HOW DO VACCINATIONS PROTECT YOUR BIRDS?
________________________________________
All chicks are vaccinated at the hatchery, and some chicks receive "booster" vaccinations after they have been in the grow-out house for several days. Have you ever wondered, "How do these vaccinations protect my chicks?"
________________________________________
The purpose of all vaccinations is to cause the birds to develop immunity to pathogens. Pathogens are things like bacteria and/or viruses. Marek's, Newcastle, Infectious Bronchitis, and Gumboro are diseases caused by viral pathogens that we normally vaccinate chicks against.
Vaccines against viruses consist of attenuated viruses that are either in cells or freed from cells. Attenuation means to reduce the ability of the virus to cause disease, that is, decrease its virulence. This is done by putting the virus through several replication cycles in embryonic cells. Then the virus is either freed from the embryonic cells or the vaccine is prepared using viruses still in the cells.
For purposes of illustration, we will assume that our chicks are vaccinated with a Marek's disease vaccine. Within minutes after the vaccine enters the body of the chick, it will be "eaten" by phagocytes. These are large cells that occur everywhere in the body. Their function is to remove foreign materials from the body. After the phagocyte has removed the Marek's virus that was in the vaccine, it will then pass a message to certain lymphocytes (white blood cells), it has encountered a foreign pathogen. The lymphocytes that receive the message originated either in the bursa of Fabricius (bursa) or in the thymus.
The bursa is a small gland located in the tail region of the bird. It looks like a flesh-colored fig. The bursa provides an environment in which certain lymphocytes, called B-cells, develop that can produce antibodies. The thymus has a series of six to seven lobes of tissue located on each side of the throat adjacent to the esophagus. Like the bursa, it provides an environment for maturation of lymphocytes, called T-cells, that produce chemicals called cytokines. These are protein-like molecules that have many functions. For instance, they kill unwanted cells that may enter the body, reject foreign tissues, kill viruses, or kill malignant cells.
The message passed from the phagocyte to the appropriate B- and T-cells will be, "B-cells make antibodies, and T-cells make cytokines against Marek's disease virus!" The next question is, "How does the phagocyte know how to do this?" This is still a mystery of science.
As soon as the B- and T-cells receive the "go" message from the phagocyte, they enter the spleen and attach to "nurse" cells. The B- and T-cells, under the constant care of the nurse cells, swell and soon divide each into two daughter cells. The two daughter cells will divide, and their daughters will divide, and so on. It takes only about 9 minutes for a division to occur. So, in a short time, we have two clones of B-cells formed as well as two clones of T-cells. The first clone of 
cells is called primary responders, and the second clone of cells is called memory cells.
The first clone of B-cells immediately start producing antibodies against Marek's disease virus and the first clone of T-cells produce cytokines against Marek's virus. The second clone of both B- and T-cells simply continue to divide. These memory cells do not respond during primary responses.
Figure 1 shows antibody levels in the blood that are a direct result of the action of the first clone.
NOTE SEVERAL THINGS ABOUT THESE ANTIBODY LEVELS:
• No antibodies are present until about 2 days after vaccination.
• Peak antibody level occurs at about Day 8.
• The peak lasts only a short time, and antibody levels then begin to decrease.
• By Day 14, all the antibody in the blood is gone. This is a typical primary humoral immune response. The T-cells react like the B-cells and produce what is termed a primary cell-mediated immune response.
"Would primary humoral and cell-mediated immune responses to a viral pathogen such as Marek's protect the chicks?" The answer is "No." If this were all of the protection the body can give, the chicks would have the disease.
Let's assume that when the vaccinated chicks are 14 days old, an unwanted rat enters the house and leaves behind feces loaded with live and highly virulent Marek's disease virus. Within 12 hours, the virus challenges every chicken in the house. The second clone of daughter cells (both B- and T-cells), called memory cells that did not respond during the primary responses, now responds dramatically. 
