Genomic Analysis of IgG Antibody Response to Common Pathogens in Commercial Sows in Health-Challenged Herds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Losses due to infectious diseases are one of the main factors affecting productivity in the swine industry, motivating the investigation of disease resilience-related traits for genetic selection. However, these traits are not expected to be expressed in the nucleus herds, where selection is performed. One alternative is to use information from the commercial level to identify and select nucleus animals that are genetically superior for coping with pathogen challenges. In this study, we analyzed the genetic basis of antibody (Ab) response to common infectious pathogens in health-challenged commercial swine herds as potential indicator traits for disease resilience, including Ab response to influenza A virus of swine (IAV), Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (MH), porcine circovirus (PCV2), and Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (APP; different serotypes). Ab response was measured in blood at entry into gilt rearing, post-acclimation (~40 days after entering the commercial herd), and parities 1 and 2. Heritability estimates for Ab response to IAV, MH, and PCV2 ranged from 0 to 0.76. Ab response to APP ranged from 0 to 0.40. The genetic correlation (r_G) of Ab response to IAV with MH, PCV2, PRRSV, and APPmean (average Ab responses for all serotypes of APP) were positive (>0.29) at entry. APPmean was negatively correlated with PCV2 and MH at entry and parity 2 but positively correlated with MH at post-acclimation and parity 1. Genomic regions associated with Ab response to different APP serotypes were identified on 13 chromosomes. The region on SSC 14 (2 Mb) was associated with several serotypes of APP, explaining up to 4.3% of the genetic variance of Ab to APP7 at entry. Genomic prediction accuracies for Ab response were, in general, low to moderate, with the exception of average Ab response to all infectious pathogens evaluated. These results suggest that genetic selection of Ab response in commercial sows is possible, but with variable success depending on the trait and the time-point of collection. Future work is needed to determine genetic correlations of Ab response with disease resilience, reproductive performance, and other production traits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".