Abstract :

The article provides recommendations on the use of immunological methods and criteria for assessing the level of natural resistance, in order to select animals with high natural resistance. Karakul sheep of the sur (brown) color having a concentration of common immune proteins of serum blood (CIPSB) with a quantitative method of 32–50 mg/ml and a semi–quantitative method of 1.1–2.0 conventional units, cellular immunity according to the skin reaction (delayed hypersensitivity reaction DHR) of 7.0–9.0 mm are classified as highly resistant; with CIPSB 18–31 mg/ml and 0.71–1.0 conv. units, DHR on a skin test of 5–6 mm to medium–resistant and respectively CIPSB of 13–17 mg/ml and 0.4–0.66 conv. units, DHR on a skin test of 3–4 mm and lower to a low–resistant group of animals. The indexes of common immune proteins of serum blood of 8–12 mg/ml and less according to the quantitative method and 0.25–0.45 conv. units according to the indicator method, T–cell activity according to the skin test of 1.0–2.0 mm characterize the immunodeficiency condition.

Studies have shown that the productivity of karakul sheep with a high level of natural resistance was higher than that of low–resistant ones. Karakul lambs with medium and high level of immunological reactivity quickly regained body weight after the stress factors of the weaning period, were better fed and weighed 33.6±0.45 and 34.5±0.35 kg at 8 months of age, the gain during the pasture fattening period was 8.2 ± 0.16 and 8.4± 0.11 kg, respectively, the average daily weight gain 91.1 g and 93.3 g, while animals with low immune reactivity weighed 30.3 ± 0.46 kg, where the gain over the entire period of pasture fattening was 6.7 ± 0.12 kg with an average daily gain of 74.4 g.

Body weight of lambs which suffered immunodeficiency conditions in various colostral–milk periods was 28.1 ± 0.75 kg, weight gain 6.2 kg ± 0.08 kg and average daily weight gain 68.8 g. The meat productivity (slaughter weight) of lambs with medium and high immune reactivity was 2.03 kg and 2.71 kg or 14.03 % and 17.9 % higher than in lambs with low natural resistance, and 3.24 kg and 3.92 kg or 22.4 % and 25.9 % higher compared to lambs which had immunodeficiency syndromes.

 

---

Keywords :

immunodiagnostics, immunological indicators and criteria, karakul lambs, live weight, live weight gain, natural resistance, slaughter weight, slaughter yield.

---

References :

1. Ata–Kurbanov E.A. Immunobiological aspects of increasing the productivity of karakul sheep. Tashkent. “Mehnat”, 1986. – p. 176.
2. Voronin E.S., Petrov A.M., Serykh M.M., Devrishov D.A. Immunology. – M.: “Kolos–Press”, 2002. – p. 408.
3. Valiev R.G. History, theory and practice of karakul sheep breeding // International scientific and practical conference “Problems of pasture animal husbandry and ecology of deserts”. – Samarkand, 2000. – p. 39–41.
4. Zlobin S. The quality of colostrum and the safety of young animals. J.: Animal husbandry of Russia. – No. 3, 2008. – p. 57–58.
5. Clinical laboratory diagnostics in veterinary medicine. Handbook / I.P. Kondrakhin, N.V. Kurilov, A.G. Malakhov – M.: Agropromizdat, 1985. – p. 74–75.
6. Norbaev K. N., Daminov A. S., Eshburiev S. B. (2019). Etiopathogenesis of secondary osteodystrophy in cows.
7. Norbaev K.N., Bakirov B.B., Eshburiev B.M. Internal non–infectious diseases of animals. Textbook. – Samarkand, 2020. – p. 485.
8. Methodology for assessing the meat productivity of sheep. All–Russian Research Institute of Animal Husbandry. Dubrovitsy, 1978.
9. Elaboration a system for monitoring the viability and reproductive function of karakul sheep. /Report on research work on assignment 01.06. Uzbek Scientific Research Institute of Karakul Sheep Breeding and Desert Ecology. Samarkand, 1996. – p. 82–84.
10. Skorykh L.N. Meat productivity and interior features of young sheep of different genotypes / L.N. Skorykh // Reports of the Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2011. – No. 5. – p. 34–35.
11. Fazilov U.T. Karakul breed of sheep //Monograph. Samarkand, Uzbek Scientific Research Institute of Karakul Sheep Breeding and Desert Ecology, 2013. – p. 153–154.
12. Fayzieva S. F., Norboev K. N., Bazarov A. H. (2022). Intestinal dysbacteriosis in calves dyspepsia. Bulletin of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Husbandry, 2 (1).
13. Eshburiev S. B., Narbaev K., Kostomakhin N. M. (2017). Group prevention of vitamin and mineral metabolism disorders in highly productive cows. Chief zootechnik, (11). – p. 3–
14. Yusupov S.Yu. Constitutional differentiation and productivity of karakul sheep. Monograph. Tashkent, 2005. – p. 239.
15. Ata–Kurbanov E.A. The arid zone ecological area for breeding of karakul sheep. Journal of Arid Land Studies, 53, 1999. – 343–346.
16. Kettritz R., Falk R.J., Jennete J.C., Gaido M.L. Neutrophil superoxide release is required for spontaneous and FMLP–mediated but not TNF alpha–mediated apoptosis // J.Am.Soc.Nephrol, 1997. – 8., No. 7. – p. 1091–1100.
17. Killan M., Russell M.W. Function of mucosal immunoglobulin. Handbook of Mucosal Immunology. San Diego, Academic Press, 1994. – p. 127–
18. Lekstrom–Himes, J.A. Immunodeficiency diseases caused by defects in phagocytes / J.A. Lekstrom–Himes, J.I. Gallin // The New England Journal of Medicine, 2000. – Vol. 343 (23). – p. 1703–1714.
19. Nathan C.F., Murray H.W., Cohn Z. Current concepts: The macrophage as an effector cell // J. Med. – Vol. 303, 1980. – p. 622–
20. Norboyev, Q. N., Bakirov, B., & Eshburiyev, B. M. (2009). Pathology and therapy of non–infectious diseases of young animals. Study guide. Samarkand.