Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of vaccination with the Leptospira interrogans serovar hardjo type hardjoprajitno component of a pentavalent Leptospira bacterin against a virulent experimental challenge with Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo type hardjo-bovis strain 203 in cattle. Animals: Fifty-five 6-month-old Holstein heifers. Procedures: Heifers that were negative for persistent infection with bovine viral diarrhea virus determined via immunohistochemical testing and negative for Leptospira interrogans serovar pomona, Leptospira interrogans serovar hardjo, Leptospira interrogans serovar grippotyphosa, Leptospira interrogans serovar bratislava, Leptospira interrogans serovar canicola, and Leptospira interrogans serovar icterohaemorrhagiae determined via microscopic agglutination assay were enrolled in the study. Two heifers were separated and used for the challenge passage. The remaining heifers were vaccinated twice with a commercial pentavalent bacterin or a sham vaccine 21 days apart and subsequently challenged with L borgpetersenii serovar hardjo type hardjo-bovis strain 203. Urinary shedding, antibody titers, and clinical signs of leptospirosis infection were recorded for 8 weeks after challenge. Results: Heifers that received the pentavalent bacterin did not shed the organism in urine after challenge and did not have renal colonization at necropsy. Heifers that were sham vaccinated shed the organism in urine and had renal colonization. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Results provided evidence that a pentavalent Leptospira vaccine containing L interrogans serovar hardjo type hardjoprajitno can provide protection against challenge with L borgpetersenii serovar hardjo type hardjo-bovis strain 203. It is important to demonstrate cross-protection that is vaccine specific against disease-causing strains of organisms that are prevalent under field conditions.

Objective: To determine whether vaccine virus can be detected by use of reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR assays for pooled and individual skin samples obtained from cattle after vaccination with a commercially available modified-live bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) vaccine. Animals: 12 BVDV-seropositive steer calves and 7 BVDV-seronegative (antibody titer < 1:4) heifers; all cattle were free of persistent infection with BVDV. Procedures: 2 experiments were conducted. Cattle were vaccinated on day 0 with a commercially available modified-live BVDV vaccine. Skin samples were collected on days 0, 3 to 14, 16, and 18 for virus detection by use of RT-PCR assay on individual and pooled samples. In addition, blood samples and nasal swab specimens were collected for virus isolation. Results: All cattle, regardless of serologic status, had negative results for BVDV as determined by use of RT-PCR assay of individual and pooled skin samples. Virus was detected via virus isolation in serum or the buffy coat in 5 of 7 heifers that were seronegative when vaccinated. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: These findings indicated that it would be unlikely to detect BVDV vaccine virus in skin by use of RT-PCR assay of individual or pooled skin samples obtained from cattle after vaccination with a commercially available modified-live BVDV vaccine. Veterinarians and producers should be confident that positive test results for BVDV on skin samples would not likely be caused by the vaccination virus after administration of a modified-live virus vaccine.