CRISPR/Cas9 Mutagenesis of UL21 in Multiple Strains of Herpes Simplex Virus Reveals Differential Requirements for pUL21 in Viral Replication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
have yielded conflicting results regarding the necessity of pUL21 in HSV infection. To resolve this discrepancy, we utilized CRISPR/Cas9 mutagenesis to isolate pUL21 deficient viruses in multiple HSV backgrounds, and performed a side-by-side comparison of the cell-to-cell spread and replication phenotypes of these viruses. These analyses confirmed previous studies implicating the involvement of pUL21 in cell-to-cell spread of HSV. Cell-to-cell spread of HSV-2 was more greatly affected by the lack of pUL21 than HSV-1, and strain-specific differences in the requirement for pUL21 in cell-to-cell spread were also noted. HSV-2 strain 186 lacking pUL21 was particularly crippled in both cell-to-cell spread and viral replication in non-complementing cells, in comparison to other HSV strains lacking pUL21, suggesting that the strict requirement for pUL21 by strain 186 may not be representative of the HSV-2 species as a whole. This work highlights CRISPR/Cas9 technology as a useful tool for rapidly constructing deletion mutants of alphaherpesviruses, regardless of background strain, and should find great utility whenever strain-specific differences need to be investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".