Comparison of bovine leukemia virus (BLV) and CMV promoter-driven reporter gene expression in BLV-infected and non-infected cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Viral promoters are used in mammalian expression vectors because they generally have strong activity in a wide variety of cells of differing tissues and species. METHODS: The utility of the BLV LTR/promoter (BLVp) for use in mammalian expression vectors was investigated through direct comparison to the CMV promoter (CMVp). Promoter activity was measured using luciferase assays of cell lines from different tissues and species stably transduced with BLVp or CMVp driven luciferase vectors including D17, FLK, BL3.1 and primary bovine B cells. Cells were also modified through the addition of BLV Tax expression vectors and/or BLV infection as well as treatment with trichostatin A (TSA). RESULTS: Results indicate the BLV promoter, while having low basal activity compared to the CMV promoter, can be induced to high-levels of activity similar to the CMV promoter in all cells tested. Tax or BLV infection specifically enhanced BLVp activity with no effect on CMVp activity. In contrast, the non-specific activator, TSA, enhanced both BLVp and CMVp activity. CONCLUSION: Based on these data, we conclude the BLV promoter could be very useful for transgene expression in mammalian expression vectors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".