4.6 Article

Human cytomegalovirus with IE-2 (UL122) deleted fails to express early lytic genes

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 75, 期 4, 页码 1870-1878

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.75.4.1870-1878.2001

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Much evidence suggests that the major immediate early (IE) transactivator of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), IE-2, is likely to be critical for efficient viral replication; however, the lack of an IE-2 mutant HCMV has precluded an experimental test of this hypothesis. As an initial step toward characterizing an IE-2 mutant, we first cloned the HCMV Towne genome as a bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) and analyzed the ability of transfected Tonne-BAC DNA (T-BACwt) to produce plaques following introduction into permissive human fibroblasts. Like Towne viral DNA, transfected T-BACwt DNA was infectious in permissive cells, and the resulting virus stocks were indistinguishable from Towne virus. We then used homologous recombination in Escherichia coli to delete the majority of UL122, the open reading frame encoding the unique portion of IE-2, from T-BACwt. From this deleted BAG, a third BAC clone in which the deletion was repaired with wild-type UL122 was created. In numerous transfections of permissive human foreskin fibroblast cells with these three BAC DNA clones, the rescued BAC and T-BACwt consistently yielded plaques, while the UL122 mutant BAC never generated plaques, even after 4 weeks. Protein and mRNA of other IE genes were readily detected from transfected UL122 mutant BAC DNA; however, reverse transcription-PCR failed to detect mRNA expression from any of five early genes examined. The generalized failure of this mutant to express early genes is consistent with expectations from in vitro assays which have demonstrated that IE-2 transactivates most HCMV promoters. These experiments provide the first direct demonstration that IE-2 is required for successful HCMV infection and indicate that virus lacking IE-2 arrests early in the replication cycle.

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