↓ Skip to main content

Oral Vaccination of Fish – Antigen Preparations, Uptake, and Immune Induction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
121 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
249 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Oral Vaccination of Fish – Antigen Preparations, Uptake, and Immune Induction
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00519
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen Mutoloki, Hetron Mweemba Munang’andu, Øystein Evensen

Abstract

The oral route offers the most attractive approach of immunization of fish for a number of reasons: the ease of administration of antigens, it is less stressful than parenteral delivery and in principle, it is applicable to small and large sized fish; it also provides a procedure for oral boosting during grow-out periods in cages or ponds. There are, however, not many commercial vaccines available at the moment due to lack of efficacy and challenges associated with production of large quantities of antigens. These are required to stimulate an effective immune response locally and systemically, and need to be protected against degradation before they reach the sites where immune induction occurs. The hostile stomach environment is believed to be particularly important with regard to degradation of antigens in certain species. There is also a poor understanding about the requirements for proper immune induction following oral administration on one side, and the potential for induction of tolerance on the other. To what extent primary immunization via the oral route will elicit both local and systemic responses is not understood in detail. Furthermore, to what extent parenteral delivery will protect mucosal/gut surfaces and vice-versa is also not fully understood. We review the work that has been done on the subject and discuss it in light of recent advances that include mass production of antigens, including the use of plant systems. Different encapsulation techniques that have been developed in the quest to protect antigens against digestive degradation, as well as to target them for appropriate immune induction are also highlighted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 243 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 17%
Student > Master 34 14%
Researcher 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 5%
Other 31 12%
Unknown 85 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 53 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 36 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 20 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 18 7%
Environmental Science 7 3%
Other 14 6%
Unknown 101 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,414
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,731
of 295,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#150
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.