ArticleOpen veterinary journal2014
Innocuity and immune response to Brucella melitensis Rev.1 vaccine in camels (Camelus dromedarius).
Article in Open veterinary journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Camel brucellosis: a narrative review of epidemiology and control strategies.Veterinary research communications · 2025Review
- Comparative proteomics ofOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Mass Vaccination Strategy to Control Brucellosis in Sheep and Goats in Northern Iraq.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Bovine brucellosis - a comprehensive review.The veterinary quarterly · 2021Review
- A cross-sectional seroepidemiological study of camel (Open veterinary journal · 2019Article
- The effects of the conjunctival Brucella vaccine on some biochemical parameters in sheep.Tropical animal health and production · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A field trial was conducted in a camel brucellosis-free herd to evaluate antibody response to the Brucella melitensis Rev.1 vaccine in camels and assess shedding of the vaccine strain in milk. Twenty eight camels were divided into four groups according to their age and vaccination route. Groups A (n=3) and B (n=3) consisted of non-pregnant lactating female camels, vaccinated through subcutaneous and conjunctival routes, respectively. Groups C (n=10) consisted of 8-11 months old calves vaccinated through conjunctival route. The rest of the herd (n=12) composed of female and young camels were not vaccinated and were considered as the control group. Each animal from groups A, B and C was given the recommended dose of 2 × 10(9) colony forming units of Rev.1 vaccine irrespective of age or route of vaccination. Blood samples were collected from all the animals at the time of vaccination and at weekly, bi-weekly and monthly interval until 32 weeks post vaccination and from controls at weeks 8 and 24. The serological tests used were modified Rose Bengal Test, sero-agglutination test, and an indirect Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay. Milk samples were collected from all vaccinated female camels and tested for the presence of Rev.1 vaccine strain. Most vaccinated animals started to show an antibody response at week 2 and remained positive until week 16. By week 20 post-vaccination all animals in the three groups were tested negative for Brucella antibodies. Bacteriological analysis of milk samples did not allow any isolation of Brucella melitensis. All samples were found Brucella negative in PCR analysis. The results of this study indicate that the Rev.1 vaccine induces seroconversion in camels. Rev.1 vaccine strain is not excreted in the milk of camels. These findings are promising as to the safe use of the Rev.1 vaccine in camels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26623347PMC4629599W1652734140What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.