We do not know what the signals for memory responses are, but the reaction, as shown in Figure 2, is immediate production of large amounts of antibody and cytokines. These memory responses destroy the invading Marek's virus and prevent the chicks from becoming ill. This is termed a secondary or memory immune response.
THESE ARE CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS RESPONSE:
• Rapid production and release of antibodies into the bloodstream so that by 2 days after challenge, antibody levels peak.
• Peak antibody levels are normally at least twice as high as levels during the primary response.
• Antibody levels remain high indefinitely. Cytokine production during a memory response has the same characteristics as a secondary response. Cytokine levels rise to high levels very quickly and remain elevated until the virus is cleared from the body.
"Will these memory responses protect the birds against Marek's disease?" The answer is a definite "YES!" This is immunity, and it is correctly defined as the ability to remember a pathogenic challenge and then to respond in a protective way whenever this pathogen is encountered again.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Mechanism of Vaccination
Sanitation in Poultry Farm
Water Sanitation
During routine use, material build up and contamination of a water system can and will occur. As lime and scale deposits, rust, dirt and algae collect in the water lines, the functioning of the system will be affected. The build up of these substances, on the inner surface of the system can and will provide a place for microorganisms to take hold. The organic material can supply nutrients for growth and multiplication of microbes such as E.coli. Every time the bird consumes water it will be exposed to an increased microbial load through the drinking water which could result in poor feed conversions, down grading of carcasses, increased mortality and possibly increased condemnation.
The build up of this organic material could also have a negative effect on medication and vaccines delivered through the drinking water. To keep the watering system in proper working order, a routine monitoring, cleaning and sanitizing program should be developed and applied.
The environmental protection agency of the U.S.D.A allows 5,000 coliforms per 100 ml of potable water. However, resources from major poultry officials consider any number to be unacceptable. (Good 1985, Lacy 1994, Koelkbeck 1989).
The following information is to inform the reader of the choices available for water line sanitation and disinfection. One must continue to strive for water quality, as this ingredient is a key component towards poultry health.
Cleaning and sanitizing of water lines
I) Cleaning between flocks (shocking the line)
Probably the most critical time period for the cleaning of a water line system. Cleaning water lines should be a part of the routine barn cleaning and disinfection program.
1)Flush the lines with high-pressure water to dislodge heavy organic matter.
2)Fill the lines with the cleaning solution and leave it in the lines for 3 to 6 hours.
3)Clean the proportioner and change filters.
4)Flush the water lines with clean water.
5)All plasons, cups and other open drinkers must be cleaned as well.
* Do not use these concentrations when birds are in the barn
II) Cleaning With Birds Present
The objective is to keep the water lines clean while birds are in the house. This helps to remove and prevent organic build up in the water lines:
1)Medicate or dilute the indicated concentrations to provide the level needed for cleaning (Table 2).
2)Cleaning should be stopped 2 days prior to vaccination and water medication.
3)When starting this program, monitor the birds behavior to make sure they are drinking water.
III) Sanitizing Water Lines
The objective of water sanitizing is to decrease the number of microorganisms (bacteria and viruses) in the water lines. The addition of a sanitizer to the watering system not only helps to reduce the microbial load but also aids in minimizing the algae growth, mineral deposits and slime build up. The addition of chlorine also helps to reduce oxidation of iron, which helps control rust deposits in the water lines. Keep in mind that a sanitizer should not be used 48 hours prior to and 24 hours after vaccination.
Points to consider when cleaning and sanitizing water lines
1) Some cleaners in combination with medications can enhance delivery and activity.
i) Ammonia, at low levels helps to increase the solubility of sulfa drugs.
ii) Citric acid helps keep tetracycline in solution.
iii) Citric acid as a carrier for vitamins and minerals, rather than sugar, helps reduce slime build up.
