Celeste Kidd and Steven Piantadosi had sued the university over its handling of sexual harassment allegations made against colleague Florian Jaeger.
The poxvirus stockpiles genes when it needs to adapt.
December 1, 2012|
© SPL/SCIENCE SOURCE
N.C. Elde et al., “Poxviruses deploy genomic accordions to adapt rapidly against host antiviral defenses,” Cell, 150:831-41, 2012.
Double-stranded DNA viruses, such as poxviruses, were thought to mutate slowly despite keeping pace with rapidly shifting host defenses. Now, Harmit Malik at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and colleagues have found that poxviruses expand their genome—making duplicate copies of genes—which allows more beneficial mutations to arise and hastens adaptive viral offensives.
The war zone
Nels Elde, at the time a postdoc in Malik’s lab, grew vaccinia virus in unfavorable conditions, namely in human cells that produced a viral inhibitor named protein kinase R (PKR). Although vaccinia virus carries a gene for one version of a PKR antagonist called K3L—a protein that usually undermines the inhibitory action of the kinase—this version was poorly adapted to the PKR in Elde’s cells. “We just asked the virus, ‘What do you do, how do you solve that puzzle?’” says Elde, now an assistant professor at the University of Utah.
After several poor passages in the unfavorable cell line, the poxvirus’s replication picked up. The team sequenced the viral genome, finding it up to 7–10 percent larger, with a spike in number of gene copies that encode K3L—and a helpful point mutation in some copies. When they subsequently grew the adapted virus in a hamster cell line—in which viral K3L functions effectively—the genome shrank again.
This could be the end of a theoretical battle, says University of California, Davis, microbiologist John Roth, who was not involved in the study. Instead of the old theory that organisms might speed up mutation rates, this suggests “they exploit this natural system to get enough targets at the same old mutation rate,” he says.
February 11, 2013
To Dave20640, 65% is the proportion of the 2,000 retracted articles, not of all articles published. If 200,000 articles were published, that would be only 2/3 of one percent of all articles published; not a stunning number. I didn't see anything in the article (or the linked material) that indicated whether 2,000 was large or not, by comparison. What perplexes me is that these people think they are not going to get caught. That makes me wonder if there's a lot more going on than we know about, that they do know about. I then wonder why we don't see, in these reports, information that they were asked if, in their experience, this kind of behavior is widespread. Not that we would necessarily be confident about the veracity of their observations. kredi hesaplama-evim şahane - fragman izle - mobilya modelleri