ArticleBMC veterinary research2018
Application of different laboratory techniques to monitor the behaviour of a Mycoplasma synoviae vaccine (MS-H) in broiler breeders.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Diversity and Emerging Trends ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Enhancing Mycoplasma synoviae control: A novel quantitative real-time PCR approach to differentiate MS-H vaccine strain and field strains.Poultry science · 2025Article
- Recombinant MS087-based indirect ELISA for the diagnosis ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the protective efficacy of six major immunogenic proteins ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Minimum Inhibitory Concentrations for 154 Mycoplasma synoviae isolates from Italy collected during 2012-2017.PloS one · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMycoplasma synoviae (MS) is a major poultry pathogen which causes severe economic losses in all the productive sectors. The prevalence of MS in European countries has increased in the last few years, leading to greater attention to the available methods to prevent its spread. The main strategy currently applied for its containment is the development and maintenance of MS-free breeder flocks. A live MS vaccine (MS-H) obtained by mutagenizing an Australian field strain has recently been introduced in Italy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the vaccine behaviour in broiler breeder groups at different production stages and the effectiveness of the available laboratory tests in discriminating the MS-H from a field strain.
resultsThe vaccine diffused extensively through the population, shown by the wide serological response (over 80% of positive samples in RSA and 85% in ELISA), the high serological titres, the positivity of all the tracheal samples collected during the production phase by MS PCR and the positivity by cultivation from tracheal swabs at the end-point (55 weeks after vaccination). In contrast, only one swab from a sternal bursa was positive in MS PCR, while all the joint and oviduct samples were negative. There was no evidence of vertical transmission. Different genotyping techniques were used to achieve a clear classification of the MS positive samples. The vlhA and the obg gene analysis showed that most of the strains were homologous with the vaccine, but some ambiguous samples were further investigated with the multi locus sequence typing (MLST) scheme which confirmed the homology.
conclusionsThe development of a multi-technique approach to monitor vaccinated avian flocks, based both on serological and biomolecular methods, is advised as well as the use of effective genotyping techniques to analyse the MS strains circulating in high densely populated poultry areas.
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.