MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of RNA in Facilitating Gag/Gag-Pol Interaction

2002· article· en· W2118223132 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Khorchid, Rabih Halwani, Mark A. Wainberg, Lawrence Kleiman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroup-specific antigenRNABiologyMolecular biologyRNase PIntegraseDNACell biologyVirologyVirusBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have examined the influence of RNA upon the interaction of Gag-Pol with Gag during human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) assembly. COS7 cells were transfected with protease-negative HIV-1 proviral DNA, and Gag/Gag-Pol complexes were detected by coimmunoprecipitation with anti-integrase. In COS7 cells, Gag/Gag-Pol is found almost entirely in pelletable, membrane-bound complexes. Exposure of cells to 1% Triton X-100 releases Gag/Gag-Pol from bulk membrane, but the complexes remain pelletable. The role of RNA in facilitating the interaction between Gag and Gag-Pol was examined in these bulk membrane-free, pelletable complexes. The specific presence of viral genomic RNA is not required to maintain the Gag/Gag-Pol interaction, but some type of RNA is, since exposure to RNase destabilized the Gag/Gag-Pol complex. When present only in Gag, the nucleocapsid mutation R7R10K11S, which inhibits Gag binding to RNA, inhibits the formation of both Gag and Gag/Gag-Pol complexes. When present only in Gag-Pol, this mutation has no effect upon complex formation. This result indicates that Gag-Pol may not interact directly with RNA but rather requires RNA-facilitated Gag multimerization for its interaction with Gag.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations56
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VirologySame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207