2) Some products and combinations warrant some caution.
i) Hydrogen peroxide at full concentrations can be corrosive and tissue damaging.
ii) Iodine is corrosive to galvanized steel, rubber and latex.
iii) Citric acid is corrosive to galvanized steel.
iv) Chlorine at high levels can be corrosive to all metals including stainless steel.
v) Chlorine, ammonia and commercial cleaning agents should not be mixed together since some combinations can react producing dangerous gases.
Conclusion
Since poultry consume about twice as much water as they do feed, it is logical that water quality and content should be considered as one of the most important nutritional elements in production. Therefore, following a water quality assurance program based on monitoring, cleaning and sanitizing should be the most important protocol to implement. With these measures in place, there is no doubt that production parameters will be maintained and optimized.
Acknowledgements
Michael Leslie
Canadian Poultry Consultants Ltd.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Decorating a Birdhouse
Decorating a Birdhouse
Submitted by jamespatt
Having a craft project to work on as a family is a great way to pass the time. It allows for something to be accomplished together and becomes a point of pride for all involved. This is especially important during the summer months when the kids are out of school and may be stir crazy for something to do.
Building and decorating a bird house is something that parents and kids can do together. It is relatively cheap and can provide hours of entertainment even after the project is completed. If your child is anything like me, they will love anything that can fly and by building a bird house it will help them to watch birds and may even challenge them to find out even more about the types of birds that frequent your backyard.
Building Your Birdhouse
Three are many different ways that you can go about building your bird house. If you want your kids to have some input, it is important for the design to remain simple. However, if building the bird house is simply for your own craft, there are many complicated and fascinating designs that can be followed. It all depends on what you are looking for from your birdhouse. Looking to impress the neighbors? There are designs that will make your own home look like a shack!
If you want your kids to be a part of the process it is very easy to make your birdhouse very simple. It is quite possible to use four or five pieces of wood and construct one with very little in the way of tools. This will allow your kids to claim ownership over the birdhouse from start to finish.
Painting Your Birdhouse
This is where your kids will have a blast! If you approached correctly, your kids will realize that this is actually a house for birds and they need to decorate it as they would their own house. Again, this will be a great exercise for kids to visualize and might spark a greater interest in birds and other animals. Although there are many ways to go about painting your birdhouse, one the best ways to go about doing this is to use a sponge brush. This will give you enough control to do what you want. Sponge brushes are also great for kids. They don’t hold too much paint, but are still able to get the job done.
One thing to keep in mind is that the paint you use should not contain any chemicals that will have potential harm to the bird who will be visiting. Please take careful notice of the type of paint you are using. Not only could this be fatal to the birds, but it could also be traumatic to your kids.
Another thing to consider is to leave the inside of the birdhouse free of any paint. It should be completely natural and free of chemicals so that the birds can freely make a home inside.
How Bright Should My Birdhouse Be Painted?
Although it might be fun to paint your birdhouse a loud color that will stand out in your yard, and this might be your kid’s color of choice, it is important to recognize that bright colors will not necessarily attract more birds. In the wild, female birds are a more subdued color for protection. This will often translate into where birds attempt to find shelter. If your birdhouse is too bright, it might not attract birds.
About the Author
James has been in the bird world for over 10 years, spending most of it breeding exotic birds.He has also written many articles for his local bird club's newsletter.Site: http://www.birdflights.com/beak.pl/cedar/how/butterfly-audubon.html
Source: ArticleTrader.com
The Basics of Feeding Wild Baby Birds
The Basics of Feeding Wild Baby Birds
Submitted by webrunner
Mon, 25 Aug 2008
Have you found yourself in the position of baby bird caregiver?
In feeding wild baby birds, you have a few different options available. To aid you in feeding these birds in need, you can use a variety of tools to deliver the food. Tools to consider that are easily available include: tweezers, syringes, eyedroppers, small paint brushes, popsicle sticks, blunt toothpicks, your fingers and pipettes.
