English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

IN studies on experimental Escherichia coli diarrhoea in gnotobiotic piglets, Kohler and Bohl (1966), Kohler (1967) and Miniats, Mitchell and Barnum (1970) observed that the protective effect of antiserum was not associated with a marked reduction in the concentration of the organisms of the infecting strain in the contents of the small intestine, suggesting that this effect was anti- enterotoxic rather than antibacterial in nature. In somewhat similar studies on conventionally reared weaned pigs Smith and Linggood (1971 b), however, found much lower concentrations of the infecting organisms in the small intes- tine of antiserum-protected animals than in the unprotected controls, suggesting that the antibacterial effect of antiserum was important in preventing clinical infection. In view of these apparently conflicting observations, fresh experi- ments were designed with the purpose of elucidating the parts played by anti- bacterial and anti-enterotoxic antibodies in controlling E. coZi diarrhoea in the piglet. Orally administered antiserum was mainly studied because under natural conditions piglets receive practically all their antibodies from colostrum.

The Nature Of The Protective Effect Of Antisera Against Escherichia Coli Diarrhoea In Piglets