Response to experimentally induced infection with bovine respiratory syncytial virus following intranasal vaccination of seropositive and seronegative calves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a combination modified-live bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) vaccine can stimulate protective immunity in young BRSV-seropositive calves following intranasal (IN) administration. DESIGN: Controlled challenge study. ANIMALS: 66 Holstein bull calves, 3 to 8 days old. PROCEDURES: In experiment 1, BRSV-seropositive and -seronegative calves were vaccinated IN with a commercially available combination modified-live virus vaccine formulated for SC administration; calves underwent BRSV challenge 4.5 months later. In experiment 2, BRSV-seronegative calves were vaccinated IN or SC (to examine the effect of route of administration) with the same combination vaccine that instead had a 1/100 dose of BRSV (to examine the effect of dose); calves underwent BRSV challenge 21 days later. RESULTS: In experiment 1, BRSV challenge resulted in severe respiratory tract disease with low arterial partial pressures of oxygen and lung lesions in most calves from all groups. Maximum change in rectal temperature was significantly greater in seropositive IN vaccinated calves, compared with seronegative IN vaccinated and seropositive control calves. Number of days of BRSV shedding was significantly lower in seronegative IN vaccinated calves than in seropositive IN vaccinated and seropositive control calves. In experiment 2, maximum change in rectal temperature was significantly greater in seronegative control calves, compared with seronegative IN and SC vaccinated calves. Shedding of BRSV was significantly reduced in seronegative IN and SC vaccinated calves, compared with control calves; also, lung lesions were reduced in seronegative IN and SC vaccinated calves. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Maternal antibodies may inhibit priming of protective responses by IN delivered BRSV vaccines.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".