Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36466692›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2022

Mouse adaptation of H6 avian influenza viruses and their molecular characteristics.

Zhimin Wan, Jianxi Gong, Jianjun Sang, Wenjie Jiang, Zhehong Zhao, Mingjun Lian, Ting Tang, Yafeng Li, Qiuqi Kan, Quan Xie and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. PA and PA-X: two key proteins from segment 3 of the influenza viruses.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhimin WanKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Jianxi GongKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Jianjun SangSinopharm Yangzhou VAC Biological Engineering Co. Ltd, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Wenjie JiangKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Zhehong ZhaoKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Mingjun LianKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Ting TangKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Yafeng LiKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Qiuqi KanKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Quan XieKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Tuofan LiKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Hongxia ShaoKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Wei GaoKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Aijian QinKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Jianqiang YeKey Laboratory of Jiangsu Preventive Veterinary Medicine, Key Laboratory for Avian Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ministry of Education, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Yangzhou University · CNChina National Pharmaceutical Group Corporation (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

H6 avian influenza viruses (AIVs) not only continue to circulate in both domestic poultry and wild waterfowl, but also have occasionally caused spillovers infections in pigs and humans, posing a potential threat to public health. However, the molecular mechanism of H6 AIV adaptation to mammals remains largely unknown. In this study, two mouse-adapted (MA) H6 AIV strains, named as MA E-Teal/417 and MA GWF-Goose/740, were generated through blind passages in BALB/c mice. The two MA H6 strains replicated more efficiently and showed higher virulence than the corresponding wild type (WT) H6 strains in mice. Genome sequencing revealed that MA E-Teal/417 and MA GWF-Goose/740 carried six amino acid mutations (PB2-T224A/E627K, HA-G124R, NA-F167L/Y356H and M1-M92R), and four amino acid mutations (PB1-K577E, PA-T97I/D514E and HA-T276K), respectively, when compared to the corresponding WT virus. Receptor binding assay showed MA E-Teal/417 had stronger binding activity to α-2,3 SA than WT E-Teal/417. Moreover, the polymerase activity analysis found the RNP polymerase activity of both MA H6 viruses was significantly higher than that of the corresponding WT virus in 293T cells. All these demonstrate that H6 AIV can acquire limit amino acid substitutions to adapt to mammals and increase virulence, highlighting the significance of monitoring such mutations of H6 AIV in the field for alarming the potential of its cross-transmission and pathogenesis in mammals.

Indexed as

amino acid substitutionsH6 AIVmolecular mechanismmouse adaptationpathogenicitypolymerase activityreceptor binding

Identifiers

PMID36466692
PMCPMC9713515
OpenAlexW4309609020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.