4.6 Article

Generation and Characterization of a Replication-Competent Human Adenovirus Type 55 Encoding EGFP

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v15051192

关键词

human adenovirus type 55; infectious clone; reporter virus; enhanced GFP; replication-competent; homologous recombination

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a full-length infectious cDNA clone of human adenovirus 55 (HAdV-55) was constructed using a bacteria-mediated recombination approach. The green fluorescent protein expression cassette was then inserted to obtain a recombinant virus. The recombinant virus can be used for neutralizing antibody testing and antiviral screening.
Human adenovirus 55 (HAdV-55) has recently caused outbreaks of acute respiratory disease (ARD), posing a significant public threat to civilians and military trainees. Efforts to develop antiviral inhibitors and quantify neutralizing antibodies require an experimental system to rapidly monitor viral infections, which can be achieved through the use of a plasmid that can produce an infectious virus. Here, we used a bacteria-mediated recombination approach to construct a full-length infectious cDNA clone, pAd55-FL, containing the whole genome of HadV-55. Then, the green fluorescent protein expression cassette was assembled into pAd55-FL to replace the E3 region to obtain a recombinant plasmid of pAd55-dE3-EGFP. The rescued recombinant virus rAdv55-dE3-EGFP is genetically stable and replicates similarly to the wild-type virus in cell culture. The virus rAdv55-dE3-EGFP can be used to quantify neutralizing antibody activity in sera samples, producing results in concordance with the cytopathic effect (CPE)-based microneutralization assay. Using an rAdv55-dE3-EGFP infection of A549 cells, we showed that the assay could be used for antiviral screening. Our findings suggest that the rAdv55-dE3-EGFP-based high-throughput assay provides a reliable tool for rapid neutralization testing and antiviral screening for HAdV-55.

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