MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626853171 · doi:10.1099/jgv.0.000787

Toll-like receptor (TLR)21 signalling-mediated antiviral response against avian influenza virus infection correlates with macrophage recruitment and nitric oxide production

2017· article· en· W2626853171 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Sarjoon Abdul-Cader, Hanaa Ahmed-Hassan, Aruna Amarasinghe, Éva Nagy, Shayan Sharif, Mohamed Faizal Abdul-Careem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of General Virology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyIn ovoCpG siteInnate immune systemToll-like receptorVirologyVirusNitric oxideImmune systemMacrophageInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1EmbryoImmunologyGeneIn vitroDNA methylationCell biologyGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cytosine-guanosinedeoxynucleotide (CpG) DNA can be used for the stimulation of the toll-like receptor (TLR)21 signalling pathway in avian species which ultimately leads to up-regulation of gene transcription for pro-inflammatory molecules including nitric oxide and recruitment of innate immune cells. The objective of this study was to determine the antiviral effect of NO, produced in response to in ovo delivery of CpG DNA, against avian influenza virus (AIV) infection. We found that when CpG DNA is delivered at embryo day (ED)18 in ovo and subsequently challenged with H4N6 AIV at ED19 pre-hatch and day 1 post-hatching, CpG DNA reduces H4N6 AIV replication associated with enhanced NO production and macrophage recruitment in lungs. In vitro, we showed that NO originating from macrophages is capable of eliciting an antiviral response against H4N6 AIV infection. This study provides insights into the mechanisms of CpG DNA-mediated antiviral response, particularly against AIV infection in avian species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of General VirologySame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207