Stimulation of picornavirus replication by the poly(A) tail in a cell-free extract is largely independent of the poly(A) binding protein (PABP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Picornavirus infectivity is dependent on the RNA poly(A) tail, which binds the poly(A) binding protein (PABP). PABP was reported to stimulate viral translation and RNA synthesis. Here, we studied encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV) and poliovirus (PV) genome expression in Krebs-2 and HeLa cell-free extracts that were drastically depleted of PABP (96%-99%). Although PABP depletion markedly diminished EMCV and PV internal ribosome entry site (IRES)-mediated translation of a polyadenylated luciferase mRNA, it displayed either no (EMCV) or slight (PV) deleterious effect on the translation of the full-length viral RNAs. Moreover, PABP-depleted extracts were fully competent in supporting EMCV and PV RNA replication and virus assembly. In contrast, removing the poly(A) tail from EMCV RNA dramatically reduced RNA synthesis and virus yields in cell-free reactions. The advantage conferred by the poly(A) tail to EMCV synthesis was more pronounced in untreated than in nuclease-treated extract, indicating that endogenous cellular mRNAs compete with the viral RNA for a component(s) of the RNA replication machinery. These results suggest that the poly(A) tail functions in picornavirus replication largely independent of PABP.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".