4.2 Article

Biophysical and enzymatic properties of the simian and prototype foamy virus reverse transcriptases

期刊

RETROVIROLOGY
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1742-4690-7-5

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG [Re627/8-1, SFB 479, Wo630/7-3]
  2. Graduate School in the Elite Network of Bavaria Lead Structures of Cell Functions
  3. University of Bayreuth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The foamy virus Pol protein is translated independently from Gag using a separate mRNA. Thus, in contrast to orthoretroviruses no Gag-Pol precursor protein is synthesized. Only the integrase domain is cleaved off from Pol resulting in a mature reverse transcriptase harboring the protease domain at the N-terminus (PR-RT). Although the homology between the PR-RTs from simian foamy virus from macaques (SFVmac) and the prototype foamy virus (PFV), probably originating from chimpanzee, exceeds 90%, several differences in the biophysical and biochemical properties of the two enzymes have been reported (i.e. SFVmac develops resistance to the nucleoside inhibitor azidothymidine (AZT) whereas PFV remains AZT sensitive even if the resistance mutations from SFVmac PR-RT are introduced into the PFV PR-RT gene). Moreover, contradictory data on the monomer/dimer status of the foamy virus protease have been published. Results: We set out to purify and directly compare the monomer/dimer status and the enzymatic behavior of the two wild type PR-RT enzymes from SFVmac and PFV in order to get a better understanding of the protein and enzyme functions. We determined kinetic parameters for the two enzymes, and we show that PFV PR-RT is also a monomeric protein. Conclusions: Our data show that the PR-RTs from SFV and PFV are monomeric proteins with similar biochemical and biophysical properties that are in some aspects comparable with MLV RT, but differ from those of HIV-1 RT. These differences might be due to the different conditions the viruses are confronted with in dividing and nondividing cells.

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

4.2
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