MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2505439876 · doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1005772

Spliceosome SNRNP200 Promotes Viral RNA Sensing and IRF3 Activation of Antiviral Response

2016· article· en· W2505439876 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Tremblay, Martin Baril, Laurent Chatel‐Chaix, Salwa Es-Saad, Alex Young Park, Robert K. Koenekoop, Daniel Lamarre

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Pathogens · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
Topicinterferon and immune responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Liver FoundationFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsRNA Helicase ARIG-ISmall nuclear RNARNAGene knockdownBiologySpliceosomeRNA-dependent RNA polymeraseVirologyRNA silencingSendai virusCell biologyIRF3HelicaseRNA splicingRNA interferenceVirusGeneGeneticsTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spliceosomal SNRNP200 is a Ski2-like RNA helicase that is associated with retinitis pigmentosa 33 (RP33). Here we found that SNRNP200 promotes viral RNA sensing and IRF3 activation through the ability of its amino-terminal Sec63 domain (Sec63-1) to bind RNA and to interact with TBK1. We show that SNRNP200 relocalizes into TBK1-containing cytoplasmic structures upon infection, in contrast to the RP33-associated S1087L mutant, which is also unable to rescue antiviral response of SNRNP200 knockdown cells. This functional rescue correlates with the Sec63-1-mediated binding of viral RNA. The hindered IFN-β production of knockdown cells was further confirmed in peripheral blood cells of RP33 patients bearing missense mutation in SNRNP200 upon infection with Sendai virus (SeV). This work identifies a novel immunoregulatory role of the spliceosomal SNRNP200 helicase as an RNA sensor and TBK1 adaptor for the activation of IRF3-mediated antiviral innate response.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS PathogensSame topicinterferon and immune responsesFrench-language works237,207