4.6 Article

Identification and characterization of two closely related unclassifiable endogenous retroviruses in pythons (Python molurus and Python curtus)

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
Volume 76, Issue 15, Pages 7607-7615

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.76.15.7607-7615.2002

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Boid inclusion body disease (BIBD) is a fatal disorder of boid snakes that is suspected to be caused by a retrovirus. In order to identify this agent, leukocyte cultures (established from Python molurus specimens with symptoms of BIBD or kept together with such diseased animals) were assessed for reverse transcriptase (RT) activity. Virus from cultures exhibiting high RT activity was banded on sucrose density gradients, and the RT peak fraction was subjected to highly efficient procedures for the identification of unknown particle-associated retroviral RNA. A 7-kb full retroviral sequence was identified, cloned, and sequenced. This virus contained intact open reading frames (ORFs) for gag, pro, pol, and env, as well as another ORF of unknown function within pol. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the virus is distantly related to viruses from both the B and D types and the mammalian C type but cannot be classified. It is present as a highly expressed endogenous retrovirus in all P. molurus individuals; a closely related, but much less expressed virus was found in all tested Python curtus individuals. All other boid snakes tested, including Python regius, Python reticulatus, Boa constrictor, Eunectes notaeus, and Morelia spilota, were virus negative, independent of whether they had BIBD or not. Virus isolated from P. molurus could not be transmitted to the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of B. constrictor or P. regius. Thus, there is no indication that this novel virus, which we propose to name python endogenous retrovirus (PyERV), is causally linked with BIBD.

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