Reprogramming the chiA expression profile of Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expression of chiA and v-cath RNA and enzyme activity in wild-type Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus (AcMNPV) was compared with that of recombinant AcMNPV viruses reprogrammed for expression of the endogenous chiA. To establish a baseline for our recombinant AcMNPV studies, we compared, for the first time, the temporal expression profiles of both AcMNPV chiA transcription and translation simultaneously. The rate of intracellular chitinase accumulation during AcMNPV infection followed the same pattern observed for chiA transcription but was delayed by about 6 h. Replacement of 21 nucleotides containing the native late chiA and v-cath promoters with a selectable polh-EGFP cassette was sufficient to eliminate expression of both chiA and v-cath. Viruses were generated that express chiA from either the late p6.9 or very late polh promoters of AcMNPV, replacing the native chiA promoter. There was a marked difference in the temporal chiA transcription profiles from the native, p6.9 and polh promoters, resulting in respective specific activities of chitinase at 48 h p.i. of 62, 160 and 219 mU (mg lysate total protein)(-1). Based on temporal analysis of v-cath transcription by Northern blot, AcMNPV v-cath was transcribed from 9 h p.i. in Sf21 cells. However, expression of v-cath RNA or enzyme from a reconstructed v-cath promoter in the chiA-reprogrammed viruses was not detected at 48 h of virus replication. Reprogramming for increased chitinase (and putatively cathepsin) expression with native baculovirus promoters might provide a means for designing environmentally benign biological insecticides.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".