Effects of Ligands for Toll-Like Receptors 3, 4, and 21 as Adjuvants on the Immunogenicity of an Avian Influenza Vaccine in Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Avian influenza viruses (AIV) are of great concern to the worldwide community as well as the poultry industry. Although existing vaccines are successful in limiting the spread of the virus, these vaccines do not eliminate virus shedding into the environment. As a result, it is of great importance to enhance the efficacy of existing AIV vaccines. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to utilize the immunostimulatory Toll-like receptor ligands poly I:C, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and CpG DNA motifs, either alone or in combination with each other, as adjuvants to enhance the immunogenicity of an inactivated AIV vaccine. Chickens were vaccinated twice, 14 days apart. Antibody-mediated responses were assessed by collected sera and lacrimal secretions, while cell-mediated immunity was assessed by stimulating splenocytes from vaccinated chickens in vitro with the vaccine antigen. The results suggest that CpG alone served as the best single-ligand adjuvant compared to poly I:C or LPS, as it significantly enhanced antibody-mediated responses, as determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay. Furthermore, upon combining CpG with poly I:C, a robust antibody-mediated and cell-mediated immune response was elicited, resulting in an enhanced hemagglutination inhibition titer and splenocyte proliferation respectively. Future studies may be aimed at assessing the efficacy of the poly I:C and CpG combination adjuvant in protecting against AIV 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".