MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Herpesviruses and the Unfolded Protein Response

2019· preprint· en· W3126022571 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin P. Johnston, Craig McCormick

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnfolded protein responseBiologyCell biologyProtein foldingReprogrammingViral replicationImmune systemViral proteinVirologyCellGeneticsVirusEndoplasmic reticulum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herpesviruses usurp cellular stress responses to avoid immune detection while simultaneously promoting viral replication and spread. The unfolded protein response (UPR) is an evolutionarily conserved stress response that is activated when the protein load in the ER saturates its chaperone folding capacity causing an accrual of misfolded proteins. Through translational and transcriptional reprogramming, the UPR aims to restore protein homeostasis; however, if this fails the cell undergoes apoptosis. It is commonly thought that many enveloped viruses, including herpesviruses, may activate the UPR due to saturation of the ER with nascent glycoproteins and thus these viruses may have evolved mechanisms to evade the potentially negative effects of UPR signaling. Over the past fifteen years there has been considerable effort to provide evidence that different viruses may reprogram the UPR to promote viral replication. Here we provide an overview of the molecular events of UPR activation, signaling and transcriptional outputs, and highlight key findings that demonstrate that the UPR is an important cellular stress response that herpesviruses have hijacked to facilitate persistent infection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207