A Comprehensive Review of Our Understanding and Challenges of Viral Vaccines against Swine Pathogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pig farming has become a strategically significant and economically important industry across the globe. It is also a potentially vulnerable sector due to challenges posed by transboundary diseases in which viral infections are at the forefront. Among the porcine viral diseases, African swine fever, classical swine fever, foot and mouth disease, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome, pseudorabies, swine influenza, and transmissible gastroenteritis are some of the diseases that cause substantial economic losses in the pig industry. It is a well-established fact that vaccination is undoubtedly the most effective strategy to control viral infections in animals. From the period of Jenner and Pasteur to the recent new-generation technology era, the development of vaccines has contributed significantly to reducing the burden of viral infections on animals and humans. Inactivated and modified live viral vaccines provide partial protection against key pathogens. However, there is a need to improve these vaccines to address emerging infections more comprehensively and ensure their safety. The recent reports on new-generation vaccines against swine viruses like DNA, viral-vector-based replicon, chimeric, peptide, plant-made, virus-like particle, and nanoparticle-based vaccines are very encouraging. The current review gathers comprehensive information on the available vaccines and the future perspectives on porcine viral vaccines.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".