Comparative Haemato-biochemical and Histopathological Studies in Birds Inoculated with Vaccine and Field Strain of Infectious Bursal Disease Virus

DOI: 10.18805/ijar.B-3962    | Article Id: B-3962 | Page : 315-323
Citation :- Comparative Haemato-biochemical and Histopathological Studies in Birds Inoculated with Vaccine and Field Strain of Infectious Bursal Disease Virus.Indian Journal Of Animal Research.2021.(55):315-323
M.K. Pandey, D.K. Agrawal, G.K. Mishra, Vandana Gupta, P.D.S. Raghuvanshi
Address : Chhattisgarh Kamdhenu Vishwavidyalaya, Durg-491 001, Chhattisgarh, India.
Submitted Date : 6-12-2019
Accepted Date : 15-05-2020


Background: Infectious bursal disease (IBD) is an economically important disease of birds which is controlled largerly by vaccination with live attenuated vaccine. The virus is more pathogenic in birds above three  weeks of age. The problem of immuno-suppression in birds is one of the leading cause of increase in incidences and intensity of already existing diseases and also of new emerging diseases. Vaccination being one of the important preventive measure for IBD has been implicated as a cause of immunosuppression in many instances. This study was designed to compare the haemato-biochemical and gross-histopathological observations after infection with field and vaccine strain in birds below and above three weeks of age.
Methods: In birds below and above three weeks of age, field and vaccine strain of IBD virus was inoculated with subsequent study of haemato-biochemical and gross-histopathological changes. 
Result: Results indicated that vaccine strain used in this study (IV-95 strain) caused a comparable damage with field strain. The bursal body weight index was not a good indicator for IBD pathogenicity. However, the clinical signs were dependent and could be correlated to aspects such as haemato-biochemical alterations, gross and histopathological lesions in organs other than bursa of Fabricius (BF). Bursal changes could not be correlated to clinical signs as the birds lacking frank clinical signs were equally suffering from bursal damage and depletion of lymphocytes. Hence attenuated intermediate invasive strain of vaccine was capable of damaging BF and may be responsible for immunosuppression.


