In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Introduction-HIV-1 uses a programmed -1 ribosomal frameshift to generate Gag-Pol, the precursor of its enzymes, when its full-length mRNA is translated by the ribosomes of the infected cells. This change in the reading frame occurs at a so-called slippery sequence that is followed by a specific secondary structure, the frameshift stimulatory signal. This signal controls the frameshift efficiency. The synthesis of HIV-1 enzymes is critical for the virus replication and therefore, the -1 ribosomal frameshift could be the target of novel antiviral drugs. Areas covered-This review examines various approaches used to select drugs interfering with the -1 frameshift of HIV-1. These include the selection and modification of chemical compounds that specifically bind to the frameshift stimulatory signal, the use of antisense oligonucleotides targeting this signal and the selection of compounds that modulate HIV-1 frameshift, by using bicistronic reporters where the expression of the second cistron depends upon HIV-1 frameshift. Expert opinion-The most promising approach is the selection and modification of compounds specifically targeting HIV-1 frameshift stimulatory signal. The use of antisense oligonucleotides binding to the frameshift stimulatory signal is still questionable. The use of bicistronic reporters preferentially selects compounds that modulate the frameshift by targeting the ribosomes, which is less promising. 
 Title: Targeting frameshifting in the human immunodeficiency virus

Output: True


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The majority of human emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) are zoonotic, with viruses originating in wild mammals of particular concern (e.g. HIV, Ebola, SARS) 1-3 . Understanding patterns of viral diversity in wildlife and determinants of successful cross-species transmission, or spillover, are therefore key goals for pandemic surveillance programs 4 . However, few analytical tools exist to identify which host species likely harbor the next human virus, or which viruses can cross species boundaries 5-7 . Here we conduct the most comprehensive analysis yet of mammalian hostvirus relationships and show that both the total number of viruses that infect a given species, and the proportion likely to be zoonotic are predictable. After controlling for research effort, the proportion of zoonotic viruses per species is predicted by phylogenetic relatedness to humans, host taxonomy, and human population within a species range -which may reflect human-wildlife contact. We demonstrate for the first time that bats harbor a significantly higher proportion of zoonotic viruses than all other mammalian orders. We identify the taxa and geographic regions with the largest estimated number of 'missing viruses' and 'missing zoonoses' and therefore of highest value for future surveillance. We then show that phylogenetic host breadth and other viral traits are significant predictors of zoonotic potential, providing a novel framework to assess if a newly discovered mammalian virus could infect people. Viral zoonoses are a serious threat to public health and global security, and have caused the majority of recent pandemics in people 4 , yet our understanding of the factors driving viral diversity in mammals, viral host range, and cross-species transmission to humans remain nascent. Recent studies have described broad patterns of pathogen host range 1,3 and various host or microbial factors that facilitate cross-species transmission 5,7,8 , or have focused on Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature. All datasets (host traits, viral traits, full list of host-virus associations and associated references, phylogenetic trees, and phylogenetic distance matrices) along with the R code and R package dependencies needed to fully replicate and evaluate these analyses are provided at http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.569079. The top-level README.txt file in the directory details the file structure and metadata provided. 
 Title: Host and viral traits predict zoonotic spillover from mammals HHS Public Access

