ArticleThe Journal of general virology2016
The B-cell response to foot-and-mouth-disease virus in cattle following vaccination and live-virus challenge.
Article in The Journal of general virology, 2016. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cattle antibodies identify a cross-serotype broadly neutralising foot-and-mouth disease virus epitope.NPJ vaccines · 2026Article
- Distinctive Immunological Signatures Define Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus Persistence in Vaccinated Cattle.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Article
- Assessment on Different Vaccine Formulation Parameters in the Protection against Heterologous Challenge with FMDV in Cattle.Viruses · 2022Article
- Foot-and-mouth disease virus localisation on follicular dendritic cells and sustained induction of neutralising antibodies is dependent on binding to complement receptors (CR2/CR1).PLoS pathogens · 2022Article
- Clearance of a persistent picornavirus infection is associated with enhanced pro-apoptotic and cellular immune responses.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- The B Cell Response to Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus in Cattle following Sequential Vaccination with Multiple Serotypes.Journal of virology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antibodies play a pivotal role against viral infection, and maintenance of protection is dependent on plasma and memory B-cells. Understanding antigen-specific B-cell responses in cattle is essential to inform future vaccine design. We have previously defined T-cell-dependent and -independent B-cell responses in cattle, as a prelude to investigating foot-and-mouth-disease-virus (FMDV)-specific B-cell responses. In this study, we have used an FMDV O-serotype vaccination (O1-Manisa or O SKR) and live-virus challenge (FMDV O SKR) to investigate the homologous and heterologous B-cell response in cattle following both vaccination and live-virus challenge. The FMDV O-serotype vaccines were able to induce a cross-reactive plasma-cell response, specific for both O1-Manisa and O SKR, post-vaccination. Post-FMDV O SKR live-virus challenge, the heterologous O1-Manisa vaccination provided cross-protection against O SKR challenge and cross-reactive O SKR-specific plasma cells were induced. However, vaccination and live-virus challenge were not able to induce a detectable FMDV O-serotype-specific memory B-cell response in any of the cattle. The aim of new FMDV vaccines should be to induce memory responses and increased duration of immunity in cattle.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.