MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171485073 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093444

CD8α Dendritic Cells Drive Establishment of HSV-1 Latency

2014· article· en· W2171485073 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kevin R. Mott, Sariah J. Allen, Mandana Zandian, Bindu Konda, Behrooz G. Sharifi, Clinton Jones, Steven L. Wechsler, Terrence Town, Homayon Ghiasi

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Eye InstituteYork University
KeywordsCD8Cytotoxic T cellAdoptive cell transferBiologyImmunologyCell biologyBone marrowChemistryImmune systemT cellIn vitroGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is generally accepted that CD8 T cells play the key role to maintain HSV-1 latency in trigeminal ganglia of ocularly infected mice. Yet, comparably little is known about the role of innate immunity in establishment of viral latency. In the current study, we investigated whether CD8α DCs impact HSV-1 latency by examining latency in the trigeminal ganglia (TG) of wild-type (WT) C57BL/6 versus CD8α-/- (lack functional CD8 T cells and CD8α+ DCs), CD8β-/- (have functional CD8α+ T cells and CD8α+ DCs), and β2m-/- (lack functional CD8 T cells but have CD8α+ DCs) mice as well as BXH2 (have functional CD8 T cells but lack CD8α+ DCs) versus WT C3H (have functional CD8α T cells and CD8α+ DCs) mice. We also determined whether the phenotype of CD8α-/- and BXH2 mice could be restored to that of WT mice by adoptive transfer of WT CD8+ T cells or bone marrow (BM) derived CD8α+ DCs. Our results clearly demonstrate that CD8α DCs, rather than CD8 T cells, are responsible for enhanced viral latency and recurrences.

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 score0.006

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207