ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Antigen specificity affects analysis of natural antibodies.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Avian Antibodies as Potential Therapeutic Tools.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural antibodies are used to compare immune systems across taxa, to study wildlife disease ecology, and as selection markers in livestock breeding. These immunoglobulins are present prior to immune stimulation. They are described as having low antigen specificity or polyreactive binding and are measured by binding to self-antigens or novel exogenous proteins. Most studies use only one or two antigens to measure natural antibodies and ignore potential effects of antigen specificity in analyses. It remains unclear how different antigen-specific natural antibodies are related or how diversity among natural antibodies may affect analyses of these immunoglobulins. Using genetically distinct lines of chickens as a model system, we tested the hypotheses that (1) antigen-specific natural antibodies are independent of each other and (2) antigen specificity affects the comparison of natural antibodies among animals. We used blood cell agglutination and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays to measure levels of natural antibodies binding to four antigens: (i) rabbit erythrocytes, (ii) keyhole limpet hemocyanin, (iii) phytohemagglutinin, or (iv) ovalbumin. We observed that levels of antigen specific natural antibodies were not correlated. There were significant differences in levels of natural antibodies among lines of chickens, indicating genetic variation for natural antibody production. However, line distinctions were not consistent among antigen specific natural antibodies. These data show that natural antibodies are a pool of relatively distinct immunoglobulins, and that antigen specificity may affect interpretation of natural antibody function and comparative immunology.
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.