CHAPTER ONE

1.1. INTRODUCTION

Vaccination of dogs generally is of utmost importance to us seeing that dog is man’s best friend. Vaccinating dogs not only helps to save dogs from infections but it also helps to protect man, seeing that we humans are in constant contact with dogs and most Nigerians eat dogs. So therefore it is essential we take proper care of dogs around us by vaccinating them appropriately.

Prompt Vaccinations protects dogs from specific diseases that can make it very sick, disable or even kill it. They help to boost the dog’s immune system against pathogens or disease causing organisms.Vaccines create immunity that protects dogs from an infection without causing the suffering of the disease itself.  

Dog Vaccination is when a, or, is deliberately administered to a dog (usually by injection) so that the dog’s immune system can prepare to fight a future infection (Adams 2005). There arevaccinesto help prevent many illnesses that affectdogs. Vaccinating your dog has long been considered one of the easiest ways to help him live a long and healthy life. Not only are there different vaccines for different diseases, there are different types and combinations of vaccines in Nigeria today. Regular and prompt vaccination of dogs have contributed both to the health of dogs and to the public health. In countries where routine rabies vaccination of dogs is practiced, for example, rabies in humans is reduced to a barest minimum.

Generally in Nigeria, we have two major types of dog vaccines in Nigeria namely, the killed vaccine which is locally made here in Nigeria and the modified live vaccine (MLV) which is often imported into the country (Obi 2005).

1.2. STATEMENT OF GENERAL PROBLEM

Generally in Nigeria, dog vaccination has had its fair share of inconsistencies especially when it has a lot to do with vaccination of local dogs. The general response of local dogs in Nigeria has come under intense scrutiny, thus leading us to undertake this research work of statistically determining how local dogs respond to the two major types of vaccines when used together with worm expellants. When it comes to how local dogs respond to vaccines, it is generally said that puppies respond faster to vaccines than adult dogs, being researchers, we do not make assertions that are not statistically proven.  There is also this major concern about the potency of these two vaccines as to which of the two is more effective when used to vaccinate local dogs; this is also a major concern which led to this statistical survey or research.

1.3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study is aimed at the following:

1. To find out if the antibody titer of each dog would keep increasing ,remain constant or decrease when  any of the vaccines ( killed vaccine or Modified live vaccine )  is used n both puppies and adult dogs if each of the vaccines are repeatedly used.( most important)
2. To find out which among the two vaccine used would give the best result on local dogs (both adult and puppy dog). That is comparing the effect of two types of vaccines on the dogs.

Which one of the de-worming drugs gives the best result when used on the local dogs?

1. General response of local dogs to vaccination.
2. To know the best combination of drug and vaccine that would have more effect on local dogs.
3. To enlighten local dog breeders and veterinary doctors.
4. To know if the response to these dogs to vaccination is sex or gender based.

1.4. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The importance of this study is mainly to ascertain the response of local dogs to vaccination.  Another important Significance is to determine which of the two vaccines has greater effect on local dogs, to know if the response of these local dogs to vaccination is age or gender based; that is, do adult or puppy dogs respond differently or alike when vaccinated?. The same goes for male and female dogs. Another equally cardinal significance is to know which combination of de-worming drug and vaccine would have more effect on local dogs so that we can enlighten our local dog breeders and veterinary doctors on the recent development.

1.5. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

For the purpose of this study as the topic depicts, the scope of the study will be focused on how local dogs respond to vaccination, which de-worming drug when used with any of the vaccine has more effect on the local dogs. Another scope is to determine if the response of these dogs are age or gender based, that is if adult or puppy dogs response to vaccination is the same or different. The scope of this study would also be focused on which de-worming drug when used with vaccines has more effect on the local dogs and finally to know which of the two vaccines under study here is more effective when used on local dogs. In the earlier stage of the study there is a detailed coverage of the techniques and methods used in judging whether a dog responded well or not to vaccination by looking at their antibody titre.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

It is necessary to mention some of the limitations of this research work. The chief limitation is the difficulty in obtaining relevant information in that a few of our values were missing but these missing values were not  statistical significant enough to be noticed.

Notwithstanding, in the highlighted limitation above, it is hoped that this research will be useful to dog breeders, veterinary     clinics and other similar organization that may want to know the general response of local dogs to vaccination.

1.7. DEFINITION OF TERMS

Vaccine: a sub-substance that is put into the blood and that protects the body from a disease.

Vaccination:  Injection of a killed microbe in order to stimulate the immune system against the microbe, thereby preventing disease.

MLV:  Modified live vaccine.

1.7. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

The research hypotheses are as follows:

HYPOTHESIS 1

H0: there is no significant relationship between the antibody titre and the sex of the local dog.

H1: there is a significant relationship between the antibody titre and the sex of the local dog.

Level of significance: 0.05

Decision rule: reject H0 if p-value is less than the level of significance. Accept H0 if otherwise.

HYPOTHESIS 2

H0 : there is no significant difference in the performance of the de-worming drugs on the local drugs.

H1 : there is significant difference in the performance of the de-worming drugs on the local dogs.

Level of significance (α): 0.05

Decision rule: reject H0 if the p-value is less than the level of significance (α) accept H0 if otherwise.

HYPOTHESIS 3

H0 : there is no significant relationship between the age of the local dog and the rate of vaccination

H1 : there is  a significant relationship between the age of the local dog and the rate of vaccination

Level of significance (α): 0.05

Decision rule: reject H0 if the p-value is less than the level of significance (α) accept H0 if otherwise.

HYPOTHESIS 4

H0 : there is no significant difference in the effects of  MLV and KILLED vaccines when used with de-worming drugs on the local dogs.

H1 : there is significant difference in the effects of MLV and KILLED vaccines  when used with de-worming drugs on local dogs.

Level of significance (α): 0.05

Decision rule: reject H0 if the p-value is less than the level of significance (α) accept H0 if otherwise.