Enhancement of protective efficacy of innate immunostimulant based formulations against yolk sac infection in young chicks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to characterize and compare the protective effects of various innate immune stimulants against yolk sac infection (YSI) caused by an avian pathogenic Escherichia coli in young chicks. The immune stimulants were administered alone or in various combinations of unmethylated CpG oligodeoxynucleotides (CpG), polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (Poly I:C), and avian antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Routes included in ovo or in ovo followed by a subcutaneous (S/C) injection. CpG alone and in combination with Poly I:C, truncated avian cathelicidin (CATH)-1(6-26), avian beta defensin (AvBD)1, and CATH-1(6-26) + AvBD1, were administered in ovo to 18-day-old embryonated eggs for gene expression and challenge studies. Next, CpG alone and the potentially effective formulation of CpG + Poly I:C, were administrated via the in ovo route using 40 embryonated eggs. At 1 day post-hatch, half of each group also received their respective treatments via the S/C route. Four hours later, all chicks were challenged using E. coli strain EC317 and mortalities were recorded for 14 d. The first challenge study revealed that amongst the single use and combinations of CpG with different innate immune stimulants, a higher protection and a lower clinical score were offered by the combination of CpG + Poly I:C. The second challenge study showed that this combination (CpG + Poly I:C) provides an even higher level of protection when a second dose is administered via the S/C route at 1 day post-hatch. The current research highlights the efficacy of a combination of CpG + Poly I:C administered either in ovo or in ovo along with a S/C injection and its potential use as an alternative to antibiotics against yolk sac infection in young chicks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".