MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767401463 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2017.10.055

The Host Protein Reticulon 3.1A Is Utilized by Flaviviruses to Facilitate Membrane Remodelling

2017· article· en· W2767401463 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Turgut E. Aktepe, Susann Liebscher, Julia E. Prier, Cameron P. Simmons, Jason M. Mackenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Infection and ImmunityNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsEndoplasmic reticulumViral replicationDengue virusVirologyFlavivirusBiologyDengue feverViral structural proteinRNAViral proteinHost factorVirusCell biologyViral entryGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flaviviruses are enveloped, positive-sensed single-stranded RNA viruses that remodel host membranes, incorporating both viral and host factors facilitating viral replication. In this study, we identified a key role for the membrane-bending host protein Reticulon 3.1 (RTN3.1A) during the replication cycle of three flaviviruses: West Nile virus (WNV), Dengue virus (DENV), and Zika virus (ZIKV). We observed that, during infection, RTN3.1A is redistributed and recruited to the viral replication complex, a recruitment facilitated via the WNV NS4A protein, however, not DENV or ZIKV NS4A. Critically, small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown of RTN3.1A expression attenuated WNV, DENV, and ZIKV replication and severely affected the stability and abundance of the NS4A protein, coinciding with a significant alternation and reduction of viral membrane structures in the endoplasmic reticulum. These observations identified a crucial role of RTN3.1A for the viral remodelling of host membranes during efficient flavivirus replication and the stabilization of viral proteins within the endoplasmic reticulum.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations105
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207