Elsevier

Veterinary Microbiology

Volume 97, Issues 1–2, 2 December 2003, Pages 153-165
Veterinary Microbiology

Review
Research on infectious bursal disease—the past, the present and the future

This review is dedicated to Professor Hermann Becht on the occasion of his 70th birthday on 8 July 2002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2003.08.005Get rights and content

Abstract

Infectious bursal disease (IBD) virus (IBDV) is the etiological agent of “Gumboro diesease”. Although first observed about 40 years ago, this disease continues to pose an important threat to the commercial poultry industry. The emergence of antigenic variant as well as very virulent strains in vaccinated flocks considerably stimulated research efforts on both, IBD and IBDV. In this review, some of the recent advances in the understanding of the structure, morphogenesis and molecular biology of the virus as well as in development of new diagnostic approaches and new strategies for vaccination against IBD are briefly summarized.

Section snippets

Forty years of “Gumboro disease”

When infectious bursal disease (IBD) appeared in chickens in 1962, the disease was designated as “Gumboro disease” after the geographic location of the first recorded outbreaks. Infections caused by IBD virus (IBDV) may exacerbate infections with other etiologic agents, and reduce the chicken’s ability to respond to vaccination. Since the first report, IBD has gained the attention of the poultry industries all over the world. The economic impact of IBD is influenced by strain of virus,

Structure and molecular biology of IBDV

IBDV particles have a non-enveloped, icoasahedral capsid with a diameter of about 60 nm. The structure of the virus is based on a T=13 lattice and the capsid subunits are predominantly trimer clustered (Böttcher et al., 1997). Characterization of the viral genome as a bi-segmented double-stranded (ds) RNA (Müller et al., 1979) allowed placing IBDV into a new family of viruses, the Birnaviridae (Dobos et al., 1979); there it represents the prototype member of the genus Avibirnavirus (Leong et

IBDV antigenicity

Two serotypes of IBDV can be differentiated by virus neutralization test (McFerran et al., 1980). Serotype 1 contains the pathogenic strains, whereas serotype 2 strains, mainly isolated from turkeys, cause neither disease nor protection against serotype 1 strains in chickens. Antigenic variant strains have been reported in the US (Snyder et al., 1988), Central America (Jackwood and Sommer, 1999) and, only recently, in Australia (Sapats and Ignjatovic, 2000). The antigenic site responsible for

IBDV pathogenicity

Experiments in which bursectomized chickens survived IBDV infections lethal for normal chickens demonstrate that the BF is the target organ for the pathogenic serotpye 1 strains. High concentrations of viral antigens and high infectivity titres have been demonstrated in the BF, whereas only traces of antigen and low virus titres were detected in the thymus and spleen. Analogous results were obtained with lymphoid cells isolated from these organs. In vitro infection studies showed that IBDV

Virulence and attenuation

The outcome of an IBDV infection largely depends on the strain and the amount of the infecting virus, the age and the breed of the bird, the route of inoculation, and the presence or absence of neutralizing antibodies. Reassortant serotype 1/serotype 2 IBDV show that genome segment A determines bursa tropism whereas segment B is involved in the efficiency of virus replication (Zierenberg et al., 2003). The pathogenic serotype 1 field isolates can be grouped into classical virulent (cv) or vv

Diagnosis

In chicken flocks, the clinical picture and the course of the disease usually are indicative of an IBDV infection. Pathological changes observed at the BF are characteristic, and histopathological investigations combined with the demonstration of viral antigens by immunohistochemistry confirm an IBDV infection. IBDV can be isolated by the inoculation of antibody-free embryonated chicken eggs. Viral antigens can be demonstrated by the agar-gel precipitin assay or by the antigen-capture

Vaccination

IBDV is highly infectious and very resistant to inactivation. Therefore, despite strict hygienic measures, vaccination is inevitable under high infection pressure and mandatory to protect chickens against infection during the first weeks after hatch. To induce high titres of maternally derived antibodies that persist over the whole laying period, layers are vaccinated with inactivated oil-emulsified vaccines. After hatching, chickens are immunized with live vaccines. The time-point of

Concluding remarks

During the last decades, chicken meat has increased its proportion of the total meat market because of price advantage and a positive health image among consumers. Consumer demand in the area of food safety appears to be for a product without “chemicals” and without pathogens. In the future, microbial contamination may become a major issue for the chicken industry. Consumers also expect chicken meat to be produced from flocks in which the needs of animal health and welfare have been fulfilled.

Acknowledgements

M.R. Islam was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Georg Forster Research Fellowship Programme).

References (121)

  • H. Müller et al.

    Infectious bursal disease of poultry: antigenic structure of the virus and control

    Vet. Microbiol.

    (1992)
  • E. Mundt et al.

    Complete nucleotide sequences of 5′- and 3′-noncoding regions of both genome segments of different strains of infectious bursal disease virus

    Virology

    (1995)
  • H. Nieper et al.

    Rapid preparation of plasma membranes from avian lymphoid cells and fibroblasts for the application in virus binding studies

    J. Virol. Methods

    (1998)
  • K.V. Phenix et al.

    Recombinant Semliki Forest virus vector exhibits potential for avian virus vaccine development

    Vaccine

    (2001)
  • S. Rautenschlein et al.

    The role of T cells in protection by an inactivated infectious bursal disease virus vaccine

    Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol.

    (2002)
  • H. Repp et al.

    Infectious bursal disease virus infection changes the potassium current properties of chicken embryo fibroblasts

    Virology

    (1998)
  • A.B. Sanchez et al.

    Proteolytic processing in infectious bursal disease virus: identification of the polyprotein cleavage sites by site-directed mutagenesis

    Virology

    (1999)
  • I. Shaw et al.

