4.6 Article

A Conserved Phenylalanine Residue of Autographa Californica Multiple Nucleopolyhedrovirus AC75 Protein Is Required for Occlusion Body Formation

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.663506

关键词

Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus; AC75; Phe-54; budded virus; occlusion body

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFE0121900]
  2. WIV One-Three-Five strategic program [Y602111SA1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified Phe-54 as a crucial residue in AC75 protein for viral propagation and occlusion body formation in AcMNPV, whereas Gln-81 does not play a role in viral propagation. Additionally, the Phe-54 mutation affects AC75 stability and polyhedrin assembly.
Autographa californica multiple nucleopolyhedrovirus (AcMNPV) orf75 (ac75) is a highly conserved gene that is essential for AcMNPV propagation. However, the key domains or residues of the AC75 protein that play a role in viral propagation have not been identified. In this study, sequence alignment revealed that residues Phe-54 and Gln-81 of AC75 were highly conserved among alphabaculoviruses and betabaculoviurses. Thus, Phe-54 and Gln-81 AC75 mutation bacmids were constructed. We found that Gln-81 was not required for viral propagation, whereas mutating Phe-54 reduced budded virus production by 10-fold and impaired occlusion body formation when compared with that of the wild-type AcMNPV. Electron microscopy observations showed that the Phe-54 mutation affected polyhedrin assembly and also occlusion-derived virus embedding, whereas western blot analysis revealed that mutating Phe-54 reduced the amount of AC75 but did not affect the localization of AC75 in infected cells. A protein stability assay showed that the Phe-54 mutation affected AC75 stability. Taken together, Phe-54 was identified as an important residue of AC75, and ac75 is a pivotal gene in budding virus production and occlusion body formation.

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