Specialized DNA Structures Act as Genomic Beacons for Integration by Evolutionarily Diverse Retroviruses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retroviral integration site targeting is not random and plays a critical role in expression and long-term survival of the integrated provirus. To better understand the genomic environment surrounding retroviral integration sites, we performed a meta-analysis of previously published integration site data from evolutionarily diverse retroviruses, including new experimental data from HIV-1 subtypes A, B, C and D. We show here that evolutionarily divergent retroviruses exhibit distinct integration site profiles with strong preferences for integration near non-canonical B-form DNA (non-B DNA). We also show that in vivo-derived HIV-1 integration sites are significantly more enriched in transcriptionally silent regions and transcription-silencing non-B DNA features of the genome compared to in vitro-derived HIV-1 integration sites. Integration sites from individuals infected with HIV-1 subtype A, B, C or D viruses exhibited different preferences for common genomic and non-B DNA features. In addition, we identified several integration site hotspots shared between different HIV-1 subtypes, all of which were located in the non-B DNA feature slipped DNA. Together, these data show that although evolutionarily divergent retroviruses exhibit distinct integration site profiles, they all target non-B DNA for integration. These findings provide new insight into how retroviruses integrate into genomes for long-term survival.
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) | 0.001 | 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".