Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 14, Number 1—January 2008

Experimental Infection of Swans and Geese with Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Virus (H5N1) of Asian Lineage

Justin D. Brown*Comments to Author , David E. Stallknecht*, and David E. Swayne†
Author affiliations: *College of Veterinary Medicine of the University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; †Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory of the US Department of Agriculture, Athens, Georgia, USA;

Main Article

Table 2

Virus isolation data from 4 species of swans and 2 species of geese exposed to highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (H5N1) by intranasal inoculation and contact with infected birds*

Species Oropharynx
Average duration† AMT‡ (EID50/mL) Average duration† AMT‡ (EID50/mL)
Black swan 2 (2–3) 6.46 2 (1–2) 4.94
Trumpeter swan 5 (4–6) 6.14 4 (2–5) 3.18
Whooper swan 5 (4–6) 6.30 4 (3–5) 4.25
Mute swan 5 (3–7) 5.58 4 (3–4) 4.46
Cackling goose 5 (4–6) 5.25 3 (2–5) 3.05
Bar-headed goose 6 (5–8) 5.10 3 (0–7) 2.55§

*Exposure date for each species was adjusted so that 0 d postcontact (when the contact birds were placed into the cage with the inoculated birds) was assumed to be equivalent to 0 d postinoculation. AMT, average maximum titer; EID50, median embryo infectious dose.
†Average duration of viral shedding in days (range).
‡AMT for birds that shed virus. All of the contact and inoculated birds shed detectable concentrations of virus by the oropharyngeal and cloacal route with 1 exception (noted below).
§One bar-headed goose did not excrete detectable virus by the cloacal route, and the average maximum titer for cloacal shedding in this species was calculated based on the 4 birds with detectable cloacal shedding. If all 5 geese were included in this calculation, the average cloacal shedding would be log10 2.04 EID50/mL.

Main Article

Page created: July 08, 2010
Page updated: July 08, 2010
Page reviewed: July 08, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.