Depending on what food or formula you're giving, pick the most suitable tool or a combination. The thickness of the food formula is usually dependant on the age of the bird so if you're feeding a group use a combination of tools that are most effective.Young birds will readily reach out for food until they are full. Avoid over-feeding baby birds but remember they need frequent small feedings. If they are slow to take food, they may be full or too dehydrated to eat. Also if a baby bird doesn't take food, it may be sick, nervous, or unaware that your gesture is a feeding attempt. In these cases, try taping the side of the nest or whistle lightly so as to mimic a parent birds arrival home.
Baby birds in the wild are naturally fed throughout the day. You'll want to do the same as the bird's caregiver. Generally hatchings should be fed every 20 minutes. Young birds who are not babies can be fed every two hours. Try to give baby birds the same food they would naturally eat in the wild. You may need to research what that particular bird species normally eats. You may also call a local animal center to inquire about what food is appropriate or if a formula recipe is suitable for your particular bird. When feeding ensure that any food is cleaned up and not left to dry on the bird's feathers as this can cause skin problems or feather to fall off.
The goal of you as the caregiver of a baby bird, is to provide temporary care until the bird is well enough to survive in it's natural environment on it's own. Avoid interacting with bird other than at feeding and cleaning times. Also ensure that the bird is kept away from domestic animals including pet birds.
I hope this helps you rehabilitate and feed the wild baby birds you find in need.
About the Author
Eve Duncan is a freelance writer, researcher and web publisher from Canada. To get other tips about birds and squirrel problems, visit Squirrelproofer.com where you can also learn squirrel proof bird feeders.
Source: ArticleTrader.com
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Parasites That Love Your Dog
Parasites That Love Your Dog
By: Lee Dobbins
Your dog might not love them, but there are many common parasites that love your dog. If your dog is not properly cared for he can become infested with any of these pests and develop illness or life threatening disease.
Luckily, there are many ways to ward off and get rid of parasites which are as simple as taking pills or using drops. With proper care and prevention, your dog will be generally free and safe from parasites and diseases but if you do notice your dog acting strangly, not eating or scratching too much, it's best to get him to the vet right away.
Some common parasites that can take up residence on your dog include:
Ticks
We all know fido gets fleas and ticks in the summer, but ticks can pose more serious problems than due to diseases like Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and Lyme disease. You should check your dog for ticks religiously especially if he spends a lot of time outdoors. Tweezers can be used to remove ticks one by one. If you do not know how to remove ticks properly and carefully, ask your vet first. If you do know how, put them in a can with soap and water after removal.
Fleas
These are the most common external parasites and can cause the dog to continuously scratch various parts of the body. It may get so bad that your dog loses fur in the infested areas. Ask your veterinarian to put your pet on a good flea-control program and be aware that fleas could become resistant to some products over time.
Lice
Lice is less common than fleas but can affect dogs. Your vet will have several treatments that can easily get rid of lice in dogs.
Heartworm
Caused by mosquito bites, heartworm resides in your dogs heart and blood vessels. A dog infected by heartworms looks dull and may even have a chronic cough. There are many heartworm medications that can prevent your dog from developing this disease - ask your vet which one is best for your pet.
Hookworm
Hookworms can cause anemia an loss of appetite and can be given by the mother dog to a puppy during the nursing period or even before birth.
Tapeworm
A dog can get tapeworm from swallowing larvae-laden fleas. There are not many symptoms with tapeworm but you might see rice-like pieces in your dogs stools. This is one good reason to always bring a stool sample to your vet when you bring your pet in for a yearly checkup.
Roundworm
Roundworms cause pneumonia, diarrhea, dehydration, stunted growth, and vomiting. A dog with roundworm may have a pot belly.
Whipworm
A dog infected with whipworms may have diarrhea and other ailments like, stool mucus, and serious bowel inflammation. Extreme weight loss is also a symptom caused by whipworms.
Although our dog can attract any of these parasites, most of them can be easily taken care of. Proper care and maintenance and routine visits to the vet will help keep your dog happy, healthy and parasite free.
