Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 470

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of The Replication of Positive-Stranded Rna Viruses of Plants and Animals

Open access
Buck, Kenneth W.·1996·Advances in Virus Research

Abstract

Publisher Summary It is clear from the experimental data that there are some similarities in RNA replication for all eukaryotic positive-stranded RNA viruses—that is, the mechanism of polymerization of the nucleotides is probably similar for all. It is noteworthy that all mechanisms appear to utilize host membranes as a site of replication. Membranes appear to function not only as a way of compartmentalizing virus RNA replication but also appear to have a central role in the organization and functioning of the replication complex, and further studies in this area are needed. Within virus supergroups, similarities are evident between animal and plant viruses—for example, in the nature and arrangements of replication genes and in sequence similarities of functional domains. However, it is also clear that there has been considerable divergence, even within supergroups. For example, the animal alpha-viruses have evolved to encode proteinases which play a central controlling function in the replication cycle, whereas this is not common in the plant alpha-like viruses and even when it occurs, as in the tymoviruses, the strategies that have evolved appear to be significantly different. Some of the divergence could be host-dependent and the increasing interest in the role of host proteins in replication should be fruitful in revealing how different systems have evolved. Finally, there are virus supergroups that appear to have no close relatives between animals and plants, such as the animal coronavirus-like supergroup and the plant carmo-like supergroup.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0065-3527(08)60736-8

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Metadata

Authors
Buck, K. W.
Venue
Advances in Virus Research
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
1996
Volume
47
Pages
159-251
ISSN
0065-3527 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1482767536
Cited by
470
References
2
FWCI
34.75
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of The Replication of Positive-Stranded Rna Viruses of Plants and Animals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0065-3527(08)60736-8
The paper
Buck, K. W. (1996). Comparison of The Replication of Positive-Stranded Rna Viruses of Plants and Animals. Advances in Virus Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-3527(08)60736-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.