Local and Systemic Immune Responses in Growing Feather Pulps and Blood of Broiler Chickens Elicited by Electron Beam- and Formalin-Killed

Ruvindu Perera, Jossie M Santamaria, Chrysta N Beck, Gisela F Erf, Adnan Alrubaye, Palmy Jesudhasan

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Ruvindu PereraCell and Molecular Biology Program, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-3625-3589

Jossie M SantamariaDivision of Agriculture, Center of Excellence for Poultry Science, University of Arkansas System, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-8705-5146

Chrysta N BeckDepartment of Poultry Science, Mississippi State University, Mississippi, MS 39762, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-3205-1285

Gisela F ErfDivision of Agriculture, Center of Excellence for Poultry Science, University of Arkansas System, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2106-3484

Adnan AlrubayeCell and Molecular Biology Program, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5122-9150

Palmy JesudhasanPoultry Production and Product Safety Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Fayetteville, AR 72791, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9128-4544

Funding

National Institute of Food and Agriculture 2024-67015-42629

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background

methodsThis study compared broiler chicken immune responses (local and systemic) after eBeam-killed (eB) or formalin-killed (FK) SA injections. The vaccine (sham) control was endotoxin-free PBS. This study contained six treatments (trt) with five chickens/trt, with vaccine trts divided into two groups, A and B. Group A received

resultsEarly in phase 1, the eB group had increased SA-specific IgM, IgA, and total lymphocyte concentrations compared with FK. In phase 2, FK and eB i.d. vaccines increased total lymphocyte and T cell proportions in GF pulps compared with sham. In blood, the recall eB vaccination increased monocytes, B cells, CD8+ T cells, and total lymphocytes, while the recall FK vaccination increased heterophils (

conclusionsImproved early protection at mucosal surfaces may be reflected by higher plasma levels of SA-specific IgM and IgA following

Indexed as

broiler chickeneBeamleukocytesStaphylococcusvaccine

Identifiers

PMID42646733

DOI10.3390/vaccines14080716

PMCPMC13517426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.