MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045947122 · doi:10.31274/ans_air-180814-670

Willingness to Approach Behavior and Feed Disappearance of Weaned Pigs Following Vaccination with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae

2010· report· en· W2045947122 on OpenAlexaff
Anna K. Johnson, Thomas Fangman, Roy Edler, David Baumert, Paul Dubois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsBoehringer Ingelheim (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMycoplasma hyopneumoniaePasteurella multocidaVaccinationErysipelothrix rhusiopathiaeMedicinePorcine circovirusIntramuscular injectionVeterinary medicineMycoplasmaAnimal scienceVirologyBiologyInternal medicineMicrobiologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the U.S., pigs during the nursery phase receive vaccinations for circovirus, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, erysipelas, salmonellosis and ileitis and these vaccinations are typically administered via intramuscular injection (circovirus, Mhyo +/- erysipelas) or drinking water (ileitis, salmonella +/- erysipelas). It has been noted by swine practitioners (Anon Communication) that approximately 6-h after vaccination via intramuscular injection has been completed, pigs lie down, become more lethargic and reduce their feed consumption. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine if field observations of markedly reduced pig activity following vaccination with certain Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae vaccines could be confirmed and quantified by observing post-vaccinal pig behavior changes for a 15 sec period over a 28 h period. A total of 1832 weaned crossbred (GPK35 x EB5, Monsanto Choice Genetic, St Louis, MO) pigs 17 to 23 d of age were obtained from a PRRS and SIV-negative, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae positive production system. Research was conducted over 4 consecutive days in October 2007 at a commercial, mechanically ventilated nursery facility in South Central Missouri. Treatment one; MycoFLEX (n = 36 pens), defined as a single intramuscular dose of 1ml MycoFLEX® (Boehringer Ingelheim, St. Joseph, MO) vaccine injected into the lateral cervical musculature on the right side of the neck at 5 wks of age using a 16 gauge needle. Treatment two: RespiSure-ONE (n = 36 pens), defined as a single intramuscular dose of 2 ml RespiSure®-ONE (Pfizer Animal Health, New York, NY) vaccine injected into the lateral cervical musculature on the right side of the neck at 5 weeks of age using a 16 gauge needle. Willingness to approach observations was performed in the same pen on two occasions 24 h apart. The d -1 (baseline) WTA observation occurred between 3:00 PM and 4:00 PM and was defined as the WTA percentage baseline for each pen (pens were observed in the same order that vaccine was to be administered). On d 0 (post-immunization), vaccination procedures began at 7:00 AM and were completed by 10:00 AM. On d 0, WTA observation occurred between 1:00 PM and 4:00 PM and was defined as the WTA percentage post-immunization for each pen. The percentage of pigs willing to approach on d -1 and d 0 were analyzed using a Pearson Chi-square test in JMP v.6.0.0 (Cary, NC) software comparing the percentage of pigs approaching on a pen basis. Results were considered significant when P values were ≤ 0.05. Baseline willingness to approach was not different (P > 0.05) between the two treatment groups. Six h post vaccination both treatment groups had reduced their willingness to approach to the observer, however nursery aged pigs that received the MycoFLEX® vaccination were more willing to approach (P < 0.0001) than their RespiSURE® -one counterparts. In conclusion, vaccines do seem to have some short term behavioral effect on the pig and producers and veterinarians should be mindful of this when strategizing herd health management techniques.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial infections and disease researchFrench-language works237,207