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".

[EX Q]: Paragraph: Infectious bronchitis (IB) generated by the infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) causes economic difficulties for livestock farmers. The 3D8 single chain variable fragment (scFv) protein is a recombinant antibody with nuclease activity that shows antiviral effects against various DNA and RNA viruses in mice and chickens. In this experiment, 3D8 scFv G 2 transgenic chickens produced by crossing 3D8 scFv G 1 transgenic rooster and wild type hens were screened by genomic PCR and immunohistochemistry analysis. 3D8 scFv transgenic chickens, wild type sibling chickens, and SPF chickens were directly infected with IBV (5 chickens per group) and indirectly infected by airborne propagation (15 chickens per group). The relative IBV shedding titers were measured by quantitative real-time PCR using oropharyngeal and cloacal swabs on days 3 and 5 after intraocular infection. The viral load was significantly decreased in the 3D8 scFv transgenic chickens from the contact transmission group. Additionally, blood was collected from each group on day 17 post-infection. The ELISA results showed a marked reduction of the antibody titer against IBV in the 3D8 scFv transgenic chickens from the contact transmission group. These results suggest that the 3D8 scFv protein potentially inhibits infectious bronchitis virus transmission in chickens.
Title: The 3D8 single chain variable fragment protein suppress infectious bronchitis virus transmission in the transgenic chickens
[EX A]: True

[EX Q]: Paragraph: Reproductive success in the eight founder strains of the Collaborative Cross (CC) was measured using a diallel-mating scheme. Over a 48-month period we generated 4,448 litters, and provided 24,782 weaned pups for use in 16 different published experiments. We identified factors that affect the average litter size in a cross by estimating the overall contribution of parent-of-origin, heterosis, inbred, and epistatic effects using a Bayesian zero-truncated overdispersed Poisson mixed model. The phenotypic variance of litter size has a substantial contribution (82%) from unexplained and environmental sources, but no detectable effect of seasonality. Most of the explained variance was due to additive effects (9.2%) and parental sex (maternal vs. paternal strain; 5.8%), with epistasis accounting for 3.4%. Within the parental effects, the effect of the dam's strain explained more than the sire's strain (13.2% vs. 1.8%), and the dam's strain effects account for 74.2% of total variation explained. Dams from strains C57BL/6J and NOD/ShiLtJ increased the expected litter size by a mean of 1.66 and 1.79 pups, whereas dams from strains WSB/EiJ, PWK/PhJ, and CAST/EiJ reduced expected litter size by a mean of 1.51, 0.81, and 0.90 pups. Finally, there was no strong evidence for strain-specific effects on sex ratio distortion. Overall, these results demonstrate that strains vary substantially in their reproductive ability depending on their genetic background, and that litter size is largely determined by dam's strain rather than sire's strain effects, as expected. This analysis adds to our understanding of factors that influence litter size in mammals, and also helps to explain breeding successes and failures in the extinct lines and surviving CC strains. KEYWORDS
Title: A Diallel of the Mouse Collaborative Cross Founders Reveals Strong Strain-Specific Maternal Effects on Litter Size
[EX A]: False

[EX Q]: Paragraph: DNA vaccination has been of great interest since its discovery in the 1990s due to its ability to elicit both humoral and cellular immune responses. DNA vaccines consist of a DNA plasmid containing a transgene that encodes the sequence of a target protein from a pathogen under the control of a eukaryotic promoter. This revolutionary technology has proven to be effective in animal models and four DNA vaccine products have recently been approved for veterinary use. Although few DNA vaccines against bacterial infections have been tested, the results are encouraging. Because of their versatility, safety and simplicity a wider range of organisms can be targeted by these vaccines, which shows their potential advantages to public health. This article describes the mechanism of action of DNA vaccines and their potential use for targeting bacterial infections. In addition, it provides an updated summary of the methods used to enhance immunogenicity from codon optimization and adjuvants to delivery techniques including electroporation and use of nanoparticles. Keywords bacterial vaccine; cellular and humoral immune responses; DNA vaccine; molecular adjuvants Times have changed since Edward Jenner immunized James Phipps against smallpox in 1796 and created what years later became known as a vaccine [1] . From the first live-attenuated or killed vaccines to the era of DNA vaccines in the early 1990s, molecular biology and microbiology have aided medical research in the development of vaccines against infectious diseases, cancer, allergies and autoimmune diseases by inducing rapid and robust immune responses or by creating immune tolerance [2] . From the time of Jenner's first vaccine until the present day, there have been over 60 licensed vaccines in the USA. These vaccines come in many forms: killed microorganisms, live-attenuated microorganisms, subunits, conjugate vaccines or toxoids. Although there are no US FDA-approved DNA vaccines for use in humans, they are the newest vaccine platform currently in development and have already had success in veterinary medicine [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] .
Title: DNA vaccines for targeting bacterial infections NIH Public Access
[EX A]:
True