MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7055209352

CD8aa dimer is a receptor for Nipah virus on porcine lymphocytes

2019· dissertation· en· W7055209352 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsHendra VirusAntibodyPeripheral blood mononuclear cellVirusPermissiveReceptorViral replicationTransfection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nipah virus (NiV) and Hendra Virus (HeV) (Paramyxoviridae; Henipavirus) cause severe often fatal illness in humans, but can also infect swine. The presented work compared permissibility of porcine peripheral blood mononuclear cells to NiV and to HeV. While majority of cell populations did not support replication of either HeV or NiV, monocytes were permissive to both viruses. CD8+ subpopulations of T and NK cells were permissive only to NiV, even though they did not express ephrin B2 (receptor for HeV and NiV) on the surface. CHO-K1 cells transfected with porcine CD8α became permissive to NiV. Antibody against CD8α was able to block NiV replication in CD8+ cells; competition assays between HeV or NiV soluble virus attachment protein (sG) suggested that NiV can bind to CD8αα expressing porcine cells while HeV cannot. CD8αβ cells were not permissive to NiV or HeV. The results indicate that porcine CD8α dimer is a receptor for Nipah virus, but not for HeV on porcine lymphocytes. This work has implications in vaccine design. Development of a veterinary vaccine against NiV which elicits cell mediated immune respose is needed.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

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)0.0050.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research→French-language works237,207→