Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29870564›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Immunomodulation and effects on microbiota after in ovo administration of chicken cathelicidin-2.

Tryntsje Cuperus, Marina D Kraaij, Aldert L Zomer, Albert van Dijk, Henk P Haagsman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Physiological effects ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tryntsje CuperusDivision of Molecular Host Defence, Department of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marina D KraaijDivision of Molecular Host Defence, Department of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Aldert L ZomerDivision Clinical Infectiology, Department of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Albert van DijkDivision of Molecular Host Defence, Department of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Henk P HaagsmanDivision of Molecular Host Defence, Department of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4931-5201
Utrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Host Defense Peptides (HDPs) such as cathelicidins are multifunctional effectors of the innate immune system with both antimicrobial and pleiotropic immunomodulatory functions. Chicken cathelicidin-2 (CATH-2) has multiple immunomodulatory effects in vitro and the D-amino acid analog of this peptide has been shown to partially protect young chicks from a bacterial infection. However, the mechanisms responsible for CATH-2 mediated in vivo protection have not been investigated so far. In this study, D-CATH-2 was administered in ovo and the immune status and microbiota of the chicks were investigated at 7 days posthatch to elucidate the in vivo mechanisms of the peptide. In three consecutive studies, no effects on numbers and functions of immune cells were found and only small changes were seen in gene expression of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs). In two studies, intestinal microbiota composition was determined which was highly variable, suggesting that it was strongly influenced by environmental factors. In both studies, in ovo D-CATH-2 treatment caused significant reduction of Ruminococcaceae and Butyricicoccus in the cecum and Escherichia/Shigella in both ileum and cecum. In conclusion, this study shows that, in the absence of an infectious stimulus, in ovo administration of a CATH-2 analog alters the microbiota composition but does not affect the chicks' immune system posthatch.

Indexed as

ChickensAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesBone Marrow CellsCells, CulturedChick EmbryoImmunity, InnateImmunomodulationLeukocytes, MononuclearMicrobiotaAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesCMAP27 protein, chicken

Identifiers

PMID29870564
PMCPMC5988267
OpenAlexW2805116301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.