ArticleVirology2007
In vitro fidelity of the prototype primate foamy virus (PFV) RT compared to HIV-1 RT.
Article in Virology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Next-Generation Sequencing Methods to Determine the Accuracy of Retroviral Reverse Transcriptases: Advantages and Limitations.Viruses · 2025Review
- Fidelity of Ribonucleotide Incorporation by the SARS-CoV-2 Replication Complex.Journal of molecular biology · 2023Article
- Physiological magnesium concentrations increase fidelity of diverse reverse transcriptases from HIV-1, HIV-2, and foamy virus, but not MuLV or AMV.The Journal of general virology · 2021Article
- The Determination of HIV-1 RT Mutation Rate, Its Possible Allosteric Effects, and Its Implications on Drug Resistance.Viruses · 2020Review
- Reply to 'Evolutionary stasis of viruses?'Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2019Article
- Foamy virus zoonotic infections.Retrovirology · 2017Review
- The external domains of the HIV-1 envelope are a mutational cold spot.Nature communications · 2015Article
- Time dependency of foamy virus evolutionary rate estimates.BMC evolutionary biology · 2015Article
- Mutations in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase affect the errors made in a single cycle of viral replication.Journal of virology · 2014Article
- Review
- Article
- Genetic characterization of simian foamy viruses infecting humans.Journal of virology · 2012Article
- Review
- Nature, position, and frequency of mutations made in a single cycle of HIV-1 replication.Journal of virology · 2010Article
- Molecular biology of foamy viruses.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2010Review
- Biophysical and enzymatic properties of the simian and prototype foamy virus reverse transcriptases.Retrovirology · 2010Article
- Article
- Accuracy estimation of foamy virus genome copying.Retrovirology · 2009Article
- Replication in a superficial epithelial cell niche explains the lack of pathogenicity of primate foamy virus infections.Journal of virology · 2008Article
- AZT-resistant foamy virus.Virology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We compared the in vitro fidelity of wild-type human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase (RT) and the prototype foamy virus (PFV) RT. Both enzymes had similar error rates for single nucleotide substitutions; however, PFV RT did not appear to make errors at specific hotspots, like HIV-1 RT. In addition, PFV RT made more deletions and insertions than HIV-1 RT. Although the majority of the missense errors made by HIV-1 RT and PFV RT are different, relatively few of the mutations caused by either enzyme can be explained by a misalignment/slippage mechanism. We suggest that the higher polymerase activity of PFV RT could contribute to the ability of the enzyme to jump to the same or a different template.
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.