Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 272

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Differences Between Laboratory Strains of Epstein-Barr Virus Based on Immortalization, Abortive Infection, and Interference

Open access
Miller, George, Robinson, James, Heston, Lee, Lipman, Muriel·1974·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Biologic activities of extracellular Epstein-Barr virus (EB virus) from two laboratory strains, namely, P 3 J-HR-1 (P-H) from Burkitt lymphoma and B95-8 (B95) from infectious mononucleosis, were compared. Virus stocks from both sources contained approximately the same number of virions. Virus from the P-H line induced “early antigen” in six nonproducer EB virus genome carrier cell lines; virus from B95 did not induce “early antigen.” Extracellular virus from B95 regularly caused lymphocytes from human umbilical cords to form continuous lines (immortalization); P-H virus did not cause primary cultures of human lymphocytes to grow continuously. B95 virus stimulated DNA synthesis as determined by rate of incorporation of [ 3 H]thymidine into acid-insoluble material; P-H virus did not stimulate DNA synthesis. Pretreatment of lymphocytes with undiluted P-H virus inhibited immortalization and stimulation of DNA synthesis by B95 virus. The inhibitory properties of the P-H virus were sedimented at 100,000 × g and inactivated by heat and UV irradiation; interference by the P-H virus was neutralized by human serum with antibody to EB virus and not by antibody-negative human serum. The hypothesis most consistent with these results is that the P-H virus is defective in gene(s) needed for initiation of immortalization. We speculate that the absence of this gene allows early antigen to be expressed upon super-infection of nonproducer cell lines. The availability of two laboratory strains of EB virus which differ in biologic behavior provides starting material for analysis of the mechanism of lymphocyte immortalization by EB virus and of virus structural differences which affect immortalization.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.71.10.4006

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 272

Metadata

Authors
Miller, G., Robinson, J., Heston, L., & Lipman, M.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1974-10
Volume
71
Issue
10
Pages
4006-4010
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2077210975
Cited by
272
References
0
FWCI
6.74
Type
journal article
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: Differences Between Laboratory Strains of Epstein-Barr Virus Based on Immortalization, Abortive Infection, and Interference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.71.10.4006
The paper
Miller, G., Robinson, J., Heston, L., & Lipman, M. (1974). Differences Between Laboratory Strains of Epstein-Barr Virus Based on Immortalization, Abortive Infection, and Interference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.71.10.4006

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.