CpG Motif Identification for Veterinary and Laboratory Species Demonstrates That Sequence Recognition Is Highly Conserved
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oligodinucleotides containing CpG motifs stimulate vertebrate immune cells in vitro, have proven efficacy in murine disease models and are currently being tested in human clinical trials as therapies for cancer, allergy, and infectious disease. As there are no known immunostimulatory motifs for veterinary species, the potential of CpG DNA as a veterinary pharmaceutical has not been investigated. Here, optimal CpG motifs for seven veterinary and three laboratory species are described. The preferential recognition of a GTCGTT motif was strongly conserved across two vertebrate phyla, although a GACGTT motif was optimal for inbred strains of mice and rabbits. In a subsequent adjuvanticity trial, the in vitro screening methodology was validated in sheep, representing the first demonstration of CpG DNA efficacy in a veterinary species. These results should provide candidate immunostimulant and therapeutic drugs for veterinary use and enable the testing of CpG DNA in large animal models of human disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".