4.6 Article

Integration targeting by avian sarcoma-leukosis virus and human immunodeficiency virus in the chicken genome

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
Volume 79, Issue 18, Pages 12035-12044

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.79.18.12035-12044.2005

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI52845, R01 AI052845, R01 AI034786, AI34786] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have analyzed the placement of sites of integration of avian sarcoma-leukosis virus (ASLV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) DNA in the draft chicken genome sequence, with the goals of assessing species-specific effects on integration and allowing comparison to the distribution of chicken endogenous retroviruses (ERVs). We infected chicken embryo fibroblasts (CEF) with ASLV or HIV and sequenced 863 junctions between host and viral DNA. The relationship with cellular gene activity was analyzed by transcriptional profiling of uninfected or ASLV-infected CEF cells. ASLV weakly favored integration in active transcription units (TUs), and HIV strongly favored active TUs, trends seen previously for integration in human cells. The ERVs, in contrast, accumulated mostly outside TUs, including ERVs related to ASLV. The minority of ERVs present within TUs were mainly in the antisense orientation; consequently, the viral splicing and polyadenylation signals would not disrupt cellular mRNA synthesis. In contrast, de novo ASLV integration sites within TUs showed no orientation bias. Comparing the distribution of de novo ASLV integration sites to ERVs indicated that purifying selection against gene disruption, and not initial integration targeting, probably determined the ERV distribution. Further analysis indicated that ERVs in humans, mice, and rats showed similar distributions, suggesting purifying selection dictated their distributions as well.

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