ABSTRACT Lentogenic Newcastle disease virus (lNDV) such as Lasota strain and low pathogenicity avian influenza such as H9N2 virus are two of the most economically important viruses affecting poultry worldwide, and little attention in recent years has been paid to simultaneous infections in chickens with these two viruses for the reason that co-infection do occur but are not easily detected. In the present study, chickens were inoculated with lNDV (Lasota) and LPAIV (A/chicken/Tehran/ZMT-173/99(H9N2)) simultaneously or sequentially three days apart. Oropharyngeal and cloacal swabs were collected from chickens from 1 to 14 days after inoculation. RRT-PCR for AIV and NDV detection was performed. The rate of viral shedding was measured within 14 days. No clinical symptoms were observed during the experiment however the pattern of virus shed was different with co-infection, thus comparing the results obtained from viral shedding showed that AIV is a much stronger agent than NDV in the occurrence of viral interference. This is due to the fact that in simultaneous inoculation, AIV replication delayed and reduced NDV replication, while replication of Lasota in simultaneous or pre-inoculated inoculation could not significantly disrupt H9N2 virus replication. These findings indicate that the infection with one virus can interfere with the replication of another, modifying the pathogenesis of the viruses. So, infection of the host with both viral agents simultaneously causes higher shedding of LPAIV than lNDV in OP and CL areas. In conclusion, co-infection with LPAVI in chickens did not impact clinical signs but affected the replication dynamics of these viruses.

ABSTRACT Despite the intensive vaccination programs used for controlling Newcastle disease (ND) in the Iranian poultry industry, outbreaks of ND have been reported in poultry farms. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines for the protection against ND infection and virus-shedding period of velogenic Newcastle disease virus (vNDV) field strain after different immunization schemes. Eight groups of commercial broiler chickens were used. Six groups were vaccinated with different vaccination programs using commercial live and inactivated ND vaccines. All groups, except for group 8, were challenged with a virulent field isolate (104EID50/bird) at 28 days of age. Clinical signs, mortality rate and gross lesions were investigated. Antibody titers were assayed by hemagglutination inhibition test and fecal virus shedding was determined for 14 days post challenge (dpc) with 3-day intervals by the RT-PCR method. All unvaccinated-challenged control birds died. Vaccination with these ND vaccines protected chickens from clinical disease. The mortality rate in the vaccinated groups was significantly lower than in the positive control group. However, vaccinated chickens shed the challenge virus in fecal samples. Although the different vaccination regimens displayed close degrees of protection against the disease, the best protection was observed in broilers primed with the live B1 vaccine via eye drop simultaneously with inactivated vaccine at 8 days of age and boosted with B1 or LaSota via drinking water on day 18. In conclusion, the currently used vaccines with different vaccination schemes can protect chickens against the disease in areas where ND is endemic, while the spread of the field virus to other flocks cannot be prevented.