Haemato-biochemical Histopathology Infectious bursal disease Poultry Vaccine


  1. Abu Tabeekh, M.A.S. and Al-Mayah, A.A.S. (2009). Morphological investigation of bursa of Fabricius of imported broilers and local chicks vaccinated with two types of IBD vaccines. Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 23(2): 201-206.
  2. Abdel-Alim G.A. and Saif Y.M. (2001). Immunogenicity and antigenicity of very virulent strains of infectious Bursal disease viruses. Avian Diseases. 45(1): 92-101.
  3. Al-Afaleq, A.I. (1998). Biochemical and hormonal changes associated with experimental infection of chicks with infectious bursal disease virus. Zentralbl Veterinarmed B. 45(9): 513-517.
  4. Al-Mayah, A. and Al-Mayah, S. (2013). Comparison of pathogenicity of four commercial IBD Intermediate live vaccines in broilers. Mirror of Research in Veterinary Sciences and Animals. 2(2): 16-27.
  5. Camilotti, E., Moraes, L.B., Furian, T.Q., Borges, K.A., Moraes, H.L.S. and Salle, C.T.P. (2016). Infectious Bursal Disease: Pathogenicity and Immunogenicity of vaccines. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science. 18(2): 303-308.
  6. Cho, Y. and Edgar, S.A. (1969). Characterization of infectious bursal agent. Poultry Science. 48: 2102-2109.
  7. Fadly, A.M. and Nazerian, K. (1983). Pathogenesis of infectious bursal disease in chickens infected with virus at various ages. Avian Diseases. 27: 714-723.
  8. Hiraga, M., Nunoya, T., Otaki, Y., Tajima, M., Saito, T. and Nakamura, T. (1994). Pathogenesis of highly virulent infectious bursal disease virus infection in intact and bursectomized chickens. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 56: 1057-1063.
  9. Hitchner, S.B. (1971). Persistence of parental infectious bursal disease antibody and its effect on susceptibility of young chickens. Avian Diseases. 15: 894-900.
  10. Jackwood, D.J. and Sommer, S.E. (2002). Identification of infectious bursal disease virus quasi species in commercial vaccines and field isolates of this double-stranded RNA virus. Virology. 304(1): 105-113.
  11. Juranova, R., Nguyen, Thi. Nga, Kulikova, L. and Jurajda, V. (2001). Pathogenicity of Czech isolates of Infectious Bursal Disease virus. Acta Vet. Brno. 70: 425-431.
  12. Lasher, H.N. and Shane, S.M. (1994). Infectious bursal disease. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 50: 133-166.
  13. Ley, D.H., Yamamoto, R. and Bickford, A.A. (1983). The pathogenesis of infectious bursal disease: serologic, histopathologic and clinical chemical observations. Avian Diseases. 27: 1060-1085.
  14. Lillie, R.D. (1965). Histopathological Technique and Practical Histochemistry. New York. USA. The Blackinton Co. Inc.
  15. Lucas, A.M. and Jamroz, C. (1961). Atlas of Avian Hematology. Govt. Priner, Washington, D.C.
  16. Lukert, P.D. and Saif, Y.M. (1991). Infectious Bursal Disease. In: Diseases of Poultry, [B.W. Calnek, H.J. Barnes, C.W. Beard, W.M. Reid and H.W. Yoder, Jr., (eds.)], 9th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. pp. 648-663. 
  17. McFerran, J.B. (1993). IBD Invirus Infections of Birds. Elsevier Science Publications, Amsterdam, 213-221.
  18. Moraes, H.L.S., Salle, C.T.P., Padilha, A.P., Nascimento, V.P., Souza, G.F., Pereira, R.A., Artencio, J.O. and Salle, F.O. (2004). Pathogenicity of commercial vaccines from Brazilian specific pathogen free chickens. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science. 6: 243-247.
  19. Natt, M.P. and Herrick, C.A. (1952). A new blood diluent for counting the erythrocytes and leucocytes of the chicken. Poultry Science. 31: 735-778.
  20. Neilson, D.L., Sorenson, P., Hedemand, J.E., Laursen, S.B. and Jorgenson, P. H. (1998). Inflammatory response of different chicken lines and B haplotytes to infection with infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Pathology. 27: 181-184.
  21. Nunoya, T., Otaki, Y., Tajima, M., Hiraga, M. and Saito, T. (1992). Occurrence of acute infectious bursal disease with high mortality in Japan and pathogenicity of field isolates in SPF chickens. Avian Diseases. 36: 597-609.
  22. Panigrahy, B., Rowe, L.D. and Corrier, D.E. (1986). Haematological values and changes in blood chemistry in chicken with infectious bursal disease. Research in Veterinary Sciences. 40(1): 86-88.
  23. Panisup, A.S., Jarplid, B., Verma, K.C. and Mohanty, G.C. (1988). Electron-microscopy of bursa of Fabricius of chicks infected with a field strain of infectious bursal disease virus. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 29: 125-127.
  24. Panisup, A.S., Verma, K.C. and Mohanty, G.C. (1984). Age resistance in chickens against infectious bursal disease. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 25: 561-566.
  25. Sahar, M.O., Ali, A.S., Mahasin, E. and Rahman, A. (2004). Residual pathogenic effects of Infectious Bursal Disease vaccines containing intermediate and hot strains of the virus in broiler chickens. International Journal of Poultry Sciences. 3(6): 415-418.
  26. Schalm, O.W. (1965). Veterinary Haematology. 2nd Ed. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, USA, pp. 155-162.
  27. Sivanandan, V. and Maheswaran, S.K. (1980). Immune profile of infectious bursal disease virus on peripheral blood T and B lymphocytes of chickens. Avian Diseases. 24: 715-    725.
  28. Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.E. (1987). Statistical Methods. 6th Ed. Oxford and IBH Publication Co. New Delhi, India.
  29. Verma, K.C., Panisup, A.S., Mohanty, G.C. and Reddy, B.D. (1981). Infectious Bursal Disease (Gumboro disease) and associated conditions in poultry flocks of Andhra Pradesh. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 16: 385-389.
  30. Zeryehun, T., Hair-Bejo, M. and Rasedee, A. (2012). Biochemical changes in specific-pathogen-free chicks infected with infectious bursal disease virus of Malaysian Isolate. Global Veterinaria. 8(1): 08-14.

Global Footprints