4.6 Article

Influenza A Virus Encoding Secreted Gaussia Luciferase as Useful Tool to Analyze Viral Replication and Its Inhibition by Antiviral Compounds and Cellular Proteins

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097695

关键词

-

资金

  1. Leibniz Graduate School EIDIS
  2. Leibniz Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reporter genes inserted into viral genomes enable the easy and rapid quantification of virus replication, which is instrumental to efficient in vitro screening of antiviral compounds or in vivo analysis of viral spread and pathogenesis. Based on a published design, we have generated several replication competent influenza A viruses carrying either fluorescent proteins or Gaussia luciferase. Reporter activity could be readily quantified in infected cultures, but the virus encoding Gaussia luciferase was more stable than viruses bearing fluorescent proteins and was therefore analyzed in detail. Quantification of Gaussia luciferase activity in the supernatants of infected culture allowed the convenient and highly sensitive detection of viral spread, and enzymatic activity correlated with the number of infectious particles released from infected cells. Furthermore, the Gaussia luciferase encoding virus allowed the sensitive quantification of the antiviral activity of the neuraminidase inhibitor (NAI) zanamivir and the host cell interferon-inducible transmembrane (IFITM) proteins 1-3, which are known to inhibit influenza virus entry. Finally, the virus was used to demonstrate that influenza A virus infection is sensitive to a modulator of endosomal cholesterol, in keeping with the concept that IFITMs inhibit viral entry by altering cholesterol levels in the endosomal membrane. In sum, we report the characterization of a novel influenza A reporter virus, which allows fast and sensitive detection of viral spread and its inhibition, and we show that influenza A virus entry is sensitive to alterations of endosomal cholesterol levels.

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