Author Bio
Lee Dobbins writes for Epet Pet Center where you can find more on how to keep your pet healthy and happy.
Article Source: http://www.ArticleGeek.com - Free Website Content
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Recovery and Preservation of Goat Follicular Oocytes
Introduction
Embryo-transfer has become the fastest method of genetic improvement of farm animals. In vitro maturation and in vitro fertilization (IVF) of follicular oocytes are the recent advances of embryo transfer, these are the important tools to study gamete physiology. From these techniques embryos can be obtained in abundant quantity, production of transgenic animal, embryo sexing, embryo splitting and multiplication of embryos in vitro on lines of superior offspring is possible by these methods.
The oocytes can be obtained from living animals as well as from slaughtered animals also. If those are collected from immature living animals and from immature slaughtered animals, in vitro matured, in vitro fertilized and transferred to the recipient the generation interval can be reduced. If the oocytes collected from varies of slaughtered animal the utility of that animal even after slaughter is improved. This also formulate low cost supply of follicular oocytes which can be matured, cultured and fertilized in vitro.
Material and Methods
Thirty three pairs of goat ovaries were obtained from, local slaughter house Parbhani immediately after slaughter: Paired ovaries were brought to the laboratory in a thermos flask containing 0.9 per cent normal saline at a room temperature: Normal saline is supplemented with Inj-Benzyl penicillin - 400 IU per m1' of saline: Inj-Streptomycin 200 mg/ml and 0.25 mg Nystatin. The pair of ovaries in various stages of oestrous cycle were classified as per (Zemjanis, 1970) into early luteal stage, luteal state and follicular stage. After recovery of oocytes, the good quality oocytes were selected and 65 oocytes were preserved in Ham’s F-10 medium with 10 per cent and 73 oocytes were preserved in 15 percent serum level at 5°C temperature for 24 hours. The ovaries were wahsed with normal saline and placed in a sterile petridish containing medium. The follicles measuring above 3mm in diameter were punctured with. The help of needle (19 guage) and contents were allowed to flow freely into the medium. The whole pertridish containing culture medium was observed under streoscopic microscope at 25 x in order to locate occytes.
Result and Discussion
The average numbers of follicles between 3-5 mm size in early luteal, luteal, and follicular stages were 4.30 + 0.37, 6.00 + 0.57 and 5.20 + 0.40; 3.00 + 1.00, 4.00 + 0.40 and 5.50 ± 0.22 respectively for 10 percent serum level and 15 percent serum level present findings are in agreement with those of Parkale (1987) an d Giri (1992) who reported them as 4.70, 4.95 and 4.32, 3.28, 4.33 and 4.02 respectively for corresponding stages of oestrous cycle in buffaloes. The present findings for early luteal and luteal stages are lower and for follicular stage in agreement with those. of Thakre (1993) who reported them as 5.60+ 0.35, 5.52 + 0.40 and 5.24 + 0.28 the corresponding stages of *estrous cycle in goat.
The overall average number of follicles per pair of ovaries irrespective of oestrous, stages and follicular sizes were 6,00+1.07 and 5.27+0.83 respectively, which are in agreement with those reported by Thakre (1993). These findings are higher than those reported by Parkale (1987) and Giri (1992) as 4.65 and 4.04 respectively.
Differences in the number of follicles may be due to differences in species, breeds, climatic conditions and endocrine profile etc of animals studied by different workers.
The average recovery rate follicular oocytes in early luteal, luteal and follicular stage for 10 per cent and 15 per cent serum levels was 73.33, 63.18 and 72.42] 66.66, 72.22 and 78.84 per cent respectively which are found to be higher than observations made by Giri (1992) and are in agreement with Thakare (1993) who reported them as 47.83, 58.24 and 47.20 and 76.84 per cent respectively which is in accordance with Lambert (1983) who reported 72-79 per cent by laproscopy method. The present findings are significantly higher than that reported by Leibfred and First (1979), Parkale (1987) and Giri (1992) who reported lower recovery rate of follicular oocytes as 50.00, 50.00 and 50.92 per cent respectively.
