The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Characterization of Scrapie Infection in Mouse Neuroblastoma Cells
Abstract
A mouse neuroblastoma cell line was successfully infected with scrapie agent. Agent derived from infected mouse brain or spleen infected cultures. However, agent from infected hamsters did not infect mouse cell cultures, suggesting that species specificity influenced the infection process in vitro. Positive cultures supported scrapie replication for as many as 47 passages in vitro. Agent was shown to be cell-associated and between 631 and 7943 unselected culture cells constituted 1 mouse LD50. However, fluctuation analysis indicated that only one of 144 cells in unselected cultures was actually infected. Thus, agent was confined to a small percentage of cells and only 4.4 to 55.1 positive cells were needed to confer a mouse LD50.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Coleman, B. M., & Hill, A. F. (2015) · Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.02.007 · Cited by 208
Metadata
- Authors
- Race, R. E., Fadness, L. H., & Chesebro, B.
- Venue
- Journal of General Virology
- Publisher
- Microbiology Society
- Published
- 1987-05-01
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1391-1399
- ISSN
- 0022-1317 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-2099
- OpenAlex
- W2133288158
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Characterization of Scrapie Infection in Mouse Neuroblastoma Cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1099/0022-1317-68-5-1391
- The paper
- Race, R. E., Fadness, L. H., & Chesebro, B. (1987). Characterization of Scrapie Infection in Mouse Neuroblastoma Cells. Journal of General Virology. https://doi.org/10.1099/0022-1317-68-5-1391
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.
