Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 164

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functional Analysis of Mosquito-Borne Flavivirus Conserved Sequence Elements within 3′ Untranslated Region of West Nile Virus by Use of a Reporting Replicon That Differentiates between Viral Translation and RNA Replication

Open access
Lo, Michael K., Tilgner, Mark, Bernard, Kristen A., Shi, Pei-Yong·2003·Journal of Virology

Abstract

We have developed a reporting replicon of West Nile virus (WNV) that could be used to quantitatively distinguish viral translation and RNA replication. A Renilla luciferase (Rluc) gene was fused in-frame with the open reading frame of a subgenomic replicon in the position where the viral structural region was deleted, resulting in RlucRep. Transfection of BHK cells with RlucRep RNA yielded two distinctive Rluc signal peaks, one between 2 and 10 h and the other after 26 h posttransfection. By contrast, only the 2- to 10-h Rluc signal peak was observed in cells transfected with a mutant replicon containing an inactivated viral polymerase NS5 (RlucRep-NS5mt). Immunofluorescence and real-time reverse transcriptase PCR assays showed that the levels of viral protein expression and RNA replication increased in cells transfected with the RlucRep but not in those transfected with the RlucRep-NS5mt. These results suggest that the Rluc signal that occurred at 2 to 10 h posttransfection reflects viral translation of the input replicon, while the Rluc activity after 26 h posttransfection represents RNA replication. Using this system, we showed that mutations of conserved sequence (CS) elements within the 3′ untranslated region of the mosquito-borne flaviviruses did not significantly affect WNV translation but severely diminished or completely abolished RNA replication. Mutations of CS1 that blocked the potential base pairing with a conserved sequence in the 5′ region of the capsid gene (5′CS) abolished RNA replication. Restoration of the 5′CS-CS1 interaction rescued viral replication. Replicons containing individual deletions of CS2, repeated CS2 (RCS2), CS3, or RCS3 were viable, but their RNA replication was dramatically compromised. These results demonstrate that genome cyclization through the 5′CS-CS1 interaction is essential for WNV RNA replication, whereas CS2, RCS2, CS3, and RCS3 facilitate, but are dispensable for, WNV replication.

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 · 10.1128/jvi.77.18.10004-10014.2003

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 164

Metadata

Authors
Lo, M. K., Tilgner, M., Bernard, K. A., & Shi, P.-Y.
Venue
Journal of Virology
Published
2003-09-15
Volume
77
Issue
18
Pages
10004-10014
ISSN
  • 0022-538X (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5514
OpenAlex
W2070179005
Cited by
164
References
1
FWCI
9.89
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: Functional Analysis of Mosquito-Borne Flavivirus Conserved Sequence Elements within 3′ Untranslated Region of West Nile Virus by Use of a Reporting Replicon That Differentiates between Viral Translation and RNA Replication. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jvi.77.18.10004-10014.2003
The paper
Lo, M. K., Tilgner, M., Bernard, K. A., & Shi, P.-Y. (2003). Functional Analysis of Mosquito-Borne Flavivirus Conserved Sequence Elements within 3′ Untranslated Region of West Nile Virus by Use of a Reporting Replicon That Differentiates between Viral Translation and RNA Replication. Journal of Virology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.77.18.10004-10014.2003

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.