↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of two monoclonal antibodies, 38F10 and 44D11, against the major envelope fusion protein of Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus

Overview of attention for article published in Virologica Sinica, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
Title
Characterization of two monoclonal antibodies, 38F10 and 44D11, against the major envelope fusion protein of Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus
Published in
Virologica Sinica, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12250-016-3831-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zijiao Zou, Jinliang Liu, Zhiying Wang, Fei Deng, Hualin Wang, Zhihong Hu, Manli Wang, Tao Zhang

Abstract

The envelope fusion protein F of baculoviruses is a class I viral fusion protein which play a significant role during virus entry into insect cells. F is initially synthesized as a precursor (F0) and then cleaved into a disulfide-linked F1 and F2 subunits during the process of protein maturation and secretion. To facilitate further investigation into the structure and function of F protein during virus infection, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against the F2 subunit of Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus (HearNPV) (HaF) were generated. Two kinds of mAbs were obtained according to their different recognition epitopes: one kind of mAbs, as represented by 38F10, recognizes amino acid (aa) 85 to 123 of F2 and the other kind, represented by 44D11, recognizes aa 148 to 173 of F2. Western blot and immunofluorescence assay confirmed that both of the mAbs recognized the F protein expressed in HearNPV infected cells, however, only 44D11 could neutralize HearNPV infection. The results further showed that 44D11 may not interact with a receptor binding epitope, rather it was demonstrated to inhibit syncytium formation in cells expressing the HaF protein. The results imply that the monoclonal antibody 44D11 recognizes a region within HaF2 that may be involved in the F-mediated membrane fusion process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 1 33%
Student > Postgraduate 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 33%
Unknown 2 67%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,418,183
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Virologica Sinica
#437
of 576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#355,853
of 421,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virologica Sinica
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.