Comparative Genome Sequence Analysis of Choristoneura occidentalis Freeman and C. rosaceana Harris (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) Alphabaculoviruses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complete genome sequences of Choristoneura occidentalis and C. rosaceana nucleopolyhedroviruses (ChocNPV and ChroNPV, respectively) (Baculoviridae: Alphabaculovirus) were determined and compared with each other and with those of other baculoviruses, including the genome of the closely related C. fumiferana NPV (CfMNPV). The ChocNPV genome was 128,446 bp in length (1147 bp smaller than that of CfMNPV), had a G+C content of 50.1%, and contained 148 open reading frames (ORFs). In comparison, the ChroNPV genome was 129,052 bp in length, had a G+C content of 48.6% and contained 149 ORFs. ChocNPV and ChroNPV shared 144 ORFs in common, and had a 77% sequence identity with each other and 96.5% and 77.8% sequence identity, respectively, with CfMNPV. Five homologous regions (hrs), with sequence similarities to those of CfMNPV, were identified in ChocNPV, whereas the ChroNPV genome contained three hrs featuring up to 14 repeats. Both genomes encoded three inhibitors of apoptosis (IAP-1, IAP-2, and IAP-3), as reported for CfMNPV, and the ChocNPV IAP-3 gene represented the most divergent functional region of this genome relative to CfMNPV. Two ORFs were unique to ChocNPV, and four were unique to ChroNPV. ChroNPV ORF chronpv38 is a eukaryotic initiation factor 5 (eIF-5) homolog that has also been identified in the C. occidentalis granulovirus (ChocGV) and is believed to be the product of horizontal gene transfer from the host. Based on levels of sequence identity and phylogenetic analysis, both ChocNPV and ChroNPV fall within group I alphabaculoviruses, where ChocNPV appears to be more closely related to CfMNPV than does ChroNPV. Our analyses suggest that it may be appropriate to consider ChocNPV and CfMNPV as variants of the same virus species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".