Analysis of Interactions Between Viral Replicase Proteins and Plant Intracellular Membranes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Replication of the genome of positive-strand RNA plant viruses takes place in membrane-bound complexes that contain viral replicase proteins, viral RNA, and host proteins. Many viral replicase proteins play a crucial role in the assembly of replication complexes at intracellular membranes. They are integral membrane proteins that interact directly with the membranes and bring other proteins and the viral RNA to the complex via protein-protein or protein-RNA interactions. In this chapter, we describe subcellular fractionation methods that determine whether viral proteins are integral membrane proteins in planta. Differential centrifugation techniques are used to produce membrane-enriched fractions, which can then be analyzed for the presence of viral replicase proteins by immunoblotting. Confirmation of the membrane-association is obtained by membrane flotation assays and treatment of membrane-enriched fractions with high salt or high pH followed by detection of the viral proteins. Because many plant viruses replicate in association with the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), we also discuss two techniques to specifically analyze the interaction of viral proteins with these membranes. These techniques are continuous sucrose-gradient fractionation in the presence or absence of 3 mM Mg2+ and glycosylation assays.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".