4.5 Article

Analysis of cellular proteome alterations in porcine alveolar macrophage cells infected with 2009 (H1N1) and classical swine H1N1 influenza viruses

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS
卷 75, 期 6, 页码 1732-1741

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2011.12.012

关键词

H1N1/2009; Pandemic; Proteomics; Virulence

资金

  1. China National Basic Research Program (China 973 Program) [2011CB505004, 2010CB534002]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31072154, 30800832]
  3. National Transgenic Major Program [2009ZX08009-141B]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The H1N1/2009 influenza virus has the potential to cause a human pandemic, and sporadic cases of human-to-pig transmission have been reported. In this study, two influenza viruses were isolated from pigs. A phylogenetic analysis showed that the A/swine/NanChang/F9/2010(H1N1) (F9/10) strain shared a high degree of homology with the pandemic H1N1/2009 virus, and A/swine/GuangDong/34/2006 (H1N1) (34/06) strains was a classical swine influenza virus. A proteomic analysis was performed to investigate possible alterations of protein expression in porcine alveolar macrophage (PAM) cells infected by the F9/10 and 34/06 viruses over different time courses. Using 2-DE in association with MALDI-TOF MS/MS, we identified 13 up-regulated and 21 down-regulated protein spots, including cytoskeleton proteins, cellular signal transduction proteins, molecular biosynthesis proteins and heat shock proteins. The most significant changes in the infected cells were associated with molecular biosynthesis proteins and heat shock proteins. We analysed the biological characteristics of the F9/10 and 34/06 viruses in vivo and in vitro. The F9/10 virus showed greater pathogenicity than the 34/06 virus in PAM cells and mice. This study provides insights into the biologic characteristics, potential virulence alteration and cross-species transmission mechanisms of the pandemic H1N1/2009. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据