4.6 Article

Effects of conserved RNA secondary structures on hepatitis delta virus genotype I RNA editing, replication, and virus production

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 79, 期 17, 页码 11187-11193

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.79.17.11187-11193.2005

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI042324, R01-AI42324] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RNA editing of the hepatitis delta virus (HDV) antigenome at the amber/NV site by the host RNA adenosine deaminase ADAR1 is a critical step in the HDV replication cycle. Editing is required for production of the viral protein hepatitis delta antigen long form (HDAg-L), which is necessary for viral particle production but can inhibit HDV RNA replication. The RNA secondary structural features in ADAR1 substrates are not completely defined, but base pairing in the 20-nucleotide (nt) region 3' of editing sites is thought to be important. The 25-nt region 3' of the HDV amber/W site in HDV genotype I RNA consists of a conserved secondary structure that is mostly base paired but also has asymmetric internal loops and single-base bulges. To understand the effect of this 3' region on the HDV replication cycle, mutations that either increase or decrease base pairing in this region were created and the effects of these changes on amber/NV site editing, RNA replication, and virus production were studied. Increased base pairing, particularly in the region 15 to 25 nt 3' of the editing site, significantly increased editing; disruption of base pairing in this region had little effect. Increased editing resulted in a dramatic inhibition of HDV RNA synthesis, mostly due to excess HDAg-L production. Although virus production at early times was unaffected by this reduced RNA replication, at later times it was significantly reduced. Therefore, it appears that the conserved RNA secondary structure around the HDV genotype I amber/W site has been selected not for the highest editing efficiency but for optimal viral replication and secretion.

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