Immune Responses in Laying Hens after an Infectious Bronchitis Vaccination of Pullets: A Comparison of Two Vaccination Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, vaccinations have been used to limit infectious bronchitis (IB) in both the broiler and layer industries. Depending on the geographical area, live attenuated vaccines are used either alone or in combination with inactivated vaccines to control infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) infections. It has been shown that administering inactivated vaccines preceded by priming with live attenuated vaccines in pullets protects laying hens against IB. However, the immunological basis of this protective response has not been adequately investigated. The objective of the study was to compare two vaccination strategies adapted by the Canadian poultry industry in terms of their ability to systemically induce an adequate immune response in IBV-impacted tissues in laying hens. The first vaccination strategy (only live attenuated IB vaccines) and second vaccination strategy (live attenuated and inactivated IB vaccines) were applied. Serum anti-IBV antibodies were measured at two time points, i.e., 3 weeks and 10 weeks post last vaccination. The recruitment of T cell subsets (i.e., CD4+ and CD8+ T cells), and the interferon (IFN)-γ mRNA expression were measured at 10 weeks post last vaccination. We observed that vaccination strategy 2 induced significantly higher serum anti-IBV antibody responses that were capable of neutralizing an IBV Mass variant associated with a flock history of shell-less egg production better than a Delmarva (DMV)1639 variant, as well as a significantly higher IFN-γ mRNA expression in the lungs, kidneys, and oviduct. We also observed that both vaccination strategies recruited CD4+ T cells as well as CD8+ T cells to the examined tissues at various extents. Our findings indicate that vaccination strategy 2 induces better systemic and local host responses in laying hens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".