Chicken Anti-Idiotypic Antibodies As an Alternative to the Antimicrobial Treatment for the Control of Escherichia coli K 88 in Domestic Animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antimicrobials have been widely used to control dirrheal infections in domestic animals. However, the misuse of these antimicrobials can lead to human health hazards. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the efficacy of anti-idiotypic antibodies that mimic Escherichia coli K88 antigens in combating diarreal infections in piglets. Polyclonal anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab2) were produced in laying hens against several monoclonal (mAb1) and polyclonal (pAb1) antibodies that recognized Escherichia coli K88 fimbrial antigen. Preliminary evaluation showed that anti-pAb antibodies (Ab2) were superior to anti-mab antibodies. Therefore, the efficacy of two Ab2 preparations [Ab2 produced against rabbit anti-K88 IgG2a and its F(ab’) 2 ] were evaluated following an intragastric administration to neonatal piglets challenged with E. coli K88. Partial protection (62.5% survival) was observed in the Ab2 treated piglets, while only 12.5 % of control piglets (no-Ab2) survived. Our results indicate that Ab2 are excellent surrogate antigens for immunization and could also be useful in the control of E.coli infection in piglets.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".