A comparison of different vaccination schemes used in sheep combining inactivated bluetongue vaccines against serotypes 4 and 8

Eight different vaccination schemes using four commercially available inactivated Bluetongue vaccines against serotypes 4 and 8 in three different combinations (setting 1-3) were tested under field conditions for their ability to generate a measurable immune response in sheep. Animals of setting 1 (groups A-D) were simultaneously vaccinated using either individual injections at different locations (groups A & D) or double injection by a twin-syringe (groups B & C). For both application methods, a one-shot vaccination (groups C & D) was compared to a boosted vaccination (groups A & B). Sheep of setting 2 (groups E-G) were vaccinated in an alternating, boosted pattern at fortnightly intervals starting with serotype 4 (groups E & F) or vice versa (group G). Group H of setting 3 was vaccinated simultaneously and vaccines were injected individually as a one-shot application. Each group consisted of 30 sheep. The immunogenic response was tested in all sheep (n = 240) by ELISA (IDScreen®Bluetongue Competition), while serum neutralisation tests were performed in five to six sheep from each group (n = 45). All vaccine combinations were well tolerated by all sheep. Of all vaccines and schemes described, the simultaneous double injected boosted vaccination of setting 1 (group B) yielded the highest median serotype-specific titres 26 weeks after the first vaccination (afv) and 100% seropositive animals (ELISA) one year afv. In setting 1, there were no relevant significant differences in the immunogenic response between simultaneously applied vaccines at different sites or at the same injection site. Importantly, a one-shot vaccination induced comparable immunogenicity to a boosted injection half a year afv. Low serotype-specific neutralising antibody levels were detected in settings 2 and 3 and are attributed to diverse factors which may have influenced the measured immunogenicity.

Expected Net Benefit of Vaccinating Rangeland Sheep against Bluetongue Virus Using a Modified-Live versus Killed Virus Vaccine

Recurring outbreaks of bluetongue virus in domestic sheep of the US Intermountain West have prompted questions about the economic benefits and costs of vaccinating individual flocks against bluetongue (BT) disease. We estimate the cost of a BT outbreak on a representative rangeland sheep operation in the Big Horn Basin of the state of Wyoming using enterprise budgets and stochastic simulation. The latter accounts for variability in disease severity and lamb price, as well as uncertainty about when an outbreak will occur. We then estimate the cost of purchasing and administering a BT vaccine. Finally, we calculate expected annual net benefit of vaccinating under various outbreak intervals. Expected annual net benefit is calculated for both a killed virus (KV) vaccine and modified-live virus vaccine, using an observed price of $0.32 per dose for modified-live and an estimated price of $1.20 per dose for KV. The modified-live vaccine’s expected annual net benefit has a 100% chance of being positive for an outbreak interval of 5, 10, or 20 years, and a 77% chance of being positive for a 50-year interval. The KV vaccine’s expected annual net benefit has a 97% chance of being positive for a 5-year outbreak interval, and a 42% chance of being positive for a 10-year interval. A KV vaccine is, therefore, unlikely to be economically attractive to producers in areas exposed less frequently to BT disease. A modified-live vaccine, however, requires rigorous authorization before legal use can occur in Wyoming. To date, no company has requested to manufacture a modified-live vaccine for commercial use in Wyoming. The KV vaccine poses less risk to sheep reproduction and less risk of unintentional spread, both of which facilitate approval for commercial production. Yet, our results show an economically consequential tradeoff between a KV vaccine’s relative safety and higher cost. Unless the purchase price is reduced below our assumed $1.20 per dose, producer adoption of a KV vaccine for BT is likely to be low in the study area. This tradeoff between cost and safety should be considered when policymakers regulate commercial use of the two vaccine types.