↓ Skip to main content

PARP1 restricts Epstein Barr Virus lytic reactivation by binding the BZLF1 promoter

Overview of attention for article published in Virology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
PARP1 restricts Epstein Barr Virus lytic reactivation by binding the BZLF1 promoter
Published in
Virology, July 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.virol.2017.04.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lena N. Lupey-Green, Stephanie A. Moquin, Kayla A. Martin, Shane M. McDevitt, Michael Hulse, Lisa B. Caruso, Richard T. Pomerantz, JJ L. Miranda, Italo Tempera

Abstract

The Epstein Barr virus (EBV) genome persists in infected host cells as a chromatinized episome and is subject to chromatin-mediated regulation. Binding of the host insulator protein CTCF to the EBV genome has an established role in maintaining viral latency type, and in other herpesviruses, loss of CTCF binding at specific regions correlates with viral reactivation. Here, we demonstrate that binding of PARP1, an important cofactor of CTCF, at the BZLF1 lytic switch promoter restricts EBV reactivation. Knockdown of PARP1 in the Akata-EBV cell line significantly increases viral copy number and lytic protein expression. Interestingly, CTCF knockdown has no effect on viral reactivation, and CTCF binding across the EBV genome is largely unchanged following reactivation. Moreover, EBV reactivation attenuates PARP activity, and Zta expression alone is sufficient to decrease PARP activity. Here we demonstrate a restrictive function of PARP1 in EBV lytic reactivation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 5 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 April 2017.
All research outputs
#8,278,670
of 15,034,464 outputs
Outputs from Virology
#6,940
of 8,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,456
of 265,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology
#10
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,034,464 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,136 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 265,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.