Table 1.
Fish | Cumulative mortality | Mean Cumulative Mortality | Mean day to death ± SE | HR (95%CI) | RPS | P-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUS-1 | |||||||
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 0% | 5% | NA | 0.016 (0.002–0.124) | 95% | 0.003 |
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 10% | |||||
pcDNA | 10 | 100% | 100% | 11.7 ± 1.3 | NA | NA | |
pcDNA | 10 | 100% | |||||
MUS-2 | |||||||
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 30% | 15% | 10.6 ± 0.4 | 0.063 (0.018–0.223) | 85% | 0.030 |
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 0% | |||||
pcDNA | 10 | 100% | 100% | 9.9 ± 1.0 | NA | NA | |
pcDNA | 10 | 100% | |||||
MUS-3 | |||||||
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 0% | 0% | NA | NA | 100% | <0.0001 |
pVHSivb-G | 10 | 0% | |||||
pcDNA | 10 | 100% | 100% | 12.8 ± 1.8 | NA | NA |
Total number of fish challenged in each trial, mean cumulative % mortality, and mean days to death of each treatment. The table also includes mean day to death calculated using PROC LIFETEST in SAS [22]. A Cox proportional hazard model was also fitted using SAS to examine the hazard ratio (HR) between glycoprotein (G) gene and mock-vaccinated counterparts. The relative percent survival (RPS) was calculated between treatments as previously described [23]. The P-values are from t-tests testing survival differences between the treatments that were conducted using PROC TTEST in SAS