In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Q: Paragraph: To circumvent limitations of poor antigen presentation and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines that target induction of CD8 + T cell immunity, we have generated single chain MHC I trimers (MHC I SCTs) composed of a single polypeptide chain with a linear composition of antigenic peptide, β2microglobulin, and heavy chain of a MHC class I molecule connected by flexible linkers. Because of its pre-assembled nature, the SCT presents enhanced expression and presentation of the antigenic peptide/MHC complexes at the cell surface. Furthermore, DNA vaccination with a plasmid DNA encoding an SCT incorporating an immunodominant viral epitope elicited protective CD8 + T cell responses against lethal virus infection. To extend these findings, here we tested the efficacy of SCT DNA vaccines against bacterial infections. In a mouse infection model of Listeria monocytogenes, the SCT DNA vaccine encoding H-2K d and the immunodominant peptide LLO 91-99 generated functional primary and memory peptide-specific CD8 + T cells that confer partial protection against L. monocytogenes infection. DNA immunization of K d /LLO 91-99 SCTs generated functional memory CD8 + T cells independently of CD4 + T cells, although the expression of cognate or non-cognate CD4 + helper T cell epitopes further enhanced the protective efficacy of SCTs. Our study further demonstrates that the SCT serves as a potent platform for DNA vaccines against various infectious diseases. 
 Title: Single Chain MHC I trimer-based DNA vaccines for protection against Listeria monocytogenes infection

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: MRNA2 of the arteriviruses lactate dehydrogenase-elevating virus (LDV) and equine arteritis virus (EAV) encodes two proteins that are read in different frames, an about 26 kDa minor envelope glycoprotein and an about 8 kDa protein that lacks N-glycosylation sites and a signal peptide, but possesses a central hydrophobic segment. Recent studies have shown that both proteins of EAV are translated from mRNA 2 in EAV infected BHK cells, that the 8 kDa protein is membrane associated and that small amounts of it are recovered in purified virions (Snijder, E.J., van Tol, H., Pederson, K.W., Raamsman, M.J.B., de Vries, A.A.F., 1999. Identification of a novel structural protein of arteriviruses. J. Virol. 73, 6335-6345). The authors concluded that the 8 kDa protein is another arterivirus envelope protein and designated it E protein. However, we have not detected a significant level of an 8 kDa protein in LDV virions and thus conclude that it is not a structural virion component. 
 Title: An ORF-2a protein is not present at a significant level in virions of the arterivirus lactate dehydrogenase-elevating virus

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: Background: Sporozoite immunization of animals and humans under a chemo-prophylactic cover of chloroquine (CPS-CQ) efficiently induces sterile protection against malaria. In humans, CPS-CQ is strikingly more efficient than immunization with radiation attenuated sporozoites (RAS), raising the hypothesis that this might be partially due to CQ. Chloroquine, an established anti-malarial drug, is also well known for its immune modulating properties including improvement of cross-presentation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether co-administration of CQ during sporozoite immunization improves cellular responses and protective efficacy in Plasmodium berghei models. Methods: A number of experiments in selected complimentary P. berghei murine models in Balb/cByJ and C57BL/6j mice was performed. First, the effect of CQ administration on the induction of protection and immune responses by RAS immunization was studied. Next, the effect of CQ on the induction of circumsporozoite (CS) protein-specific CD8 + T cells by immunization with P. berghei parasites expressing a mutant CS protein was investigated. Finally, a direct comparison of CPS-CQ to CPS with mefloquine (MQ), an anti-malarial with little known immune modulating effects, was performed. Results: When CQ was co-administered during immunization with graded numbers of RAS, this did not lead to an increase in frequencies of total memory CD8 + T cells or CS protein-specific CD8 + T cells. Also parasite-specific cytokine production and protection remained unaltered. Replacement of CQ by MQ for CPS immunization resulted in significantly reduced percentages of IFNγ producing memory T cells in the liver (p = 0.01), but similar protection. Conclusions: This study does not provide evidence for a direct beneficial effect of CQ on the induction of sporozoite-induced immune responses and protection in P. berghei malaria models. Alternatively, the higher efficiency of CPS compared to RAS might be explained by an indirect effect of CQ through limiting blood-stage exposure after immunization or to increased antigen exposure and, therefore, improved breadth of the immune response. 
 Title: Studying the effect of chloroquine on sporozoite-induced protection and immune responses in Plasmodium berghei malaria

A:
True
****