In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

[Q]: C57 strain mice were inoculated intraperitoneally with denatured mouse hepatitis virus strain 3 particles and virus surface projection, membrane and ribonucleoprotein subeomponents, obtained from detergent treated purified virus preparations. All immunised animals developed high levels of serum antibody directed against the respective antigens, detectable by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Mice that had been immunised with denatured virus particles or surface projections were protected against infection with mouse hepatitis virus strain 3, whereas immunisation with virus membrane or ribonucleoprotein subcomponents failed to protect mice against virus challenge.
[A]: Archives of Virology Antigenieity of Mouse Hepatitis Virus Strain 3 Subeomponents in C57 Strain Miee


[Q]: Both antiseptic hand rubbing (AHR) using ethanol-based disinfectants (EBDs) and antiseptic hand washing (AHW) are important means of infection control to prevent seasonal influenza A virus (IAV) outbreaks. However, previous reports suggest a reduced efficacy of ethanol disinfection against pathogens in mucus. We aimed to elucidate the situations and mechanisms underlying the reduced efficacy of EBDs against IAV in infectious mucus. We evaluated IAV inactivation and ethanol concentration change using IAV-infected patients' mucus (sputum). Additionally, AHR and AHW effectiveness against infectious mucus adhering to the hands and fingers was evaluated in 10 volunteers. Our clinical study showed that EBD effectiveness against IAV in mucus was extremely reduced compared to IAV in saline. IAV in mucus remained active despite 120 s of AHR; however, IAV in saline was completely inactivated within 30 s. Due to the low rate of diffusion/convection because of the physical properties of mucus as a hydrogel, the time required for the ethanol concentration to reach an IAV inactivation level and thus for EBDs to completely inactivate IAV was approximately eight times longer in mucus than in saline. On the other hand, AHR inactivated IAV in mucus within 30 s when the mucus dried completely because the hydrogel characteristics were lost. Additionally, AHW rapidly inactivated IAV. Until infectious mucus has completely dried, infectious IAV can remain on the hands and fingers, even after appropriate AHR using EBD, thereby increasing the risk of IAV transmission. We clarified the ineffectiveness of EBD use against IAV in infectious mucus. IMPORTANCE Antiseptic hand rubbing (AHR) and antiseptic hand washing (AHW) are important to prevent the spread of influenza A virus (IAV). This study elucidated the situations/mechanisms underlying the reduced efficacy of AHR against infectious mucus derived from IAV-infected individuals and indicated the weaknesses of the current hand hygiene regimens. Due to the low rate of diffusion/convection because of the physical properties of mucus as a hydrogel, the efficacy of AHR using ethanolbased disinfectant against mucus is greatly reduced until infectious mucus adhering to the hands/fingers has completely dried. If there is insufficient time before treating the next patient (i.e., if the infectious mucus is not completely dry), medical staff should be aware that effectiveness of AHR is reduced. Since AHW is effective against both dry and nondry infectious mucus, AHW should be adopted to compensate for these weaknesses of AHR. FIG 1 Analysis of the physical properties of mucus from 19 influenza A virus-infected patients. (A) Rheological analysis: mean, maximum, and minimum viscosities of mucus (sputum) samples at different shear rates (left panel). Shown is a comparison of mucus and saline viscosities at different shear rates (right panel). (B) Average parameters measured for saline and mucus samples: contact angles, surface tension, and densities at different temperatures. (C) Time required for saline and mucus to completely dry (complete drying time). (D) Ethanol diffusion coefficients of saline and mucus exposed to an 80% ethanol concentration. Situations of Reduced Hand Hygiene Effectiveness September/October 2019 Volume 4 Issue 5 e00474-19 msphere.asm.org 3 FIG 6 Additional fluid simulation of changes in the ethanol concentrations in mucus. (A) Addition of 95 l of 80% ethanol to 5 l saline was modeled in OpenFOAM, demonstrating the disappearance over time of the region with Ͻ31% ethanol (shown in red). See also Movie S1. (B) Addition of 95 l of 80% ethanol to 5 l mucus was modeled. The simulation was performed under conditions of reduced viscosity (16.7% of the actual measurement value) because of the long time required for disappearance of the concentration region of Ͻ31%. See also Movie S2.
[A]: Situations Leading to Reduced Effectiveness of Current Hand Hygiene against Infectious Mucus from Influenza Virus- Infected Patients


[Q]: A total of 84 nasopharyngeal swab specimens were collected from 84 patients. Viral nucleic acid was extracted by three automated extraction systems: QIAcube (Qiagen, Germany), EZ1 Advanced XL (Qiagen), and MICROLAB Nimbus IVD (Hamilton, USA). Fourteen RNA viruses and two DNA viruses were detected using the Anyplex II RV16 Detection kit (Seegene, Republic of Korea). The EZ1 Advanced XL system demonstrated the best analytical sensitivity for all the three viral strains. The nucleic acids extracted by EZ1 Advanced XL showed higher positive rates for virus detection than the others. Meanwhile, the MICROLAB Nimbus IVD system was comprised of fully automated steps from nucleic extraction to PCR setup function that could reduce human errors. For the nucleic acids recovered from nasopharyngeal swab specimens, the QIAcube system showed the fewest false negative results and the best concordance rate, and it may be more suitable for detecting various viruses including RNA and DNA virus strains. Each system showed different sensitivity and specificity for detection of certain viral pathogens and demonstrated different characteristics such as turnaround time and sample capacity. Therefore, these factors should be considered when new nucleic acid extraction systems are introduced to the laboratory.
[A]:
Evaluation of Three Automated Nucleic Acid Extraction Systems for Identification of Respiratory Viruses in Clinical Specimens by Multiplex Real-Time PCR