Immunogenicity of Type IV Pilin Proteins from Clostridium perfringens in Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clostridium perfringens, the causative agent of necrotic enteritis in chickens, is controlled by in-feed antibiotics. With increasing pressure to reduce antimicrobial use, the development of alternative preventive tools is needed. Type IV pili proteins have been shown to be immunogenic in many Gram-positive bacteria. The aims of this study were to evaluate the immunogenic potential of pilins (PilA1, PilA2 and PilA3) from C. perfringens in chickens and to verify their ability to protect against necrotic enteritis. Chickens were immunized twice with 50 µg of recombinant proteins and adjuvant, resulting in a good and specific serum antibody response. Next, one-day-old chicks were injected three times with the same vaccines, and then infected with C. perfringens. Mean OD450 values ten times higher than the controls were obtained for IgY (p < 0.05) and a significantly lower cecal count of C. perfringens was observed in the birds injected with PilA3. However, no reduction in the severity of intestinal lesions was observed. All three pilin proteins were shown to be highly immunogenic in the chickens. Although immunization with the pilins did not protect the birds against necrotic enteritis in this study, it was interesting to observe that vaccination with the recombinant PilA3 protein reduced C. perfringens cecal colonization.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".