J Vet Sci.  2018 May;19(3):375-383. 10.4142/jvs.2018.19.3.375.

Marek's disease vaccine activates chicken macrophages

• Wang D
• Sun S
• Heidari M

• KMID: 2412128
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2018.19.3.375

Abstract

To provide insights into the role of innate immune responses in vaccine-mediated protection, we investigated the effect of Marek's disease (MD) vaccine, CVI988/Rispens, on the expression patterns of selected genes associated with activation of macrophages in MD-resistant and MD-susceptible chicken lines. Upregulation of interferon γ, interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-8, and IL-12 at different days post-inoculation (dpi) revealed activation of macrophages in both chicken lines. A strong immune response was induced in cecal tonsils of the susceptible line at 5 dpi. The highest transcriptional activities were observed in spleen tissues of the resistant line at 3 dpi. No increase in the population of CD3³ T cells was observed in duodenum of vaccinated birds at 5 dpi indicating a lack of involvement of the adaptive immune system in the transcriptional profiling of the tested genes. There was, however, an increase in the number of macrophages in the duodenum of vaccinated birds. The CVI988/Rispens antigen was detected in the duodenum and cecal tonsils of the susceptible line at 5 dpi but not in the resistant line. This study sheds light on the role of macrophages in vaccine-mediated protection against MD and on the possible development of new recombinant vaccines with enhanced innate immune system activation properties.

Keyword

CVI988/Rispens; Marek's disease; cecal tonsils; duodenum; macrophages

MeSH Terms

Animals
Birds
Chickens*
Duodenum
Immune System
Immunity, Innate
Interferons
Interleukin-12
Interleukin-8
Interleukins
Macrophages*
Marek Disease*
Palatine Tonsil
Spleen
T-Lymphocytes
Up-Regulation
Vaccines, Synthetic
Interferons
Interleukin-12
Interleukin-8
Interleukins
Vaccines, Synthetic

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Bar graphs showing gene expression patterns within the duodenum of both Marek's disease chicken lines at 5 and 10 days post-immunization (dpi). For a statistical analysis summary, please see Table 2. IFN, interferon; IL, interleukin.

• 

  Fig. 2 Bar graphs showing the expression patterns of the tested genes within the cecal tonsils of both Marek's disease lines at 3, 5, and 10 days post-immunization (dpi). For a statistical analysis summary, please see Table 3. IFN, interferon; IL, interleukin.

• 

  Fig. 3 Bar graphs showing the expression patterns of the tested genes in spleen macrophages of both Marek's disease lines at 3 and 5 days post-immunization (dpi). For a statistical analysis summary, please see Table 4. IFN, interferon; IL, interleukin.

• 

  Fig. 4 Images from the immunohistochemical analysis of CD3+ T cells and macrophage populations within the duodenum of control and vaccinated birds of the resistant and susceptible Marek's disease lines at 5 days post-immunization. The tissue samples were incubated with combination of mouse anti-chicken CD3+ T cells or macrophage monoclonal antibodies (primary) and biotinylated horse anti-mouse IgG (secondary) for detection of specific immune cells. Panels B and D show the CD3+ T cell populations within the duodenum of vaccinated birds of the resistant and susceptible lines, respectively, while panels A and C present the corresponding control tissues. Panels F and H show the macrophage populations within the duodenum of vaccinated birds of the resistant and susceptible lines, respectively, while panels E and G show the corresponding non-vaccinated control tissues. Scale bars = 200 µm (A–D), 20 µm (E–H).

• 

  Fig. 5 Images from the immunohistochemical analysis of CVI988/Rispens antigen gB within the duodenum and the cecal tonsil (CT) of the vaccinated birds of the resistant and susceptible lines at 5 days post-immunization. The tissue samples were incubated with combination of mouse anti-gB monoclonal antibody (primary) and biotinylated horse anti-mouse IgG for detection CVI988 virions. Panels B and D show the duodenum and CT tissues of birds of vaccinated resistant line 63, respectively, stained with the anti-gB of CVI988/Rispens, while panels A and C, respectively, are the corresponding non-vaccinated control tissues. The gB antigen of CVI988/Rispens is depicted within duodenum and the CT of the vaccinated birds of the susceptible line 72 in panels F and H, respectively, while the corresponding control tissues are represented in panels E and G, respectively. Scale bars = 200 µm (A–H).

