Role of Cytoplasmic Stress Granules in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Replication: a New Frontier in Virus–Host Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaluation of: Lindquist ME, Lifland AW, Utley TJ, Santangelo PJ, Crowe JE Jr: Respiratory syncytial virus induces host RNA stress granules to facilitate viral replication. J. Virol. 84(23), 12274–12284 (2010). Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major cause of respiratory illnesses worldwide. No safe, effective vaccine or good antiviral therapy is available. Respiratory epithelial cells are an important target for RSV infection and the interactions of RSV with cellular machinery during the viral life cycle are not well defined. Here, Lindquist et al. studied the kinetics of RSV replication in the context of stress granule formation, a host response known to decrease protein translation by epithelial cells in vitro. Results showed that stress granules and viral inclusion bodies, despite having similar appearance and intracellular localization, are biochemically distinct, yet share several host protein and viral RNA components. Interestingly, the authors show that formation of stress granules favors RSV replication, thereby going against intuition that stress granules have an antiviral function. These intriguing findings raise a number of unanswered questions to stimulate future studies designed to better understand RSV–host cell interactions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".