Prior induction of cellular antiviral pathways limits frog virus 3 replication in two permissive <i>Xenopus laevis</i> skin epithelial-like cell lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Frog virus 3 (FV3) causes mortality in a range of amphibian species. Despite the importance of the skin epithelium as a first line of defence against FV3, the interaction between amphibian skin epithelial cells and FV3 remains largely uncharacterized. Here, we used newly established Xenopus laevis skin epithelial-like cell lines, Xela DS2 and Xela VS2, to study the susceptibility and permissiveness of frog skin epithelial cells to FV3, and the innate immune antiviral and proinflammatory gene regulatory responses of these cells to FV3. Both cell lines are susceptible and permissive to FV3, yet do not exhibit appreciable transcript levels of scavenger receptors recently demonstrated to be used by FV3 for cellular entry. Xela DS2 and Xela VS2 upregulate antiviral and proinflammatory cytokine transcripts in response to poly(I:C) but not to FV3 or UV-inactivated FV3. Poly(I:C) pretreatment limited FV3 replication and FV3-induced cytopathic effects in both cell lines. Thus, Xela DS2 and Xela VS2 can support FV3 propagation, represent in vitro systems to investigate antiviral responses of frog skin epithelial cells, and are novel tools for screening compounds that initiate effective antiviral programs to limit FV3 replication.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".