Avian Reovirus Temperature-Sensitive Mutant <i>tsA12</i> Has a Lesion in Major Core Protein σA and Is Defective in Assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of our laboratory previously generated and described a set of avian reovirus (ARV) temperature-sensitive (ts) mutants and assigned 11 of them to 7 of the 10 expected recombination groups, named A through G (M. Patrick, R. Duncan, and K. M. Coombs, Virology 284:113-122, 2001). This report presents a more detailed analysis of two of these mutants (tsA12 and tsA146), which were previously assigned to recombination group A. The capacities of tsA12 and tsA146 to replicate at a variety of temperatures were determined. Morphological analyses indicated that cells infected with tsA12 at a nonpermissive temperature produced approximately 100-fold fewer particles than cells infected at a permissive temperature and accumulated core particles. Cells infected with tsA146 at a nonpermissive temperature also produced approximately 100-fold fewer particles, a larger proportion of which were intact virions. We crossed tsA12 with ARV strain 176 to generate reassortant clones and used them to map the temperature-sensitive lesion in tsA12 to the S2 gene. S2 encodes the major core protein sigmaA. Sequence analysis of the tsA12 S2 gene showed a single alteration, a cytosine-to-uracil transition, at nucleotide position 488. This alteration leads to a predicted amino acid change from proline to leucine at amino acid position 158 in the sigmaA protein. An analysis of the core crystal structure of the closely related mammalian reovirus suggested that the Leu(158) substitution in ARV sigmaA lies directly under the outer face of the sigmaA protein. This may cause a perturbation in sigmaA such that outer capsid proteins are incapable of condensing onto nascent cores. Thus, the ARV tsA12 mutant represents a novel assembly-defective orthoreovirus clone that may prove useful for delineating virus assembly.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".