ArticlePloS one2015
Infection Profiles of Selected Aquabirnavirus Isolates in CHSE Cells.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment of an In Vitro Model to Study Viral Infections of the Fish Intestinal Epithelium.Cells · 2023Article
- Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus Causing Clinical and Subclinical Infections in Atlantic Salmon Have Different Genetic Fingerprints.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The wide host range and antigenic diversity of aquabirnaviruses are reflected by the presence of a collection of isolates with different sero- and genotypic properties that have previously been classified as such. Differences in cytopathogenic mechanisms and host responses induced by these isolates have not been previously examined. In the present study, we investigated infection profiles induced by genetically and serologically closely related as well as distant isolates in-vitro. CHSE-214 cells were infected with either E1S (serotype A3, genogroup 3), VR-299 (serotype A1, genogroup 1), highly virulent Sp (TA) or avirulent Sp (PT) (serotype A2, genogroup 5). The experiments were performed at temperatures most optimum for each of the isolates namely 15°C for VR-299, TA and PT strains and 20°C for E1S. Differences in virus loads and ability to induce cytopathic effect, inhibition of protein synthesis, apoptosis, and induction of IFNa, Mx1, PKR or TNFα gene expression at different times post infection were examined. The results showed on one hand, E1S with the highest ability to replicate, induce apoptosis and IFNa gene expression while VR-299 inhibited protein synthesis and induced Mx1 and PKR gene expression the most. The two Sp isolates induced the highest TNFα gene expression but differed in their ability to replicate, inhibit protein synthesis, and induce gene expression, with TA being more superior. Collectively, these findings point towards the adaptation by different virus isolates to suit environments and hosts that they patronize. Furthermore, the results also suggest that genetic identity is not prerequisite to functional similarities thus results of one aquabirnavirus isolate cannot necessarily be extrapolated to another.
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.