Broiler chickens with 1950s genetics display a stable immune profile as measured by Kinome, mRNA expression, and metabolism when stimulated early in life with CpG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant changes in growth potential and feed conversion have been bred into the modern broiler chicken for well over 60 yr. These metabolic changes have had significant effects on the immune performance as well. To better understand these genetic differences in immunometabolism we studied the immune response of the modern broiler and the Athens Canadian Random Bred (ACRB) heritage broiler strain. We injected newly hatched modern broiler and ACRB chicks intraabdominally with CpG oligonucleotide, an immunostimulatory synthetic oligonucleotide. We conducted species-specific kinome array analysis and gene expression analysis on jejunum and cecal tonsil tissue. We also performed metabolic analysis of blood cells. In the modern birds, there is an initial inflammatory response to the injection at d 3 post-hatch with activation of PI3K-Akt, JAK-STAT, and NF-κB signaling, and IL-1β and IL-6 mRNA expression. By d 15 post-hatch this response changed to deactivation and downregulation of these immune responses in modern but not heritage broilers. Metabolic analysis showed an increase in glycolysis in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from modern birds given CpG, but no difference in ACRB. These results show that the ACRB birds may have a less inflammatory and more stable immune profile in response to immune stimulation than the modern broilers, possibly resulting in a more disease resistant phenotype overall.
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".