A single protective polymorphism in the prion protein blocks <scp>cross‐species</scp> prion replication in cultured cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bank vole (BV) prion protein (PrP) can function as a universal acceptor of prions. However, the molecular details of BVPrP's promiscuity for replicating a diverse range of prion strains remain obscure. To develop a cultured cell paradigm capable of interrogating the unique properties of BVPrP, we generated monoclonal lines of CAD5 cells lacking endogenous PrP but stably expressing either hamster (Ha), mouse (Mo), or BVPrP (M109 or I109 polymorphic variants) and then challenged them with various strains of mouse or hamster prions. Cells expressing BVPrP were susceptible to both mouse and hamster prions, whereas cells expressing MoPrP or HaPrP could only be infected with species-matched prions. Propagation of mouse and hamster prions in cells expressing BVPrP resulted in strain adaptation in several instances, as evidenced by alterations in conformational stability, glycosylation, susceptibility to anti-prion small molecules, and the inability of BVPrP-adapted mouse prion strains to infect cells expressing MoPrP. Interestingly, cells expressing BVPrP containing the G127V prion gene variant, identified in individuals resistant to kuru, were unable to become infected with prions. Moreover, the G127V polymorphic variant impeded the spontaneous aggregation of recombinant BVPrP. These results demonstrate that BVPrP can facilitate cross-species prion replication in cultured cells and that a single amino acid change can override the prion-permissive nature of BVPrP. This cellular paradigm will be useful for dissecting the molecular features of BVPrP that allow it to function as a universal prion acceptor.
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) | 0.001 | 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".