4.4 Article

Reversibility and safety of KISS1 metastasis suppressor gene vaccine in immunocastration of ram lambs

期刊

出版社

ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN ASSOC ANIMAL PRODUCTION SOC
DOI: 10.5713/ajas.17.0629

关键词

KISS1 Metastasis Suppressor; Gene Vaccine; Immunocastration; Reversibility; Safety; Ram Lambs

资金

  1. Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology [cstc2015jcyjBX0002]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [SWU115066]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31772598]
  4. China National Meat-type Sheep and Goat Industrial Technology System [CARS-38]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the reversibility and safety of KISS1 metastasis suppressor (KISS1) gene vaccine in immunocastration. Methods: Six eight-week old ram lambs were randomly divided into vaccinated and control groups. The vaccine (1 mg/ram lamb) was injected at weeks 0, 3, and 6 of the study. Blood samples were collected from the jugular vein before primary immunization and at weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, 14, 22, and 30 after primary immunization. All ram lambs were slaughtered at 38 weeks of age, and samples were collected. Results: The specific anti-KISS1 antibody titers in vaccinated animals were significantly higher and the serum testosterone level was significantly lower than those in the control groups from week 4 to 14 after primary immunization (p<0.05). No significant difference was observed at weeks 22 and 30 after the primary immunization. Similar results were also found for scrotal circumference, testicular weight, length, breadth, and spermatogenesis in seminiferous tubules in week 30 after primary immunization. KS (KISS1-hepatitis B surface antigen S) fusion fragment of KISS1 gene vaccine was not detected in host cell genomic DNA of 9 tissues of the vaccinated ram lambs by polymerase chain reaction. Conclusion: The effects of KISS1 gene vaccine in immunocastration were reversible and no integration events were recorded.

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

4.4
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