| Title |
Cloning, expression, and antiviral activity of interferon β from the Chinese microbat, Myotis davidii
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virologica Sinica, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12250-015-3668-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ying-Zi Liang, Li-Jun Wu, Qian Zhang, Peng Zhou, Mei-Niang Wang, Xing-Lou Yang, Xing-Yi Ge, Lin-Fa Wang, Zheng-Li Shi |
| Abstract |
Bats are natural reservoir hosts for many viruses that produce no clinical symptoms in bats. Therefore, bats may have evolved effective mechanisms to control viral replication. However, little information is available on bat immune responses to viral infection. Type I interferon (IFN) plays a key role in controlling viral infections. In this study, we report the cloning, expression, and biological activity of interferon β (IFNβ) from the Chinese microbat species, Myotis davidii. We demonstrated the upregulation of IFNB and IFN-stimulated genes in a kidney cell line derived from M. davidii after treatment with polyI:C or infection with Sendai virus. Furthermore, the recombinant IFNβ inhibited vesicular stomatitis virus and bat adenovirus replication in cell lines from two bat species, M. davidii and Rhinolophus sinicus. We provide the first in vitro evidence of IFNβ antiviral activity in microbats, which has important implications for virus interactions with these hosts. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Romania | 3 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Congo, The Democratic Republic of the | 1 | 8% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 67% |
| Scientists | 3 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 32% |
| Researcher | 5 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 18% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 03 April 2024.
All research outputs
#5,500,961
of 25,634,695 outputs
Outputs from Virologica Sinica
#123
of 675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,636
of 396,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virologica Sinica
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,634,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 396,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.