ArticleJournal of molecular biology2009
Factors that determine the efficiency of HIV-1 strand transfer initiated at a specific site.
Article in Journal of molecular biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Host SAMHD1 protein promotes HIV-1 recombination in macrophages.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2014Article
- Altered strand transfer activity of a multiple-drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse transcriptase mutant with a dipeptide fingers domain insertion.Journal of molecular biology · 2012Article
- HIV-1 reverse transcriptase dissociates during strand transfer.Journal of molecular biology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human immunodeficiency virus-1 employs strand transfer for recombination between two viral genomes. We have previously provided evidence that strand transfer proceeds by an invasion-mediated mechanism in which a DNA segment on the original RNA template is invaded by a second RNA template at a gap site. The initial RNA-DNA hybrid then expands until the DNA is fully transferred. Ribonuclease H (RNase H) cleavages and nucleocapsid protein (NC) were required for long-distance propagation of the hybrid. Evaluation was performed on a unique substrate, with a short gap serving as a precreated invasion site. In our current work, this substrate provided an opportunity for us to test what factors influence a specific invasion site to support transfer, and to distinguish factors that influence invasion site creation from those that impact later steps. RNase H can act in a polymerization-dependent or polymerization-independent mode. Polymerization-dependent and polymerization-independent RNase H were found to be important in creating efficiently used invasion sites in the primer-donor complex, with or without NC. Propagation and terminus transfer steps, emanating from a precreated invasion site in the presence of NC, were stimulated by polymerization-dependent, but not polymerization-independent, RNase H. RNase H can carry out primary and secondary cleavages during synthesis. While both modes of cleavage promoted invasion, only primary cleavage promoted propagation in the presence of NC in our system. These observations suggest that once invasion is initiated at a short gap, it can propagate through an adjacent region interrupted only by nicks, with help by NC. We considered the possibility that propagation solely by strand exchange was a significant contributor to transfers. However, it did not promote transfer even if synthetic progress of reverse transcriptase was intentionally slowed, consistent with strand exchange by random walk in which rate declines precipitously with distance.
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.