In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

[Q]: The infectious autopsy is the postmortem examination of a decedent who is likely to have a serious infectious disease that can be transmitted at autopsy. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), viral hepatitis B and C, and tuberculosis infections are common in forensic autopsy populations. Autopsy and laboratory personnel are at risk for acquiring these postmortem infections. As the autopsy often is essential to determine the cause and manner of death and/or help the living, the use of certain standard precautions can minimize the risk of occupational infections. This chapter reviews frequently encountered occupational infections and provides preventive measures including postexposure management.
[A]: Autopsy: Infectious and Serious Communicable Diseases


[Q]: We previously identified unusual variants of Moloney and Friend ecotropic mouse gammaretroviruses that have altered host range and are cytopathic in cells of the wild mouse species Mus dunni. Cytopathicity was attributed to different amino acid substitutions at the same critical env residue involved in receptor interaction: S82F in the Moloney variant Spl574, and S84A in the Friend mouse leukemia virus F-S MLV. Because M. dunni cells carry a variant CAT-1 cell surface virus receptor (dCAT-1), we examined the role of this receptor variant in cytopathicity and host range. We expressed dCAT-1 or mCAT-1 of NIH 3T3 origin in cells that are not normally infectible with ecotropic MLVs and evaluated the transfectants for susceptibility to virus infection and to virus-induced syncytium formation. The dCAT-1 transfectants, but not the mCAT-1 transfectants, were susceptible to virus-induced cytopathicity, and this cytopathic response was accompanied by the accumulation of unintegrated viral DNA. The dCAT-1 transfectants, however, did not also reproduce the relative resistance of M. dunni cells to Moloney MLV, and the mCAT-1 transfectants did not show the relative resistance of NIH 3T3 cells to Spl574. Western analysis, use of glycosylation inhibitors and mutagenesis to remove receptor glycosylation sites identified a possible role for cell-specific glycosylation in the modulation of virus entry. Virus entry and virus-induced syncytium formation using the CAT-1 receptor are mediated by a small number of critical amino acid residues in receptor and virus Env. Virus entry is modulated by glycosylation of cellular proteins, and this effect is cell and virus-specific.
[A]: Role of receptor polymorphism and glycosylation in syncytium induction and host range variation of ecotropic mouse gammaretroviruses


[Q]: Background: A broad spectrum of pathogens is causative for respiratory tract infections, but symptoms are mostly similar. Therefore, the identification of the causative viruses and bacteria is only feasible using multiplex PCR or several monoplex PCR tests in parallel. Methods: The analytical sensitivity of three multiplex PCR assays, RespiFinder-19, RespiFinder-SMART-22 and xTAG-Respiratory-Virus-Panel-Fast-Assay (RVP), were compared to monoplex real-time PCR with quantified standardized control material. All assays include the most common respiratory pathogens. Results: To compare the analytical sensitivity of the multiplex assays, samples were inoculated with 13 different quantified viruses in the range of 10 1 to 10 5 copies/ml. Concordant results were received for rhinovirus, whereas the RVP detected influenzavirus, RSV and hMPV more frequently in low concentrations. The RespiFinder-19 and the RespiFinder-SMART-22 showed a higher analytical sensitivity for adenoviruses and coronaviruses, whereas the RVP was incapable to detect adenovirus and coronavirus in concentrations of 10 4 copies/ml. The RespiFinder-19 and RespiFinder-SMART-22A did not detect influenzaviruses (10 4 copies/ml) and RSV (10 3 copies/ml). The detection of all 13 viruses in one sample was only achieved using monoplex PCR. To analyze possible competitive amplification reactions between the different viruses, samples were further inoculated with only 4 different viruses in one sample. Compared to the detection of 13 viruses in parallel, only a few differences were found. The incidence of respiratory viruses was compared in tracheal secretion (TS) samples (n = 100) of mechanically ventilated patients in winter (n = 50) and summer (n = 50). In winter, respiratory viruses were detected in 32 TS samples (64%) by RespiFinder-19, whereas the detection rate with RVP was only 22%. The most frequent viruses were adenovirus (32%) and PIV-2 (20%). Multiple infections were detected in 16 TS samples (32%) by RespiFinder-19. Fewer infections were found in summer (RespiFinder-19: 20%; RVP: 6%). All positive results were verified using monoplex PCR. Conclusions: Multiplex PCR tests have a broad spectrum of pathogens to test at a time. Analysis of multiple inoculated samples revealed a different focus of the detected virus types by the three assays. Analysis of clinical samples showed a high concordance of detected viruses by the RespiFinder-19 compared to monoplex tests.
[A]:
Comparison of three multiplex PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viral infections: evaluation of xTAG respiratory virus panel fast assay, RespiFinder 19 assay and RespiFinder SMART 22 assay