Stability of human cytomegalovirus genotypes in persistently infected renal transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although most genes are highly conserved among strains of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), several are unusually variable. By analyzing the sequence of two variable genes (UL146 and UL74) amplified directly from whole blood DNA extracts, multiple HCMV strains were detected in blood samples from 5/11 virus-infected renal transplant patients. These five patients were seronegative prior to transplantation and their likely acquisition of the virus was via the donated organ; HCMV-positive immunocompetent donors may thus be capable of harboring and transmitting multiple virus genotypes. In sequential samples taken up to 140 days post transplant no mutations in either gene were detected from 9/10 patients, and in the remaining patient a single nucleotide change was detected in UL146, and none in UL74. All sequences grouped into previously defined genotypes, with the detection of multiple members of the UL74 group 5 genotype establishing this previously tentative genotype. Additionally, identical sequences were identified in viruses from different patients, including examples from geographically distinct regions. Thus, although UL146 and UL74 exhibit impressive variation among strains, their sequences are maintained stably within and between infected individuals, suggesting that sequence differences between genotypes may be driven by differing gene function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".