No single homologous repeat region is essential for DNA replication of the baculovirus Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of homologous repeat (hr) regions in multiple locations within baculovirus genomes has led to the hypothesis that they represent origins of DNA replication. This hypothesis has been supported by transient replication assays where plasmids carrying hrs replicated in the presence of virus DNA replication. This study investigated whether any specific hr region was essential for viral DNA replication in vivo, by generating a series of recombinant Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus where the lacZ gene replaced hr1, hr1a, hr2, hr3, hr4a or hr4b. In addition, a double-hr knockout virus was constructed where both hr2 and hr3 were deleted. The successful construction of these knockout viruses indicated that no specific region was essential for virus production. These recombinant viruses were characterized by titrations of budded virus, expression of a variety of virus-specific proteins and the synthesis of viral DNA at various times after infection. The results demonstrated that each hr was dispensable for all of these properties and that no single region was absolutely essential for virus replication in cell culture. The functional significance of multiple origin regions is still unclear.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".