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Adult honey bees harbor a specialized gut microbiota of relatively low complexity. While 25 seasonal differences in community composition have been reported, previous studies have 26 focused on compositional changes rather than differences in absolute bacterial loads. 27 Moreover, little is known about the gut microbiota of winter bees, which live much longer 28 than bees during the foraging season, and which are critical for colony survival. We 29 quantified seven core members of the bee gut microbiota in a single colony over two years 30 and characterized the community composition in 14 colonies during summer and winter. Our data shows that total bacterial loads substantially differ between foragers, nurses, and 32 winter bees. Long-lived winter bees had the highest bacterial loads and the lowest 33 community α-diversity, with a characteristic shift towards high levels of Bartonella and 34 Commensalibacter, and a reduction of opportunistic colonizers. Using gnotobiotic bee 35 experiments, we show that diet is a major contributor to the observed differences in 36 bacterial loads. Overall, our study reveals that the gut microbiota of winter bees is 37 remarkably different from foragers and nurses. Considering the importance of winter bees 38 for colony survival, future work should focus on the role of the gut microbiota in winter 39 bee health and disease. 40 41 . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license author/funder. It is made available under a The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed) is the . https://doi.org/10.1101/703512 doi: bioRxiv preprint 42 The European honey bee, Apis mellifera, is an important pollinator species for natural 43 ecosystems and agricultural production [1]. Its health status is threatened by numerous 44 factors including habitat loss, pesticide exposure, and high parasite and pathogen loads [2-45 4]. Accumulating evidence suggests that the gut microbiota of adult honey bees plays a 46 critical role for bee health [5]. The bee microbiota converts dietary compounds [6, 7] and 47 produces short chain fatty acids [8] in the gut, enhances sucrose responsiveness of the host 48 [8], and stimulates the immune system [9, 10]. Moreover, disruption of the gut microbiota 49 composition by antibiotic treatment, pesticide exposure, or dietary manipulations has 50 been associated with increased pathogen loads resulting in increased host mortality [11-51 14]. 52 A striking feature of the honey bee gut microbiota is its low taxonomic complexity. In 53 worker bees, the community is dominated by less than ten phylotypes (i.e. clusters of 54 strains sharing ≥97% sequence identity in the 16S rRNA gene), which typically make up 55 >95% of the bacterial cells in the gut [5, 15-18]. These phylotypes have been consistently 56 detected in honey bees, regardless of geographic location, life stage, or season [16, 19, 20], 57 and are acquired horizontally through contact with nest mates and hive components [21]. 58 They include five core phylotypes (Gilliamella, Snodgrassella, Lactobacillus Firm-4 and 59 Firm-5, and Bifidobacterium), which are typically present in every adult worker bee, and a 60 number of non-core phylotypes, e.g. Frischella, Bartonella, Commensalibacter, or 61 Bombella, which are prevalent across colonies, but not necessarily present in every bee 62 [22]. Additional phylotypes have been detected, including Lactobacillus kunkeii, Serratia Page 4 of 44 marcescens and other Enterobacteriaceae, or Apibacter, but they typically account for a 64 relatively small proportion of the bee gut microbiota [23]. 65 While many of these phylotypes are consistently present in adult worker bees, their 66 abundance can vary across bees, and may differentially impact the host physiology. 67 Particularly, the type and amount of nutrients (i.e. pollen and nectar) available during the 68 foraging season can have profound effects on the composition of the gut microbiota and 69 may alter its metabolic activity [24]. Likewise, distinct dietary habits or variation in lifespan 70 of worker bees during summer and winter may influence gut microbiota composition. From 71 spring to autumn, young worker bees (nurses) stay inside the hive to take care of larvae, 72 and feed on nutrient-rich pollen, whereas older worker bees become foragers that feed on 73 nectar and honey to fuel their energy-expensive flights [25]. In late autumn, newly emerged 74 adult worker bees become winter bees (also called 'diutinus') that have an extended 75 lifespan (~6 months) and that ensure the colony survival during the cold winter season in 76 the absence of brood [26]. These bees form a tight cluster for thermoregulation inside the 77 hive, feed strictly on food stores (pollen, beebread, and honey) and retain their feces all 78 winter [27], which is likely to impact the ecology of their gut microbiota. 79 A number of studies have looked at the gut microbiota composition of different worker bee 80 types or throughout seasons, with the overall conclusion that the community composition 81 is relatively stable [19, 28-31]. However, previous studies were mostly based on 82 comparative analyses of relative community member abundance using 16S rRNA amplicon 83 sequencing. Such analysis cannot provide insights about the extent or directionality of 84 changes in taxa abundance, especially if microbial loads vary substantially between 85 samples [32]. In fact, a change in the total abundance of the microbiota could by itself be 86 . the single bee hive, each gut sample was placed in a drop of PBS, scored for the scab 132 phenotype [35], and placed in a bead beating tube containing ~150 mg of glass beads (0.75-133 
 Title: Gut microbiota structure differs between honey


Output: False