Reference

1. Arango Duque G, Descoteaux A. Macrophage cytokines: involvement in immunity and infectious diseases. Front Immunol. 2014; 5:491.

2. Bacon LD, Hunt HD, Cheng HH. A review of the development of chicken lines to resolve genes determining resistance to diseases. Poult Sci. 2000; 79:1082–1093.

3. Baigent S, Davison T. Marek's disease virus: biology and life cycle. In : Davison F, Nair V, editors. Marek's Disease: An Evolving Problem. Oxford: Elsevier Academic Press;2004. p. 62–77.

4. Biggs PM. The Leeuwenhoek Lecture, 1997. Marek's disease herpesvirus: oncogenesis and prevention. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1997; 352:1951–1962.

5. Biron CA. Initial and innate responses to viral infections-pattern setting in immunity or disease. Curr Opin Microbiol. 1999; 2:374–381.

6. Blaxland JD, Macleod AJ, Hall T. Trials with Marek's disease vaccines prepared from a turkey herpes virus and an attenuated Marek's disease virus. Vet Rec. 1975; 97:50–52.

7. Calnek BW. Pathogenesis of Marek's disease virus infection. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2001; 255:25–55.

8. Calnek BW, Adldinger HK, Kahn DE. Feather follicle epithelium: a source of enveloped and infectious cell-free herpesvirus from Marek's disease. Avian Dis. 1970; 14:219–233.

9. Cerwenka A, Lanier LL. Natural killer cells, viruses and cancer. Nat Rev Immunol. 2001; 1:41–49.

10. Churchill AE, Biggs PM. Agent of Marek's disease in tissue culture. Nature. 1967; 215:528–530.

11. Davison F, Nair V. Marek's Disease: An Evolving Problem. The Netherlands and Boston: Elsevier Press;2004.

12. de Boer GF, Groenendal JE, Boerrigter HM, Kok GL, Pol JM. Protective efficacy of Marek's disease virus (MDV) CVI-988 CEF65 clone C against challenge infection with three very virulent MDV strains. Avian Dis. 1986; 30:276–283.

13. Djeraba A, Bernardet N, Dambrine G, Quéré P. Nitric oxide inhibits Marek's disease virus replication but is not the single decisive factor in interferon-gamma-mediated viral inhibition. Virology. 2000; 277:58–65.

14. Haffer K, Sevoian M, Wilder M. The role of the macrophages in Marek's disease: in vitro and in vivo studies. Int J Cancer. 1979; 23:648–656.

15. Jarosinski KW, Tischer BK, Trapp S, Osterrieder N. Marek's disease virus: lytic replication, oncogenesis and control. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2006; 5:761–772.

16. Kodama H, Mikami T, Inoue M, Izawa H. Inhibitory effects of macrophages against Marek's disease virus plaque formation in chicken kidney cell cultures. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1979; 63:1267–1271.

17. Lanier LL. Evolutionary struggles between NK cells and viruses. Nat Rev Immunol. 2008; 8:259–268.

18. Lanier LL. Up on the tightrope: natural killer cell activation and inhibition. Nat Immunol. 2008; 9:495–502.

19. Lee LF, Liu X, Witter RL. Monoclonal antibodies with specificity for three different serotypes of Marek's disease viruses in chickens. J Immunol. 1983; 130:1003–1006.

20. Lee LF, Zhang H, Heidari M, Lupiani B, Reddy SM. Evaluation of factors affecting vaccine efficacy of recombinant Marek's disease virus lacking the Meq oncogene in chickens. Avian Dis. 2011; 55:172–179.

21. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2^−ΔΔC_T method. Methods. 2001; 25:402–408.

