Key result
Consecutive MLV immunization (PRRSV-1 followed by PRRSV-2) provided better protection against both species of PRRSV infection compared to concurrent vaccination.
Why the study?
For swine herds influenced by PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2, rationalizing modified live virus immunization strategies for robust and cross-protective immune responses has been a long-lasting need.
Does consecutive vaccination with PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 MLVs improve viral clearance and immune response compared to concurrent vaccination in nursery pigs?
Does consecutive vaccination with PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 MLVs improve viral clearance and immune response compared to concurrent vaccination in nursery pigs?
Consecutive vaccination of PRRSV-1 followed by PRRSV-2 provides better viral clearance and adaptive immune responses than concurrent vaccination in nursery pigs.
May guide MLV strategies in dual PRRSV herds; leaves open need for field validation of cross-protection.
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus is a severe threat to the global swine industry. Modified live virus vaccines (MLVs) for two PRRSV species (PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2) are the most widely used approach to control PRRSV-caused diseases. For swine herds influenced by PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2, how to rationalize MLV immunization strategies for robust and cross-protective immune responses has been a long-lasting need. In this study, we found that the replication of PRRSV-1 is strongly suppressed by co-infection with PRRSV-2 in vitro , especially under concurrent co-infection conditions. We compared the adaptive immune responses between consecutive and concurrent vaccination methods in nursery pigs, vaccinated either 3 days apart (PRRSV-1 MLV followed by PRRSV-2 MLV, consecutive) or together on the same day (concurrent). PRRSV-1 RNAs were mainly detectable in the sera of consecutively vaccinated pigs. In contrast, PRRSV-2 RNAs in sera were not changed in both vaccination strategies. After the homologous PRRSV-1 or PRRSV-2 challenge, we found that consecutive vaccination slightly improved PRRSV-1 viremia clearance and did not attenuate the PRRSV-2 viremia clearance. Both vaccination strategies induced comparable T-helper cell responses against PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 in peripheral blood before and after the challenge. Interestingly, consecutive vaccination induced significantly higher PRRSV-1-specific post-challenge T-helper and cytotoxic T cells responses in the tracheobronchial lymph nodes than concurrent vaccination. Furthermore, consecutive vaccination significantly improved neutralizing antibody responses against PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 in comparison with concurrent vaccination. In conclusion, consecutive vaccination appears to be better for viral clearance and induction of adaptive immune response, and our study provides a preliminary rationale to optimize PRRS MLV immunization strategy for better dual protection. • Replication of PRRSV-1 is strongly suppressed by co-infection with PRRSV-2 in vitro . • Vaccination strategies for two PRRSV species wereanalyzed in a nursery pig challenge model. • Concurrent MLV vaccination failed to protect pigs against PRRSV-1 but it performed comparably to consecutive vaccination against PRRSV-2. • Consecutive MLV immunization (PRRSV-1 followed by PRRSV-2) provided better protection protection against both species of PRRSV infection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lakshmanappa et al. (2025) studied Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS). Consecutive vaccination (PRRSV-1 MLV followed by PRRSV-2 MLV 3 days apart) vs. Concurrent vaccination (together on the same day) was evaluated on Viral clearance and adaptive immune response. Consecutive MLV immunization (PRRSV-1 followed by PRRSV-2) provided better protection against both species of PRRSV infection compared to concurrent vaccination.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: