Post-transcriptional regulation of frog innate immunity: discovery of frog microRNAs associated with antiviral responses and ranavirus infection using a <i>Xenopus laevis</i> skin epithelial-like cell line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-transcriptional regulators such as microRNAs are emerging as conserved regulators of innate antiviral immunity in vertebrates, yet their roles in amphibian antiviral responses remain uncharacterized. We profiled changes in microRNA expressions in the Xenopus laevis skin epithelial-like cell line Xela DS2 in response to poly(I:C)—an analogue of viral double-stranded RNA and inducer of type I interferons—or frog virus 3 (FV3), an immunoevasive virus associated with amphibian mortality events. Small RNA libraries generated from untreated, poly(I:C)-treated, and FV3-infected cells were sequenced. We detected 136 known X. laevis microRNAs and discovered 133 novel X. laevis microRNAs. Sixty-five microRNAs were differentially expressed in response to poly(I:C), many of which were predicted to target regulators of antiviral pathways such as cGAS-STING, RIG-I/MDA-5, TLR signaling, and type I interferon signaling, as well as products of these pathways (NF-ĸB-induced and interferon-stimulated genes). In contrast, only 49 microRNAs were altered by FV3 infection, fewer of which were predicted to interact with antiviral pathways. Interestingly, poly(I:C) treatment or FV3 infection downregulated transcripts encoding factors of the host microRNA biogenesis pathway. Our study is the first to suggest that host microRNAs regulate innate antiviral immunity in frogs and sheds light on microRNA-mediated mechanisms of immunoevasion by FV3.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".