4.6 Article

A Critical Determinant of Neurological Disease Associated with Highly Pathogenic Tick-Borne Flavivirus in Mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 10, Pages 5406-5420

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00421-14

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Sciences, and Technology of Japan
  2. Health Sciences Grants for Research on Emerging and Reemerging Infectious Disease
  3. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan
  4. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [HHSN272200200016I]
  5. [24780293]
  6. [22780268]
  7. [21405035]
  8. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26660220, 25450417] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV) and Omsk hemorrhagic fever virus (OHFV) are highly pathogenic tick-borne flaviviruses; TBEV causes neurological disease in humans, while OHFV causes a disease typically identified with hemorrhagic fever. Although TBEV and OHFV are closely related genetically, the viral determinants responsible for these distinct disease phenotypes have not been identified. In this study, chimeric viruses incorporating components of TBEV and OHFV were generated using infectious clone technology, and their pathological characteristics were analyzed in a mouse model to identify virus-specific determinants of disease. We found that only four amino acids near the C terminus of the NS5 protein were primarily responsible for the development of neurological disease. Mutation of these four amino acids had no effect on viral replication or histopathological features, including inflammatory responses, in mice. These findings suggest a critical role for NS5 in stimulating neuronal dysfunction and degeneration following TBEV infection and provide new insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of tick-borne flaviviruses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available