In the present study in Ham’s F-10 medium 65 medium 65 oocytes for 10 per cent serum level and 73 oocytes for 15 per cent serum level were preserved at 5oC for 24 hours, it was observed that there was no significant change recorded in the morphology of oocytes.
References
1. Giri, C.G. (1992): Characterisation and morphological in vitro maturation of bulffalo follicular oocytes in different culture media. M.V.Sc. Thesis, Kokan Krishi Vidapith,Dapoli.
2. Lambert R.D. : Sirad, M.A. Benard, C; Beland, R.; Riouz J.E. Lecierc, P : Manard D.P. and Bedoya M. (1986): In vitro fertilization of bovine oocytes matured in vitro and collected at laproscopy. Heriogenology 25 (1): 117.
3. Leidfired, L. and First, N.L. (1979): Characterization of bovine follicular oocytes and their ability to mature in vitro J. Anim Sci. 48 (1): 76-86.
4. Parkale, D.D. (1987): Studies on buffalo (bos bubalis) avaries, follicles and follicular oocytes with special references to culture of oocytes in vitro M.V.Sc. Thesis, Kokan Krishi Vidyapith Dapoli.
5. Thakare N.V. (1993): Studies on recovery, characterization and morphological in vitro maturation of goat follicular oocytes in different culture media. M.V. Sc. Thesis, M.A.U. Parbhani.
by : Khillare, K.P.
from : http://www.veterinaryworld.org
Study on Pathogenicity of the Aspergillus species in experimentally immunosuppressed mice
Introduction
Recent years have witnessed dramatic changes in man’s environment and his immune defenses. Increasing incidence of secondary infections due to opportunistic fungi such as Aspergillus has been noted. Members of the genus Aspergillus are ubiquitous in nature and can survive under various conditions. Aspergillus, a conidia bearing fungus cause multiple diseases in human. These diseases include invasive aspergillosis, aspergilloma, different forms of hypersensitivity diseases, etc. The rising incidence of these infections in patients has been attributed to the widespread use of multiple antibacterial antibiotics, corticosteroids, irradiation, cytotoxic and other immunosuppressive drugs in clinical practice, increased incidence of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), autoimmune diseases and diabetes, coupled with stressful life styles. The literature abounds with reports of pathogenic potential of the Aspergillus species and the role of various predisposing factors on the susceptibility of host to these opportunistic fungal infections, demonstrated in experimental animals (Sidransky et al., 1965, Ford and Friedman, 1967, Sandhu et al., 1970, White, 1977, Thurston et al., 1979, Hassan and Selim, 1983, Chattopadhyay et al., 1994, Atasever et al., 2004, etc.). But todate not much work has been done on the pathogenic potential of Aspergillus isolated from processed and ready to eat milk product. This study was undertaken to study the pathogenicity of a strain of Aspergillus isolated from khoa and to observe that whether cortisone would alter the susceptibility of mice to the pathogen after the intraperitoneal administration of spores of Aspergillus spp.
Material and Methods
Aspergillus spp. was isolated from a khoa sample procured from a retail shop in Mhow. The fungus was tested for its pathogenicity in the immunocompromised host. Spore suspension for inoculation was prepared by growing the organism on Potato dextrose agar medium at 22oC until profuse sporulation had occurred, usually in 4 to 6 days. The spores were harvested by addition of sterile normal saline with 0.1% of Tween 80 and shaking with glass beads. Tween 80 was added to spore suspension to avoid their clumping. Large particles were allowed to sediment under gravity and the supernatant spore suspension was decanted. After counting in a hematocytometer chamber a definite number of spores were used for inoculation.
Swiss albino mice weighing about 18-20g, bred in the small animal house of Institute of animal health and biological products, Mhow, were purchased for the study. Treated mice received 5 mg hydrocortisone, subcutaneously for 2 days before the spores were injected. 5 x 106 number of spores were injected in mice via intraperitoneal route. Untreated control mice were injected with same number of spores via same route at the same time as the cortisone treated mice.
Mice with and without treatment by cortisone were also inoculated with spores previously heated at 103oC for 24 hours. Their non-viability was confirmed by failure to grow on potato dextrose agar medium.
The rooms and cages used for housing the animals were thoroughly cleaned time to time. The animals were reared under strict hygienic conditions during and before infecting them. All the animals were adjudged to be healthy. The animals were provided with food and water ad libitum. The animals were observed daily for any morbidity or mortality. The mice died were necropsied within a short time.
Result
On intraperitoneal inoculation of spores of Aspergillus spp. in mice, the mortality was found in mice pretreated with hydrocortisone. Deaths occurred between three to ten days after exposure to spores of Aspergillus spp. Untreated or non - immunosuppressed mice were resistant to infection. On necropsy, lesions of visceral aspergillosis were observed. The parietal and serosal peritoneum appeared moist. Adhesions between visceral organs were found. Yellowish grey colour granulomas or abscesses were found in liver and kidneys. Heat killed spores produced no evident lesions in control or experimental mice.
Discussion
Mice are normally resistant to infection with Aspergillus and other saprophytic fungi. Hence, they are suitable animals for testing the possible role of cortisone drug in reducing resistance (Sidransky and Friedman,1959).In choosing the immunosuppressive regimen, corticosteroids were selected because of their profound effect on macrophage function, immobilization of phagocytes, stabilizing their lysosomes, diminished phagocytosis, low antibody production or impairment of antigen-antibody interaction in accordance with Louria and Brown (1960), Weissmann (1964) and Spreadbury et al. (1989).
The result of this study, which reveal that the administration of cortisone enhances the susceptibility of mice to the spores of Aspergillus spp. Being injected intraperitoneally, are consistent with earlier reports of Sidransky et al. (1972). Also, in conformity with his observations on Aspergillus sp., the fungal infection in the cortisone treated mice was found confined to the liver and kidney. Cortisone treatment would seem to impair the defenses, which prevent conidial germination, and also presumably those defenses that remove the conidia, which germinate. It therefore appears that host defenses exist in these organs and are inhibited by the cortisone treatment.
References
1. Atasever, A., Uyanik, F., Cam, Y. and Gumussoy, K.S. (2004): Indian Vet. J., 81: 979.
2. Chattopadhyay, S.K., Vanamayya, P.R., Sharma, A.K., Meur, S.K., Sikdar, A. and Parihar, N.S. (1994): Indian Journal of Veterinary Pathology, 18: 125.
3. Ford, S. and friedman, L. (1967): Journal of Bacteriology, 94: 928.
4. Hassan, M.N. and Selim, S.A. (1983): Arch. Exper. Vet. Med., 5: S. 687.
5. Louria, D.B. and Browne, H.G. (1960): Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 89: 39.
6. Sandhu, D.K., Sandhu, R.S., Demodaran,V.N. and Randhawa, H.S. (1970): Sabouraudia, 8: 32.
7. Sidransky, H. and Friedman, L. (1959): Amer. J. Path., 35: 169.
8. Sidransky, H., Verney, E., and Pittsburgh, H.B.A. (1965): Arch. Path., 79: 299.
9. Sidransky, H., Epstein, S.M., Verney, E. and Horowitz, C. (1972): American Journal of Pathology, 69: 55.
10. Spreadbury, C.L., Krausz, T., Pervez, S. and Cohen, J. (1989): Journal of Medical and Veterinary Mycology, 27: 5.
11. Thurston, J.R., Cysewski, S.J., Richard, J.L. (1979): Am. J. Vet. Res., 40: 1443.
12. Weissmann, G. (1964): Lysosomes, 24: 594.
by : Chhabra, D.1 and Dhakad, N.K.2
From : http://www.veterinaryworld.org
