4.8 Article

Construction of Genomic Library and Screening of Edwardsiella tarda Immunogenic Proteins for Their Protective Efficacy Against Edwardsiellosis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.764662

关键词

Edwardsiella tarda; edwardsiellosis; immunoreactive protein; vaccine; IL-10; IFN-gamma

资金

  1. Department of Biotechnology (DBT)
  2. Government of India [BT/PR12133/AAQ/3/707/2014, RSP-2021/20]
  3. King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified immune expressive proteins HflC, HflK, and YhcI which showed a 60% survivability in clearing Edwardsiella from the host. These immunoreactive proteins induced a strong immune response post-infection, leading to significant production of IL-10, IFN-gamma, Th1, and Th2 mediated mRNA expression, thus proving effective in vaccine production for edwardsiellosis.
Edwardsiella tarda is a severe aquaculture pathogen that can infect many hosts including humans, animals, and fish. Timely diagnosis and treatment are crucial for the control of edwardsiellosis in the aqua industry. By using rabbit polyclonal antibody, an expression gene library of virulent Edwardsiella tarda strain ED-BDU 1 isolated in south India was constructed and screened. The identified immune expressive proteins were characterized, and the corresponding coding sequences were cloned, expressed, and the purified recombinant proteins were used as antigens. The identified immunoreactive proteins namely HflC, HflK, and YhcI were studied for their immune protective potential in vivo by challenge experiments. The protective efficacy of HflC, HflK, and YhcI showed that the clearance of Edwardsiella from the host with ~ 60% survivability. Further, the immunoreactive proteins induce a strong immune response upon infection and elicit the significant production of IL-10, IFN-gamma, Th1, and Th2 mediated mRNA expression and were therefore effective in vaccine production for edwardsiellosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据