MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793021225 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2018.00057

Three-Dimensional Architecture and Biogenesis of Membrane Structures Associated with Plant Virus Replication

2018· review· en· W2793021225 on OpenAlexaff
Xuejiao Jin, Xiuling Cao, Xueting Wang, Jun Jiang, Juan Wan, Jean‐François Laliberté, Yongliang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersMinistry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of ChinaFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesChina Agricultural UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyReplication (statistics)Cell biologyBiogenesisViral replicationHost (biology)RNAElectron tomographyPlant virusVirusComputational biologyNanotechnologyVirologyGeneticsGeneMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Positive-sense (+) RNA viruses represent the most abundant group of viruses and are dependent on the host cell machinery to replicate. One remarkable feature that occurs after (+) RNA virus entry into cells is the remodeling of host endomembranes, leading to the formation of viral replication factories. Recently, rapid progress in three-dimensional (3D) imaging technologies, such as electron tomography (ET) and focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM), has enabled researchers to visualize the novel membrane structures induced by viruses at high resolution. These 3D imaging technologies provide new mechanistic insights into the viral infection cycle. In this review, we summarize the latest reports on the cellular remodeling that occurs during plant virus infection; in particular, we focus on studies that provide 3D architectural information on viral replication factories. We also outline the mechanisms underlying the formation of these membranous structures and discuss possible future research directions.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations57
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207