Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17619156›Full record

ArticleVeterinary research communications2008

Lymphoproliferative response and its relationship with histological lesions in experimental ovine paratuberculosis and its diagnostic implications.

N P Kurade, B N Tripathi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary research communications, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N P KuradeIndian Veterinary Research Institute, Regional Station, Palampur, H.P. 176 061, India.
B N Tripathi
Indian Veterinary Research Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lymphoproliferative response (LPR) was studied in 19 lambs orally infected (Group I) with Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP) with in vitro lymphocyte stimulation test using MTT dye reduction assay. The non-specific LPR against Con A and specific LPR against sonicated antigen and johnin PPD (purified protein derivatives) were estimated on preinfection (0 day) and various days postinfection period (15 to 330 dpi) in the animals, which were classified according to histological and bacteriological evidence of paratuberculosis infection. Of the two antigens used, johnin PPD was found to be superior in terms of consistency and uniformity of response over an observation period of about a year. Significantly (P<0.05) higher LPR were observed in the infected sheep during postinfection period, as compared with preinfection values and values from uninfected control sheep. It was evident from the present study that the LPR in histologically infected animals fluctuated during the long course of infection and had a definite relationship with the gut pathology and the mycobacterial load. The LPR were stronger but variable in sheep with grades 1, 2 and 3 lesions (paucibacillary) and increased progressively from 30 dpi onwards. The sheep with the advanced lesions (grade 4, multibacillary) showed progressive decline in LPR till 120 dpi after initial stronger response at 30 dpi. Most of the animals were detected by LPR before initiation of faecal shedding of MAP. The results suggested that repeated testing was required while screening an infected flock for detecting most of the positive animals.

Indexed as

AnimalsFecesFemaleLymph NodesLymphocyte ActivationLymphocytesMaleParatuberculosisSheepSheep DiseasesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID17619156
OpenAlexW2069796653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.