MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040894241 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m510596200

Association of RNA Helicase A with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Particles

2006· article· en· W2040894241 on OpenAlexafffund
Bibhuti Bhusan Roy, Jing Hu, Xiaofeng Guo, Rodney S. Russell, Fei Guo, Lawrence Kleiman, Chen Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRNA Helicase ARNATranscription (linguistics)Gene knockdownBiologyHelicaseGene expressionMolecular biologyVirologyVirusGeneCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RNA helicase A (RHA) belongs to the DEAH family of proteins that are capable of unwinding double-stranded RNA structure. In addition to its involvement in the metabolism of cellular RNA, RHA has been shown to stimulate RNA transcription from the long terminal repeat promoter of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) as well as to enhance Rev/Rev response element-mediated gene expression. In this study, we provide evidence that RHA associates with HIV-1 Gag in an RNA-dependent manner. This interaction results in specific incorporation of RHA into HIV-1 particles. Knockdown of endogenous RHA in virus producer cells leads to generation of HIV-1 particles that are less infectious in part as a result of restricted reverse transcription. Therefore, RHA represents the first example of cellular RNA helicases that participate in HIV-1 particle production and promote viral reverse transcription.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207