From promoting to inhibiting: diverse roles of helicases in HIV-1 Replication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Helicases hydrolyze nucleotide triphosphates (NTPs) and use the energy to modify the structures of nucleic acids. They are key players in every cellular process involving RNA or DNA. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) does not encode a helicase, thus it has to exploit cellular helicases in order to efficiently replicate its RNA genome. Indeed, several helicases have been found to specifically associate with HIV-1 and promote viral replication. However, studies have also revealed a couple of helicases that inhibit HIV-1 replication; these findings suggest that HIV-1 can either benefit from the function of cellular helicases or become curtailed by these enzymes. In this review, we focus on what is known about how a specific helicase associates with HIV-1 and how a distinct step of HIV-1 replication is affected. Despite many helicases having demonstrated roles in HIV-1 replication and dozens of other helicase candidates awaiting to be tested, a deeper appreciation of their involvement in the HIV-1 life cycle is hindered by our limited knowledge at the enzymatic and molecular levels regarding how helicases shape the conformation and structure of viral RNA-protein complexes and how these conformational changes are translated into functional outcomes in the context of viral replication.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".