Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Experimental reproduction numbers disentangle vaccine effects on susceptibility and infectiousness during H5N1 transmission in geese

Created on 04 Sep 2026

Authors

Piesche, R., Schulz, J., Höhle, M., Beer, M., Grund, C., Harder, T., Gonzales, J.

Abstract

Vaccination against high pathogenicity avian influenza virus (HPAIV) is increasingly used to protect poultry, but vaccine performance is commonly inferred from clinical protection and virus shedding rather than measured transmission. We asked whether reproduction numbers from controlled transmission experiments can quantify how vaccination changes susceptibility and infectiousness. Domestic geese were prime-boost vaccinated with an H5 clade 2.3.4.4b RNA-replicon vaccine and challenged with homologous HPAIV H5N1. Replicated seeder-sentinel groups represented transmission among unvaccinated animals, to vaccinated contacts, and from vaccinated breakthrough-infected animals. Vaccinated directly challenged geese remained clinically protected although all became RT-qPCR-positive. Estimated reproduction numbers were R0=4.7 (95% CI, 2.8-8.0) among unvaccinated geese, Rs=2.6 (1.6-4.5) for transmission to vaccinated contacts, Ri=3.7 (2.0-6.8) for transmission from vaccinated infected geese, and Rvacc=2.0 (0.8-4.9) for a fully vaccinated population. Vaccination reduced transmission but did not reduce the point estimate for Rvacc below one under these intensive exposure conditions. Vaccinated infected geese also shed substantially less viral RNA, whereas the estimated reduction in infectiousness was more modest, indicating that RNA shedding alone may not reliably predict transmission reduction. Experimental reproduction numbers therefore provide a direct population-level complement to conventional vaccine endpoints and separate effects on susceptibility from effects on onward transmission.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 04 Sep 2026.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 5
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement