24.12.2012 Views

Research Results - (PDF, 101 mb) - USAID

Research Results - (PDF, 101 mb) - USAID

Research Results - (PDF, 101 mb) - USAID

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The second approach was to continue<br />

screening kids raised in confinement by challenge<br />

with 10,000 H.contortus larvae. Two<br />

groups (42 and 27 kids) have been screened.<br />

Two bucks and three does have been identified<br />

that had fewer than 500 EPG in challenge infections.<br />

These results are interesting because<br />

other kids had greater than 10,000 EPG. We<br />

plan to screen two additional groups of kids<br />

before January 1991 using the same design. In<br />

addition, we will expose kids with less than 500<br />

EPG (in primary infections) to a secondary<br />

challenge for confirmation. Kids experiencing<br />

low EPG identified in these two approaches will<br />

be included in breeding challenge experiments<br />

planned for 1991.<br />

Project Achievements<br />

Goats have been identified that resist H.<br />

contortus larval challenge.<br />

Changes in Workplan<br />

We initially planned to compare two<br />

groups of at least 10 goats each-one group with<br />

low egg counts averaging less than 300 eggs per<br />

gram of feces (EPG), and the other group averaging<br />

more than 1000 EPG. Because of irsufficient<br />

kids available for the low EPG group, we<br />

have focused our efforts on obtaining additional<br />

kids that resist H. contortusinfections. We have<br />

used two approaches to identify these kids. In<br />

the first, four does from a low EPG group were<br />

bred to one buck from the same group. This<br />

produced five kids that were raised in confinement<br />

and challenged with 10,000 H. contortus.<br />

One doe had undetectable EPG on both the<br />

primary and secondary challenge infections.<br />

Additional kids will be available from this<br />

breeding stock for testing in the coming year.<br />

Activity No. 2. Identification of Antigens<br />

for the Diagnosis and Prevention of<br />

Heartwater in Goats.<br />

Objective<br />

Identify and evaluate Cowdria<br />

ruminantiumsurface proteins.<br />

Problem Statement and Approach<br />

Heartwater is caused by the rickettsia C.<br />

ruminantiumand infects goats, sheep, and cattle.<br />

In goats, the disease causes a very high mortality<br />

and can be devastating in susceptible populations.<br />

Ti;.nsmission is by ticks, primarily<br />

A<strong>mb</strong>lyomma variegatum,which is widely distributed<br />

in Kenya. The approach is to identify C.<br />

ruminantiumsurface proteins in expression<br />

libraries made from genomic DNA.<br />

Justification<br />

The identification of reco<strong>mb</strong>inant surface<br />

proteins of the organism is the first step toward<br />

development of a subunit vaccine for the disease.<br />

Such a vaccine could be used to prevent<br />

the disease and eventually become part of a<br />

multivalent reco<strong>mb</strong>inant vaccine that would<br />

induce protection against the major goat diseases.<br />

Project Progress<br />

During the evaluation of the genomic<br />

DNA library for expression of surface proteins it<br />

became obvious that one or more of the cloned<br />

genes could be used to develop a diagnostic<br />

DNA probe. The DNA probe could be used to<br />

identify infected goats and ticks. This identification<br />

could be very important foy epidemiology<br />

studies to define areas where the disease occurs<br />

and to define conditions where goats are at risk<br />

of infection.<br />

Two DNA clones were identified: pCR9,<br />

which is derived from the Kiswani, Kenya,<br />

isolate of C. ruminantiumand pCS20, which is<br />

derived from the Crystal Springs, Zi<strong>mb</strong>abwe,<br />

isolate. Initial specificity was determined by<br />

hybridization with labeled DNA from infected<br />

culture cells, but not to DNA from uninfected<br />

cells. Infurther studies, it was found that the<br />

labeled DNA insert from pCR9 bound to large<br />

amounts of some bacterial DNAs causing<br />

specificity problems. In contrast, the insert from<br />

pCS20 was more specific and did not bind to .<br />

ng of DNA isolated from several different<br />

rickettsia, bacteria and protozoa. Neither probe<br />

bound to DNA extracted from A.variegatum<br />

89

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!