MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101716268 · doi:10.1128/jvi.79.1.277-288.2005

Crystal Structure of Complete Rhinovirus RNA Polymerase Suggests Front Loading of Protein Primer

2004· article· en· W2101716268 on OpenAlexaff
T.C. Appleby, Hartmut Luecke, Jae Hoon Shim, Jim Zhen Wu, I. Wayne Cheney, Weidong Zhong, Lutz Vogeley, Zhi Hong, Nanhua Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Immunology Research
Canadian institutionsBausch Health (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPrimer (cosmetics)PolymeraseRhinovirusMolecular biologyRNA polymeraseRNAVirologyGeneticsDNAVirusGenePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Picornaviruses utilize virally encoded RNA polymerase and a uridylylated protein primer to ensure replication of the entire viral genome. The molecular details of this mechanism are not well understood due to the lack of structural information. We report the crystal structure of human rhinovirus 16 3D RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (HRV16 3Dpol) at a 2.4-A resolution, representing the first complete polymerase structure from the Picornaviridae family. HRV16 3Dpol shares the canonical features of other known polymerase structures and contains an N-terminal region that tethers the fingers and thumb subdomains, forming a completely encircled active site cavity which is accessible through a small tunnel on the backside of the molecule. The small thumb subdomain contributes to the formation of a large cleft on the front face of the polymerase which also leads to the active site. The cleft appears large enough to accommodate a template:primer duplex during RNA elongation or a protein primer during the uridylylation stage of replication initiation. Based on the structural features of HRV16 3Dpo1 and the catalytic mechanism known for all polymerases, a front-loading model for uridylylation is proposed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations57
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VirologySame topicViral Infections and Immunology ResearchFrench-language works237,207