4.6 Article

Infectious Lassa Virus, but Not Filoviruses, Is Restricted by BST-2/Tetherin

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 84, 期 20, 页码 10569-10580

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00103-10

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Joint Science and Technology Office for Chemical and Biological Defense [4.10022_08_RD_B]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bone marrow stromal antigen 2 (BST-2/tetherin) is a cellular membrane protein that inhibits the release of HIV-1. We show for the first time, using infectious viruses, that BST-2 also inhibits egress of arenaviruses but has no effect on filovirus replication and spread. Specifically, infectious Lassa virus (LASV) release significantly decreased or increased in human cells in which BST-2 was either stably expressed or knocked down, respectively. In contrast, replication and spread of infectious Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV) and Lake Victoria marburgvirus (MARV) were not affected by these conditions. Replication of infectious Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) and cowpox virus (CPXV) was also not affected by BST-2 expression. Elevated cellular levels of human or murine BST-2 inhibited the release of virus-like particles (VLPs) consisting of the matrix proteins of multiple highly virulent NIAID Priority Pathogens, including arenaviruses (LASV and Machupo virus [MACV]), filoviruses (ZEBOV and MARV), and paramyxoviruses (Nipah virus). Although the glycoproteins of filoviruses counteracted the antiviral activity of BST-2 in the context of VLPs, they could not rescue arenaviral (LASV and MACV) VLP release upon BST-2 overexpression. Furthermore, we did not observe colocalization of filoviral glycoproteins with BST-2 during infection with authentic viruses. None of the arenavirus-encoded proteins rescued budding of VLPs in the presence of BST-2. Our results demonstrate that BST-2 might be a broad antiviral factor with the ability to restrict release of a wide variety of human pathogens. However, at least filoviruses, RVFV, and CPXV are immune to its inhibitory effect.

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

4.6
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