↓ Skip to main content

gga-miR-155 Enhances Type I Interferon Expression and Suppresses Infectious Burse Disease Virus Replication via Targeting SOCS1 and TANK

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
gga-miR-155 Enhances Type I Interferon Expression and Suppresses Infectious Burse Disease Virus Replication via Targeting SOCS1 and TANK
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2018.00055
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bin Wang, Mengjiao Fu, Yanan Liu, Yongqiang Wang, Xiaoqi Li, Hong Cao, Shijun J. Zheng

Abstract

Infectious bursal disease (IBD) is an acute, highly contagious, and immunosuppressive avian disease caused by IBD virus (IBDV). MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are involved in host-pathogen interactions and innate immune response to viral infection. However, the role of miRNAs in host response to IBDV infection is not clear. We report here that gga-miR-155 acts as an anti-virus host factor inhibiting IBDV replication. We found that transfection of DF-1 cells with gga-miR-155 suppressed IBDV replication, while blockage of the endogenous gga-miR-155 by inhibitors enhanced IBDV replication. Furthermore, our data showed that gga-miR-155 enhanced the expression of type I interferon in DF-1 cells post IBDV infection. Importantly, we found that gga-miR-155 enhanced type I interferon expression via targeting SOCS1 and TANK, two negative regulators of type I IFN signaling. These results indicate that gga-miR-155 plays a critical role in cell response to IBDV infection.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 32%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 5%
Chemistry 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 37%
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 07 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,468,008
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#6,076
of 6,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#293,869
of 332,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#96
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 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 6,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. 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 332,611 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 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.