MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differential Effects of Tra2ß Isoforms on HIV-1 RNA Processing and Expression

2015· article· en· W448943630 on OpenAlexafffund
Craig D. Platt, Maria Calimano, Josip Nemet, Jodi L. Bubenik, Alan Cochrane

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario HIV Treatment Network
KeywordsRNAGene isoformContext (archaeology)RNA splicingBiologyGene expressionSmall interfering RNAViral replicationNon-coding RNACell biologyVirologyVirusGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Balanced processing of HIV-1 RNA is critical to virus replication and is regulated by host factors. In this report, we demonstrate that overexpression of either Tra2α or Tra2β results in a marked reduction in HIV-1 Gag/Env expression, an effect associated with changes in HIV-1 RNA accumulation, altered viral splice site usage, and a block to export of HIV-1 genomic RNA. A natural isoform of Tra2β (Tra2ß3), lacking the N-terminal RS domain, also suppressed HIV-1 expression but had different effects on viral RNA processing. The functional differences between the Tra2β isoforms were also observed in the context of another RNA substrate indicating that these factors have distinct functions within the cell. Finally, we demonstrate that Tra2ß depletion results in a selective reduction in HIV-1 Env expression as well as an increase in multiply spliced viral RNA. Together, the findings indicate that Tra2α/β can play important roles in regulating HIV-1 RNA metabolism and expression.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207