Summary:
Objective: Bovine viral diarrhoea/mucosal disease (BVD/MD) is still regarded as one of the economically
most important viral infections of cattle. Due to the high prevalence and the geographical
situation in Germany it is widelyaccepted that vaccination against BVD/MD is currently
indispensable. A key issue in this regard is the protection againstdiaplacentaltransmission
of the virus. A number of vaccines based on replication competent virus (“live vaccines”)
or inactivated virus (“killed vaccines”) have been registered in Germany; some with
the indication “fetal protection”. In addition to the exclusive use of “live”- or
“killed vaccines”, both types of vaccines canbe combined in the so called biphasic
vaccination scheme. The objective of the current report was to compare different vaccines
and vaccination schemes. Material and methods: Using different vaccines, a total of 60 cattle were vaccinated against BVD/MD. Serum
samples were obtained over a period of 10 months and tested in a neutralization assay
against three BVD test viruses from the groups BVDV-1a, -1b and BVDV-2a. Results: Two injections of a new inactivated vaccine (PregSure® BVD) induced high titres of neutralizing antibodies against BVDV-1 comparable to
titres observed afterthe combination of inactivated and “live vaccines” in the biphasic
vaccination scheme. With regard to BVDV-2 PregSure® BVD ledto even higherantibody titres. Conclusions: The newinactivated vaccine PregSure® BVD is also suited for use in biphasic vaccination schemes. Clinical relevance: The exclusive use of “killed vaccines” has practical advantages. The main objective
of all vaccinations against BVD/MD remains “fetal protection”.
Key words:
Bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) - mucosal disease (MD) - pestivirus - BVDV - vaccination
against BVD/ MD - biphasic vaccination scheme