22. Markowski-Grimsrud CJ, Schat KA. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses to Marek's disease herpesvirus-encoded glycoproteins. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2002; 90:133–144.

23. Mast J, Goddeeris BM. Development of immunocompetence of broiler chickens. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 1999; 70:245–256.

24. Mast J, Goddeeris BM, Peeters K, Vandesande F, Berghman LR. Characterisation of chicken monocytes, macrophages and interdigitating cells by the monoclonal antibody KUL01. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 1998; 61:343–357.

25. Matikainen S, Paananen A, Miettinen M, Kurimoto M, Timonen T, Julkunen I, Sareneva T. IFN-α and IL-18 synergistically enhance IFN-γ production in human NK cells: differential regulation of Stat4 activation and IFN-γ gene expression by IFN-α and IL-12. Eur J Immunol. 2001; 31:2236–2245.

26. Okazaki W, Purchase HG, Burmester BR. Protection against Marek's disease by vaccination with a herpesvirus of turkeys. Avian Dis. 1970; 14:413–429.

27. Powell PC, Hartley KJ, Mustill BM, Rennie M. Studies on the role of macrophages in Marek's disease of the chicken. J Reticuloendothel Soc. 1983; 34:289–297.

28. Qureshi MA. Avian macrophage and immune response: an overview. Poult Sci. 2003; 82:691–698.

29. Rispens BH, van Vloten H, Mastenbroek N, Maas HJ, Schat KA. Control of Marek's disease in the Netherlands. I. Isolation of an avirulent Marek's disease virus (strain CVI 988) and its use in laboratory vaccination trials. Avian Dis. 1972; 16:108–125.

30. Rispens BH, van Vloten H, Mastenbroek N, Maas JL, Schat KA. Control of Marek's disease in the Netherlands. II. Field trials on vaccination with an avirulent strain (CVI 988) of Marek's disease virus. Avian Dis. 1972; 16:126–138.

31. Russell JH, Ley TJ. Lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity. Annu Rev Immunol. 2002; 20:323–370.

32. Schat K, Nair V. Marek's disease. In : Saif YM, Fadly AM, Glisson JR, McDougald LB, Nolan LK, Swayne DE, editors. Diseases of Poultry. Ames: Iowa State University Press;2008. p. 452–514.

33. Schat KA, Calnek BW. Characterization of an apparently nononcogenic Marek's disease virus. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1978; 60:1075–1082.

34. Sharma JM. Natural killer cell activity in chickens exposed to Marek's disease virus: inhibition of activity in susceptible chickens and enhancement of activity in resistant and vaccinated chickens. Avian Dis. 1981; 25:882–893.

35. Van Immerseel F, De Buck J, De Smet I, Mast J, Haesebrouck F, Ducatelle R. The effect of vaccination with a Salmonella Enteritidis aroA mutant on early cellular responses in caecal lamina propria of newly-hatched chickens. Vaccine. 2002; 20:3034–3041.

36. Venugopal K. Marek's disease: an update on oncogenic mechanisms and control. Res Vet Sci. 2000; 69:17–23.

37. VonBülow V, Weiler H, Klasen A. Activating effects of interferons, lymphokines and viruses on cultured chicken macrophages. Avian Pathol. 1984; 13:621–637.

38. White DW, Keppel CR, Schneider SE, Reese TA, Coder J, Payton JE, Ley TJ, Virgin HW, Fehniger TA. Latent herpesvirus infection arms NK cells. Blood. 2010; 115:4377–4383.

39. Xing Z, Schat KA. Inhibitory effects of nitric oxide and gamma interferon on in vitro and in vivo replication of Marek's disease virus. J Virol. 2000; 74:3605–3612.

40. Xu M, Fitzgerald SD, Zhang H, Karcher DM, Heidari M. Very virulent plus strains of MDV induce an acute form of transient paralysis in both susceptible and resistant chicken lines. Viral Immunol. 2012; 25:306–323.

41. Yokoyama WM, Kim S, French AR. The dynamic life of natural killer cells. Annu Rev Immunol. 2004; 22:405–429.