Author:
Augustyniak Agata,Czyżewska-Dors Ewelina,Pomorska-Mól Małgorzata
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Blood sampling from neonatal piglets is related to multiple disadvantages. Therefore, a new, alternative matrix is required to assess piglets’ early immune status efficiently. The present study aimed to assess the usefulness of processing fluid for determining selected piglets’ immune parameters. 264 pigs − 31 sows, 146 male piglets, and 87 female piglets from commercial indoor farrow-to-finish pig herd were included in this study. 264 serum, 31 colostrum, and 146 processing fluid samples were collected. Serum was collected from all animals, colostrum was collected from sows, and processing fluid was collected from male piglets only. Using commercial ELISA tests, the concentration of various immunoglobulins, cytokines, and acute phase proteins was assessed in each matrix. Statistical analyses were employed to determine differences in the concentration of measured indices between piglets’ serum and processing fluid and correlations in the concentration of tested indices between particular sets of matrices.
Results
Statistical analyses did not reveal significant differences in the IgG, IgA, IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, and IFN-γ concentration between piglets’ serum and processing fluid (p > 0.05). A positive correlation (p < 0.05) regarding the concentration of some indices between processing fluid and samples collected from sows was also observed.
Conclusions
Processing fluid can be considered a promising alternative to blood for assessing some immunological indices in piglets, such as IgG, IgA, IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, and IFN-γ, and, possibly, in the indirect assessment of some indices in lactating sows, including IgA, IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IFN-γ, or Pig-MAP.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference32 articles.
1. Turlewicz-Podbielska H, Włodarek J, Pomorska-Mól M. Noninvasive strategies for surveillance of swine viral diseases: a review. J Vet Diagn. 2020;32:503–12.
2. Quesnel H, Farmer C, Devillers N. Colostrum intake: influence on piglet performance and factors of variation. Livest Sci. 2012;146:105–14.
3. Maciag SS, Bellaver FV, Bombassaro G, Haach V, Morés MAZ, Baron LF, Coldebella A, Bastos AP. On the influence of the source of porcine colostrum in the development of early immune ontogeny in piglets. Sci Rep. 2022;12:15630.
4. Prickett JR, Kim W, Simer R, Yoon KJ, Zimmerman J. Oral-fluid samples for surveillance of commercial growing pigs for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus and porcine circovirus type 2 infections. J Swine Health Prod. 2008;16:86–91.
5. Lopez W, Angulo J, Linhares D, Zimmerman J. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome monitoring in breeding herds using processing fluids. J Swine Health Prod. 2018;26:146–50.