MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807621043 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-23899-x

Human Sertoli cells support high levels of Zika virus replication and persistence

2018· article· en· W2807621043 on OpenAlexafffund
Anil Kumar, Juan Jovel, Joaquín López-Orozco, Daniel Limonta, Adriana M. Airo, Shangmei Hou, Iryna Stryapunina, Chad Fibke, Ronald B. Moore, Tom C. Hobman

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsZika virusSertoli cellVirologyBiologyViral replicationFlavivirusVirusSexual transmissionImmunologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zika virus is a teratogenic mosquito-transmitted flavivirus that is associated with birth defects in newborns and Guillain-Barré syndrome in adults. The virus can also be sexually transmitted, but currently, very little is known about the cell types supporting virus replication and persistence in human testes. Using primary cell cultures, we observed that Sertoli but not Leydig cells are highly susceptible to Zika virus infection, a process that is dependent on the TAM family receptor Axl. In cell culture, Sertoli cells could be productively infected with Zika virus for at least 6-weeks. Infection of Sertoli cells resulted in dramatic changes to the transcriptional profile of these cells. The most upregulated mRNA in infected cells was basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF2), a cytokine that was found to enhance Zika virus replication and support viral persistence. Together these findings provide key insights into understanding how Zika virus persists in the male reproductive tract and in turn may aid in developing antiviral therapies or strategies to minimize sexual transmission of this pathogen.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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