Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32582185›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2020

Innate Immunomodulation in Food Animals: Evidence for Trained Immunity?

Kristen A Byrne, Crystal L Loving, Jodi L McGill

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Complement system activation in wild boar (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  7. Frontiers in nutrition · 2025
    Review
  8. InactivatedFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kristen A ByrneFood Safety and Enteric Pathogens Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Services, USDA, Ames, IA, United States.
Crystal L LovingFood Safety and Enteric Pathogens Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Services, USDA, Ames, IA, United States.
Jodi L McGillDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Agricultural Research Service · USIowa State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant problem in health care, animal health, and food safety. To limit AMR, there is a need for alternatives to antibiotics to enhance disease resistance and support judicious antibiotic usage in animals and humans. Immunomodulation is a promising strategy to enhance disease resistance without antibiotics in food animals. One rapidly evolving field of immunomodulation is innate memory in which innate immune cells undergo epigenetic changes of chromatin remodeling and metabolic reprogramming upon a priming event that results in either enhanced or suppressed responsiveness to secondary stimuli (training or tolerance, respectively). Exposure to live agents such as bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) or microbe-derived products such as LPS or yeast cell wall ß-glucans can reprogram or "train" the innate immune system. Over the last decade, significant advancements increased our understanding of innate training in humans and rodent models, and strategies are being developed to specifically target or regulate innate memory. In veterinary species, the concept of enhancing the innate immune system is not new; however, there are few available studies which have purposefully investigated innate training as it has been defined in human literature. The development of targeted approaches to engage innate training in food animals, with the practical goal of enhancing the capacity to limit disease without the use of antibiotics, is an area which deserves attention. In this review, we provide an overview of innate immunomodulation and memory, and the mechanisms which regulate this long-term functional reprogramming in other animals (e.g., humans, rodents). We focus on studies describing innate training, or similar phenomenon (often referred to as heterologous or non-specific protection), in cattle, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, and fish species; and discuss the potential benefits and shortcomings of engaging innate training for enhancing disease resistance.

Indexed as

AnimalsDisease ResistanceFishesImmune SystemImmunomodulationLivestockPoultrybeta-glucansdisease resistanceinnate memorytrained innate immunityveterinary species

Identifiers

PMID32582185
PMCPMC7291600
OpenAlexW3033839488

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.