Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41469996›Full record

ReviewBMC veterinary research2025

Innate resistance to African swine fever virus: current knowledge and future directions.

Agathe Auer, Sandra Blome, Andriy Rozstalnyy, Mary-Louise Penrith

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMC veterinary research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Agathe AuerAnimal Production and Health Laboratory (APHL) at the Joint FAO/IAEA Centre of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100, 1400, Vienna, Austria. agathe.auer@fao.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4597-9529
Sandra BlomeFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Bundesforschungsinstitut Für Tiergesundheit, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Südufer 10, 17493, Greifswald, Insel Riems, Germany.
Andriy RozstalnyyFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 00153, Rome, Italy.
Mary-Louise PenrithVeterinary Tropical Diseases, University of Pretoria, 101 Old Soutpan Road, Onderstepoort, 0110, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review explores the biological basis and epidemiological implications of natural resistance to ASFV. It dispels the misconception that African wild suids are persistent virus reservoirs and clarifies the role of Ornithodoros ticks in virus maintenance and transmission. Resistance mechanisms appear multifactorial, potentially involving host genetics and immune responses. Genomic studies have begun identifying genes potentially linked to ASFV resistance, including in pigs from areas with more recent ASF incursions. Understanding and harnessing natural resistance is a promising avenue to develop ASFV-resilient pig populations, especially for smallholder farmers in resource-limited settings. While vaccines remain limited, promoting and protecting naturally resistant pigs offers an immediate, practical tool to mitigate the impact of ASF in endemic regions.

Indexed as

African Swine FeverAfrican Swine Fever VirusDisease ResistanceImmunity, InnateAnimalsSwineAfrican swine fever virusASFV immunityGenetic resistanceIndigenous pig breedsInnate resistanceVaccine alternativesWild suids

Identifiers

PMID41469996
PMCPMC12822216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.