MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410326279 · doi:10.3390/v17050689

How HIV-1 Uses the Metabolite Inositol Hexakisphosphate to Build Its Capsid

2025· review· en· W4410326279 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leo C. James

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsCapsidMetaboliteInositolHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)VirologyComputational biologyChemistryBiologyBiochemistryVirusReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The HIV-1 capsid is one of virology's most iconic structures, yet how it assembles has long remained elusive. Remarkably, the capsid is made from just a single protein, CA, which forms a lattice of ~250 hexamers and exactly 12 pentamers. Conical capsids form inside budded virions during maturation, but early efforts to reproduce this in vitro resulted instead in open-ended tubes with a purely hexameric lattice. The missing component in capsid assembly was finally identified as the metabolite inositol hexakisphosphate (IP6). Simply mixing soluble CA protein with IP6 is sufficient to drive the spontaneous assembly of conical capsids with a similar size and shape to those inside of infectious virions. Equally important, IP6 stabilises capsids once formed, increasing their stability from minutes to hours. Indeed, such is the dependence of HIV-1 on IP6 that the virus actively packages it into virions during production. These discoveries have stimulated work from multiple labs into the role and importance of IP6 in HIV-1 replication, and is the subject of this review.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207