Extended data Figure 8. Analysis of CG-suppression in previously reported ZAP-sensitive and ZAP-resistant viruses and ZAP-sensitizing elements.

a, CG suppression in RNA and reverse transcribing viruses previously reported to be ZAP sensitive (n=9, open symbols) and ZAP resistant (n=4, filled symbols) ^7,17–20. The viruses included in the analysis and their degrees of CG suppression (CG observed/expected) are: ZAP-sensitive: Sinbis virus (0.90), Semliki forest Virus (0.89), Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (0.76), Ebolavirus (0.60), Hepatitis B virus (0.52), Moloney Murine Leukemia Virus (0.51), Marburg virus (0.53), Alphavirus M1 (0.89), Ross River Virus (0.82); ZAP-insensitive: HIV-1 (0.21), Yellow fever virus (0.38) Vesicular stomatitis virus (0.48) Poliovirus (0.54). The p value was calculated using the students T-test (2-sided, n=9 ZAP sensitive viruses and n=4 ZAP resistant viruses). Influenza virus (CG obs/exp = 0.44) that has been reported to be ZAP-resistant due to the presence of an antagonist²⁴ and ZAP-L sensitive via an entirely distinct protein interaction based mechanism²³ was excluded from this analysis. b, Analysis of previous published data on ZAP inhibition of reporter gene expression. Each RNA element derived from the indicated RNA viruses was placed in a 3′UTR of a luciferase reporter plasmid and fold inhibition by coexpressed ZAP is plotted against the product of CG suppression (CG observed/expected) and length for each RNA element. A data point that is a quantitative outlier from the general trend (indicated in red) is from the Sinbis (SINV) genome, but is nevertheless included in the linear regression analysis, P value was calculated using the F-test (2-sided, n=32 data points) Data are from references^{13 and18}.