ArticleJournal of virology2001
Cell-type-specific regulation of the two foamy virus promoters.
Article in Journal of virology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond reverse transcription: molecular mechanisms and emerging paradigms in retroviral replication.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2026Review
- TheViruses · 2023Article
- The Regulation of Prototype Foamy Virus 5'Long Terminal Repeats and Internal Promoter by Endogenous Transcription Factors.Intervirology · 2022Article
- Trim28 acts as restriction factor of prototype foamy virus replication by modulating H3K9me3 marks and destabilizing the viral transactivator Tas.Retrovirology · 2021Article
- Novel Host Protein TBC1D16, a GTPase Activating Protein of Rab5C, Inhibits Prototype Foamy Virus Replication.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- Inhibition of spumavirus gene expression by PHF11.PLoS pathogens · 2020Article
- Review
- Foamy virus zoonotic infections.Retrovirology · 2017Review
- Article
- Blimp-1, an intrinsic factor that represses HIV-1 proviral transcription in memory CD4+ T cells.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2015Article
- N-Myc interactor inhibits prototype foamy virus by sequestering viral Tas protein in the cytoplasm.Journal of virology · 2014Article
- Non-simian foamy viruses: molecular virology, tropism and prevalence and zoonotic/interspecies transmission.Viruses · 2013Review
- The DEAD-box RNA helicase DDX6 is required for efficient encapsidation of a retroviral genome.PLoS pathogens · 2011Article
- Review
- The AP-1 binding sites located in the pol gene intragenic regulatory region of HIV-1 are important for viral replication.PloS one · 2011Article
- Article
- Replication in a superficial epithelial cell niche explains the lack of pathogenicity of primate foamy virus infections.Journal of virology · 2008Article
- Foamy virus capsid assembly occurs at a pericentriolar region through a cytoplasmic targeting/retention signal in Gag.Traffic (Copenhagen, Denmark) · 2006Article
- Expanded tissue targets for foamy virus replication with simian immunodeficiency virus-induced immunosuppression.Journal of virology · 2006Article
- Mucosal and systemic antibody responses in humans infected with simian foamy virus.Journal of virology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The foamy virus (FV) genome contains two promoters, the canonical long terminal repeat (LTR) promoter, containing three consensus AP-1 binding sites, and an internal promoter (IP) within the env gene. We investigated the regulation of the two promoters in lytic and persistent infections and found that in the presence of a constitutive source of the viral transactivator protein Tas, transactivation of the LTR promoter and that of the IP differ. In lytic infections, both the LTR promoter and the IP are efficiently transactivated by Tas, while in persistent infections, the IP is efficiently transactivated by Tas, but the LTR promoter is not. Analysis of proteins expressed from the LTR promoter and the IP during infection indicated that IP transcription is more robust than that of the LTR promoter in persistently infected cells, while the opposite is true for lytically infected cells. Coculture experiments also showed that LTR promoter transcription is greatest in cells which support lytic replication. Replacement of much of the LTR promoter with the IP leads to increased viral replication in persistent but not lytic infections. We also found that the induction of persistently infected cells with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) greatly enhanced viral replication and transcription from the SFVcpz(hu) (new name for human FV) LTR promoter. However, mutation of three consensus AP-1 binding sites in the FV LTR promoter did not affect viral replication in lytically or persistently infected cells, nor did the same mutations affect LTR promoter transactivation by Tas in PMA-treated cells. Our data indicate that differential regulation of transcription is important in the outcome of FV infection but is unlikely to depend on AP-1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.