Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1973 Jan;24(1):119-27.

Immunity to Escherichia coli in pigs: IgG immunoglobulin in passive immunity to E. coli enteritis

Immunity to Escherichia coli in pigs: IgG immunoglobulin in passive immunity to E. coli enteritis

A C Brandenburg et al. Immunology. 1973 Jan.

Abstract

IgG immunoglobulin was isolated in large quantities from sows' colostrum. The sows were vaccinated intramammarily with a live, formalinized Escherichia coli vaccine. A four-stage batch method with DEAE-A50 Sephadex was used in the isolation procedure. Antibacterial tests, heat labile enterotoxin neutralization tests and pig protection tests were employed to investigate the presence of any protective immunity in colostral IgG when compared with whole colostrum.

In antibacterial tests, no bactericidal activity was found in colostral whey or colostral IgG from vaccinated or non-vaccinated sows. There was, however, a significant decrease in the rate of multiplication of E. coli organisms in tests containing colostral whey or IgG from vaccinated sows when compared with similar preparations from non-vaccinated sows.

In enterotoxin neutralization tests using ligated intestinal segments of pigs, the neutralizing effects of colostral whey and IgG on the enterotoxin preparation were significant, whereas only colostral whey afforded significant protection against the vaccine strain of E. coli.

In pig protection tests, the mean survival time of two groups of 5-day-old gnotobiotic pigs fed colostral whey or IgG was significantly greater than that of the untreated control group. There was no significant difference between the two treated groups.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1965 Nov;120(2):340-6 - PubMed
    1. Nature. 1966 Apr 30;210(5035):496-8 - PubMed
    1. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1967 Jun;125(2):575-80 - PubMed
    1. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1968 Dec 15;153(12):1590-606 - PubMed
    1. Can Vet J. 1969 Apr;10(4):98-105 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources