Residue 315 regulates V3 exposure and V3 antibody recognition on HIV subtype B and C viruses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
V3 mAbs often neutralize HIV subtype B viruses but exhibit poor neutralizing activity against subtype C viruses. This limited activity is typically attributed to masking of the V3 region on subtype C viruses. However, while relatively much effort has been devoted to exploring accessibility of the V3 region on subtype B viruses, V3 exposure and the mechanism(s) that might restrict V3 exposure on subtype C viruses has yet to be understood. Here we have focused on exploring the significance of the conserved V3 tip motifs GPGR and GPGQ of subtype B and C viruses for antibody recognition. Position 315 in representative subtype B (SS1196) and subtype C viruses (ZM249M, CAP45) was switched to Gln and Arg, respectively, to assess the effect of the conserved Arg/Gln at position 315 on V3-specific neutralization. Neutralization sensitivities of the parental and mutant viruses were assessed in a single-round pseudovirus neutralization assay using a panel of neutralizing V3-specific mAbs with varying fine specificities for the V3 tip. Subtype B virus SS1196 was neutralized by all V3-specific mAbs tested here (B4e8, 2219, 268-D, 2557, 3074 and HGN194). In contrast, though as expected, mutant SS1196_R315Q was resistant to neutralization by mAbs B4e8 and 268-D, both of which require the Arg at position 315 for binding. Unexpectedly, the remaining V3 mAbs were also unable to neutralize SS1196_R315Q, despite not requiring an Arg residue at position 315 for binding. For the subtype C viruses the exact opposite was observed; both ZM249M and CAP45 were generally insensitive to antibody neutralization yet the Q315R mutants were strikingly sensitive. The results suggest that V3 may be more accessible to antibody than previously appreciated in at least some subtype C viruses. However, the data also suggest that a Gln at position 315 modulates exposure of V3. Further elucidation of this mechanism is underway.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".