MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1127298418 · doi:10.1016/j.virol.2015.07.019

Blunted inflammatory and mucosal IgA responses to pneumonia virus of mice in C57BL/6 neonates are correlated to reduced protective immunity upon re-infection as elderly mice

2015· article· en· W1127298418 on OpenAlexafffund
Pratima Shrivastava, Ethel Atanley, Indranil Sarkar, Ellen Watkiss, Susantha Gomis, Sylvia van Drunen Littel‐van den Hurk

Bibliographic record

VenueVirology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImmunologyVirusPneumoniaBronchiolitisBiologyImmunityPriming (agriculture)AntibodyImmune systemDiseaseLungAcquired immune systemVirologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Respiratory syncytial virus is a major cause of bronchiolitis in infants and pneumonia virus of mice (PVM) causes similar disease in mice. The impact of PVM infection in BALB/c and C57BL/6 neonates, and upon re-infection as elderly mice, was compared. As previously shown for adult mice, PVM caused more disease in BALB/c than in C57BL/6 neonates. After PVM-15 infection BALB/c neonates showed higher production of inflammatory mediators, more influx of plasmacytoid dendritic cells and higher IFN-α expression, and more IgA in the lungs than C57BL/6 neonates. After re-infection as elderly, BALB/c mice developed virus neutralizing antibodies in serum and lung, and were protected from clinical disease, whereas C57BL/6 mice did not develop an anamnestic response and were not protected. These results suggest that an effective local innate response, as well as priming of mucosal adaptive responses in neonates after PVM-15 infection is correlated to decreased susceptibility and protection upon re-infection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirologySame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207