SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi / 1960 / Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1

Yurdumuzda hazırlanan şap aşısının muafiyet verme kapasitesi üzerine saha tatbikatı

Macit Oral
Mahmut Sütçü
Metin Taşbaş
Sami Özkaya
Pages
24–36
Publication Date
1960-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Two batches of vaccine of foot-and-mouth disease, are being prepared 6 mout.hs and 20 days ago and the other 2 mouths 21. days ago, were app!ied in the field in the comparision with Frenkel vaccine which was imported about 8 · mouths ago and· kept at the cool room at 6° C untill to be use d. 3. · Both b:itches öf native vaccine have produced 100 percent protection in cattle against challenging after three weeks from the vaccination even though notping has been demonstraed wih Frenkel vaccine that all animals showed ·generalized disease after challenging.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:the Temporary Foot-and-Mouth Disease Laboraory in this country is given. 2.
📊
Key Findings & Data:the Temporary Foot-and-Mouth Disease Laboraory in this country is given. 2.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Two batches of vaccine of foot-and-mouth disease, are being prepared 6 mout.hs and 20 days ago and the other 2 mouths 21. days ago, were app!ied in the field in the comparision with Frenkel vaccine which was imported about 8 · mouths ago and· kept at the cool room at 6° C untill to be use d. 3. · Both b:itches öf native vaccine have produced 100 percent protection in cattle against challenging after three weeks from the vaccination even though notping has been demonstraed wih Frenkel vaccine that all animals showed ·generalized disease after challenging.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:şap · deneme

Abstract

the Temporary Foot-and-Mouth Disease Laboraory in this country is given. 2. Two batches of vaccine of foot-and-mouth disease, are being prepared 6 mout.hs and 20 days ago and the other 2 mouths 21. days ago, were app!ied in the field in the comparision with Frenkel vaccine which was imported about 8 · mouths ago and· kept at the cool room at 6° C untill to be use d. 3. · Both b:itches öf native vaccine have produced 100 percent protection in cattle against challenging after three weeks from the vaccination even though notping has been demonstraed wih Frenkel vaccine that all animals showed ·generalized disease after challenging.

Özet

Hillasa

Keywords
🔖

Cite This Article

Oral, M., Sütçü, M., Taşbaş, M., Özkaya, S. (1960). Yurdumuzda hazırlanan şap aşısının muafiyet verme kapasitesi üzerine saha tatbikatı. Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 24–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/1167071

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. ı. Aygün S. T.: Ultraviruslar ve yaptıkları hastalıklar (1953)
  2. Bacı·aclı, L. Hıosse, W. R, Callis J. J.: Science 1:02, 1269 (1855)
  3. Von lleldnun J. G.: OEEC, pp 51- 59 (1957).
  4. Datta S.: Spe. Rep. F. M. D. (1951).
  5. B elin C.: OEEC, pp 85 - 91 (1957)
  6. Eaır1e W. R., Evans V. J., Edward i\'I. F., Duchesne E;-.: J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 10, 291 (1949)
  7. Frederil•s H. H. J.: Amer. J 1 V. R. vol: 17, No: 64. July 1956 pp 455-462
  8. Fiücltiger: Spe, Rep, F. M. D. !1951) pp 148- 158
  9. Frenkel H. S.: Am. J, Vet. Res. 9, 371 (1950)
  10. » » OEEC pp 61 - 67
  11. ll. » » Am. J. Vet. Res. 12, 187 (1951)
  12. » » Bul. OIE. pp 98 - 102 (1955)
  13. » » Am. J. Vet. Res. No: 62 (1956)
  14. Gieğe,r W.: OEEC pp 96 (1957)
  15. Gillespie James H.: Cornell Veterinarian XLV No: 2 April (1955) pp 160- 169
  16. Gillesple James H.: 170-1179 Cornell Veterinarian XLIV No: 4, October (1954) Cornell Veerinarian XLV No: 2 April (1955) pp
  17. Gürsel A.: Türk Ij. Tec. Bi. D, (1951) Cilt: 9, sayı 1, sayfa: 67, 209, 335.
  18. Hagen W. A., Bruner D, W.: The Inf. Dis. of dom. Anim., pp 649 - 688 (1951) o
  19. Henderson W. M.: J. Hyg. VoL 50, No: 2, jne (1952), pp 196-208
  20. Henderson W. M.: OEEC pp 96 - 98 (1957)
  21. Lurla S. E.: Gen. Virology pp 324- 331 (1953)
  22. Machowiah C.: OEEC pp 81-83 (1957)
  23. MazzaracchiQ V., Orfie Z., D'Aınore A., Ravaloli L., Castgnoli B.: (Zooprofilassi) II, 2117 (1956)
  24. Orfei Z.: Zooprofilassi II, 285 (1956)
  25. Oral M.: Şahsi notları
  26. Oral M. ve Sütçü M.: Türk Vet. Hek. Dern. Derg. Sayı 148- 149, Sayfa: 33 - 42 (1959)
  27. Paırker R. C.: Meth. tis. cu!. New- York Hoeber (1950)
  28. Barnon G.: Of. In. Ep. No:4 Mai (1955)
  29. Reed L. JJ., JUuench H. Q. A.: Am. J, Hyg. Vol: 27 No: 3 May (1938) pp 493-497
  30. Schmidt S.: Dan. For. Of. Jo. No: 4 (1949)
  31. Seliers R. F.: Nat. Vol: 176 pp 547-549, Sept: 17, (1955)
  32. Skinner H. H.: Proc Roy. Soc. Med,. Dec 1951, Vol: 44, No: 12, pp 1041 -1!044
  33. Wal!dmann and Köbe: OMGUS - G-1 750 pp I EXH!BİT A
  34. Waldmann and Köpe: OMGUS - G-1 750 pp I EXH!B!T B
  35. Möhlmann H.: OMGUS - G-1 750 pp I EXH!B!T H
  36. Möhlmann H.: OMGUS, G-1750 pp I EXH!B!T O
  37. Willem R. and Leunen J.: OEEC pp i73- 80 (1957)