4.6 Article

Visualizing Sacbrood Virus of Honey Bees via Transformation and Coupling with Enhanced Green Fluorescent Protein

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v12020224

关键词

Chinese Sacbrood; iflavirus; cloned virus; expression tag; 3 '-UTR

类别

资金

  1. Fujian Provincial Department of Science and Technology [2018J01597, 2016I0002]
  2. Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System of China [CARS-45-KXJ3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sacbrood virus (SBV) of honey bees is a picornavirus in the genus Iflavirus. Given its relatively small and simple genome structure, single positive-strand RNA with only one ORF, cloning the full genomic sequence is not difficult. However, adding nonsynonymous mutations to the bee iflavirus clone is difficult because of the lack of information about the viral protein processes. Furthermore, the addition of a reporter gene to the clones has never been accomplished. In preliminary trials, we found that the site between 3 ' untranslated region (UTR) and poly(A) can retain added sequences. We added enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) expression at this site, creating a SBV clone with an expression tag that does not affect virus genes. An intergenic region internal ribosome entry site (IRES) from Black queen cell virus (BQCV) was inserted to initiate EGFP expression. The SBV-IRES-EGFP clone successfully infected Apis cerana and Apis mellifera, and in A. cerana larvae, it was isolated and passaged using oral inoculation. The inoculated larvae had higher mortality and the dead larvae showed sacbrood symptoms. The added IRES-EGFP remained in the clone through multiple passages and expressed the expected EGFP in all infected bees. We demonstrated the ability to add gene sequences in the site between 3 '-UTR and poly(A) in SBV and the potential to do so in other bee iflaviruses; however, further investigations of the mechanisms are needed. A clone with a desired protein expression reporter will be a valuable tool in bee virus studies.

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