2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.07.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Protection against anthrax and plague by a combined vaccine in mice and rabbits

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Y . pestis 141 (Sample ID: 11001) has a median lethal dose (MLD) of 17 colony-forming unit (CFU) when subcutaneously administered to BALB/c mice [17]. Y .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Y . pestis 141 (Sample ID: 11001) has a median lethal dose (MLD) of 17 colony-forming unit (CFU) when subcutaneously administered to BALB/c mice [17]. Y .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Expression and purification of recombinant F1 (rF1) has been described previously [17]. Briefly, the F1 gene was cloned into the expression vector pET-32a (+) to construct the final vector pET-F1, which was transformed into BL21(DE3) cells to obtain BL21(DE3)/pET-F1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, DNA vaccine that expressed both F1 and YscF (Yersinia secretory component F) antigens had shown to be protective . The protective antigen of Bacillus anthracis and the fraction 1 capsular antigen (F1 antigen) and V antigen of Y. pestis have been demonstrated to be potential candidate vaccine against anthrax and plague, respectively .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In previous reports on dual anthrax–plague vaccines, groups of animals were immunized with mixtures of PA, F1, and V (3942) but challenged separately with either B. anthracis [intratracheal (39) or subcutaneous (40) administration of spores prepared from the non-encapsulated toxigenic Sterne strain] or Y. pestis [intraperitoneal (39) or subcutaneous (4042) injection]. However, this model would not provide an accurate assessment of dual protection because the animals were not exposed to both the agents.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%