4.8 Article

Discovery of insect and human dengue virus host factors

期刊

NATURE
卷 458, 期 7241, 页码 1047-1050

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature07967

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [RO1 GM067761, R21-AI64925, 5U54-AI057157-05S, 1RO1AI076442, 1R01AI061576-01, 1SA0RR024572-1]
  2. American Society of Microbiology
  3. Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute
  4. North Carolina Biotechnology Center
  5. Duke Center for RNA Biology
  6. Duke University School of Medicine
  7. Institute of Genome Sciences and Policy
  8. Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center [5P30-CA14236]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dengue fever is the most frequent arthropod-borne viral disease of humans, with almost half of the world's population at risk of infection(1). The high prevalence, lack of an effective vaccine, and absence of specific treatment conspire to make dengue fever a global public health threat(1,2). Given their compact genomes, dengue viruses (DENV-1-4) and other flaviviruses probably require an extensive number of host factors; however, only a limited number of human, and an even smaller number of insect host factors, have been identified(3-10). Here we identify insect host factors required for DENV-2 propagation, by carrying out a genome-wide RNA interference screen in Drosophila melanogaster cells using a well-established 22,632 double-stranded RNA library. This screen identified 116 candidate dengue virus host factors (DVHFs). Although some were previously associated with flaviviruses (for example, V-ATPases and alpha-glucosidases)(3-5,7,9,10), most of the DVHFs were newly implicated in dengue virus propagation. The dipteran DVHFs had 82 readily recognizable human homologues and, using a targeted short-interfering-RNA screen, we showed that 42 of these are human DVHFs. This indicates notable conservation of required factors between dipteran and human hosts. This work suggests new approaches to control infection in the insect vector and the mammalian host.

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

4.8
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