    Protection from IBDV-induced bursal damage by a recombinant fowlpox vaccine, fpIBD1, is dependent on the titre of challenge virus and chicken genotype

    Vaccine

    (2000)
  • J.M. Sharma et al.

    Infectious bursal disease virus of chickens: pathogenesis and immunosuppression

    Dev. Comp. Immunol.

    (2000)
  • P.S. Shwed et al.

    Birnavirus VP1 proteins form a distinct subgroup of RNA-dependent RNA polymerases lacking a GDD motif

    Virology

    (2002)
  • U. Spies et al.

    Properties of RNA polymerase activity associated with infectious bursal disease virus and characterization of its reaction products

    Virus Res.

    (1987)
  • M.G. Tacken et al.

    Homotypic interactions of the infectious bursal disease virus proteins VP3, pVP2, VP4, and VP5: mapping of the interacting domains

    Virology

    (2003)
  • A.K. Tiwari et al.

    Differentiation of infectious bursal disease viruses by restriction enzyme analysis of RT-PCR amplified VP1 gene sequence

    Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.

    (2003)
  • K. Tsukamoto et al.

    Protection of chickens against very virulent infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) and Marek’s disease virus (MDV) with a recombinant MDV expressing IBDV VP2

    Virology

    (1999)
  • C.D. Bayliss et al.

    A comparison of the sequences of segment A of four infectious bursal disease virus strains and identification of a variable region in VP2

    J. Gen. Virol.

    (1990)
  • C.D. Bayliss et al.

    A recombinant fowlpox virus that expresses the VP2 antigen of infectious bursal disease virus induces protection against mortality caused by the virus

    Arch. Virol.

    (1991)
  • H. Becht

    Infectious bursal disease virus

    Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.

    (1980)
  • H. Becht et al.

    Antigenic structure of the two serotypes of infectious bursal disease virus

    J. Gen. Virol.

    (1988)
  • C. Birghan et al.

    A non-canonical lon proteinase lacking the ATPase domain employs the Ser-Lys catalytic dyad to exercise broad control over the life cycle of a double-stranded RNA virus

    EMBO J.

    (2000)
  • H.J. Boot et al.

    Rescue of very virulent and mosaic infectious bursal disease virus from cloned cDNA: VP2 is not the sole determinant of the very virulent phenotype

    J. Virol.

    (2000)
  • H.J. Boot et al.

    Rescue of infectious bursal disease virus from mosaic full-length clones composed of serotype I and II cDNA

    Arch. Virol.

    (2001)
  • H.J. Boot et al.

    Exchange of the C-terminal part of VP3 from very virulent infectious bursal disease virus results in an attenuated virus with a unique antigenic structure

    J. Virol.

    (2002)
  • B. Böttcher et al.

    Three-dimensional structure of infectious bursal disease virus determined by electron cryomicroscopy

    J. Virol.

    (1997)
  • M. Brandt et al.

    Molecular determinants of virulence, cell tropism, and pathogenic phenotype of infectious bursal disease virus

    J. Virol.

    (2001)
  • Y.C. Cao et al.

    Molecular characterization of seven Chinese isolates of infectious bursal disease virus: classical, very virulent, and variant strains

    Avian Dis.

    (1998)
  • J.R. Caston et al.

    C terminus of infectious bursal disease virus major capsid protein VP2 is involved in definition of the T number for capsid assembly

    J. Virol.

    (2001)
  • H.Y. Chen et al.

    Sequence analysis of the VP2 hypervariable region of nine infectious bursal disease virus isolates from mainland China

    Avian Dis.

    (1998)
  • N. Chettle et al.

    Outbreak of virulent infectious bursal disease in East Anglia

    Vet. Rec.

    (1989)
  • C. Chevalier et al.

    The maturation process of pVP2 requires assembly of infectious bursal disease virus capsids

    J. Virol.

    (2002)
  • B. Da Costa et al.

    The capsid of infectious bursal disease virus contains several small peptides arising from the maturation process of pVP2

    J. Virol.

    (2002)
  • P. Dobos et al.

    Biophysical and biochemical characterization of five animal viruses with bisegmented double-stranded RNA genomes

    J. Virol.

    (1979)
  • J.K. Dybing et al.

    Antigenic and immunogenic properties of baculovirus-expressed infectious bursal disease viral proteins

    Avian Dis.

    (1998)
  • N. Eterradossi et al.

    Pathogenicity and preliminary antigenic characterization of six infectious bursal disease virus strains isolated in France from acute outbreaks

    Zentralbl. Veterinarmed. B

    (1992)
  • N. Eterradossi et al.

    Critical amino acid changes in VP2 variable domain are associated with typical and atypical antigenicity in very virulent infectious bursal disease viruses

    Arch. Virol.

    (1998)
  • N. Eterradossi et al.

    Antigenic and genetic relationships between European very virulent infectious bursal disease viruses and an early West African isolate

    Avian Pathol.

    (1999)
  • A. Fernandez-Arias et al.

    The major antigenic protein of infectious bursal disease virus, VP2, is an apoptotic inducer

    J. Virol.

    (1997)
  • I. Fodor et al.

    Induction of protective immunity in chickens immunised with plasmid DNA encoding infectious bursal disease virus antigens

    Acta Vet. Hung.

    (1999)
  • A. Francois et al.

    Construction of avian adenovirus CELO recombinants in cosmids

    J. Virol.

    (2001)
  • Y.C. Hu et al.

    Chimeric infectious bursal disease virus-like particles expressed in insect cells and purified by immobilized metal affinity chromatography

    Biotechnol. Bioeng.

    (1999)
  • P.J. Hudson et al.

    Genomic structure of the large RNA segment of infectious bursal disease virus

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (1986)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text