MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dissecting the Molecular Network of Virus-Plant Interactions: The Complex Roles of Host Factors

2015· review· en· W2119477250 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Phytopathology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPlasmodesmaHost (biology)Plant virusVirusComputational biologyVirologyHost factorsGenomeGeneticsGeneCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A successful infection by a plant virus results from the complex molecular interplay between the host plant and the invading virus. Thus, dissecting the molecular network of virus-host interactions advances the understanding of the viral infection process and may assist in the development of novel antiviral strategies. In the past decade, molecular identification and functional characterization of host factors in the virus life cycle, particularly single-stranded, positive-sense RNA viruses, have been a research focus in plant virology. As a result, a number of host factors have been identified. These host factors are implicated in all the major steps of the infection process. Some host factors are diverted for the viral genome translation, some are recruited to improvise the viral replicase complexes for genome multiplication, and others are components of transport complexes for cell-to-cell spread via plasmodesmata and systemic movement through the phloem. This review summarizes current knowledge about host factors and discusses future research directions.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.276 · 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