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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Vaccination programs for the control of avian influenza (AI) in poultry have limitations due to the problem of differentiating between vaccinated and virus-infected birds. The use of AI vaccination in poultry would have greater worldwide acceptance if reliable tests that clearly discriminated between naturally infected and vaccinated-only animals (DIVA) were available. In this study, to differentiate avian influenza virus (AIV)-infected chickens vs. chickens immunized with inactivated avian influenza virus, a commercial ELISA Kit (IDEXX) was used. Using HI as the reference method, the sensitivity of the commercial ELISA kit was 100% and its specificity was 100%. In the present study, we demonstrated that, 3 weeks after infection or vaccination, sera from both infected and vaccinated groups were tested positive and the difference in mean optical density between vaccinated and challenged birds, as detected by a commercial ELISA kit (IDEXX), was very small. Therefore, this assay cannot distinguish infected from vaccinated poultry

Evaluation of a commercial ELISA kit (IDEXX) to differentiate AI virus-infected poultry from AI-vaccinated poultry (DIVA)