ArticlePloS one2019
Effect of tracheal antimicrobial peptide on the development of Mannheimia haemolytica pneumonia in cattle.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial Activities of α-Helix andInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Understanding the mechanisms of viral and bacterial coinfections in bovine respiratory disease: a comprehensive literature review of experimental evidence.Veterinary research · 2022Review
- Antimicrobial peptides as a feed additive alternative to animal production, food safety and public health implications: An overview.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2021Review
- Engineering and characterization of human β-defensin-3 and its analogues and microcin J25 peptides against Mannheimia haemolytica and bovine neutrophils.Veterinary research · 2021Article
- Significance of Endogenous Antimicrobial Peptides on the Health of Food Animals.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- The Immunology of Bovine Respiratory Disease: Recent Advancements.The Veterinary clinics of North America. Food animal practice · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial pneumonia causes significant economic loss to the beef industry and occurs at times of stress and viral infection. Administering antibiotics to at-risk calves is often used to prevent the disease, but alternatives to mass treatment with antibiotics are needed. Tracheal antimicrobial peptide (TAP), a β-defensin naturally produced by bovine airways, has bactericidal activity against the pathogens that cause pneumonia in cattle. However, TAP expression is suppressed by glucocorticoid (stress) and viral infection. We hypothesized that delivering TAP to the respiratory tract would prevent development of pneumonia in calves infected with Mannheimia haemolytica. Clean-catch calves (i.e. obtained prior to contact with the dam) were challenged by aerosol with M. haemolytica, and TAP or water was delivered to the respiratory tract at 0.3, 2 and 6 hours post-infection. TAP treatment did not protect against development of disease. Calves treated with TAP had similar bacterial loads in the nasal cavity and lung compared to calves treated with water. Similarly, TAP treatment did not affect the development of clinical signs, elevated rectal temperatures, or increased levels of blood neutrophils, haptoglobin and fibrinogen that occurred after bacterial challenge. Postmortem gross and histologic lung lesions were also similar in the two groups. To determine why there was a lack of protective effect, we tested the effect of substances in respiratory lining fluid on the bactericidal activity of TAP. Physiologic concentrations of sodium chloride inhibited TAP bactericidal activity in vitro, as did serum at concentrations of 0.62 to 2.5%, but concentrated bronchoalveolar lavage fluid had no consistent effect. These findings suggest that TAP does not have in vivo bactericidal activity against M. haemolytica because of interference by physiological sodium chloride levels and by serum. Thus, administration of TAP may not be effective for prevention of M. haemolytica pneumonia.
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.