免疫抑制剂地塞米松可明显延长乙型肝炎病毒抗原在水动力法转染HBV小鼠模型中的表达

建立基于高压水动力法的乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)转染小鼠模型,并进一步建立和优化乙肝动物模型研究方法。首先构建了含腺相关病毒倒转末端重复序列元件与包含1.3个拷贝HBV基因组(ayw亚型)的HBV表达质粒(pAAV-HBV1.3);并将pAAV-HBV1.3质粒经高压水动力法尾静脉注射C57BL/6小鼠,不同时间点采集血液和肝组织标本,ELISA检测血清HBsAg、HBeAg表达;Real-time PCR检测血清及肝组织病毒载量;HE染色、免疫组化染色检测肝组织病理学改变及病毒抗原在肝组织中的定位及表达;最后采用免疫抑制剂地塞米松注射液(DEX)腹腔注射小鼠,建立免疫功能抑制小鼠模型,在此基础上制备乙肝病毒转染小鼠模型,并进行血清HBsAg、HBeAg检测。结果是正常免疫状态下,小鼠转染pAAV-HBV1.3 10d时血清及肝组织HBV相关抗原阳性,30d后HBV相关抗原检测阴性,但30d和60d血清及肝组织病毒载量检测均为阳性,且与对照组差异显著(P0.01,P0.05);经地塞米松注射后处于免疫抑制状态下的高压水动力法建立的乙肝病毒转染小鼠,则在60d仍可检测到HBsAg、HBeAg的表达。以上结果表明通过高压水动力法建立了急性乙肝小鼠模型,通过抑制小鼠免疫状态,可延长病毒在小鼠体内存留时间。该模型建立为HBV疫苗评价、药物开发及乙肝相关致病机理研究奠定了基础。     

NIRF在体内外可明显抑制乙型肝炎病毒抗原的表达

随着对NIRF（Np95/ICBP-90 like RING finger protein）研究的深入,其功能已涉及细胞癌变进程以及表观遗传学等领域. 近期研究显示,NIRF能与HBc (hepatitis B virus core protein )相互结合,但其对乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)抗原表达的影响尚不明确. 本文通过转染pAAV-HBV1.3质粒和高压水动力法尾静脉注射BALB/C小鼠,建立乙型肝炎病毒的细胞和动物模型,研究NIRF对乙型肝炎病毒抗原表达的影响. ELISA检测细胞上清和小鼠血清中HBsAg、HBeAg的分泌和表达情况,Western 印迹或免疫组化染色技术检测HBcAg. 结果显示,乙型肝炎病毒抗原分泌的细胞以及小动物模型建立成功,并且无论在体内外,NIRF都能对它们的表达起抑制作用,期待能为后续的HBV致病机理以及治疗药物的研究提供支持与帮助.     

应用慢病毒载体携带HBV基因组DNA制备乙型肝炎病毒感染小鼠模型的影响因素分析

应用慢病毒载体构建不同HBV转导质粒,通过高压水动力法尾静脉注射小鼠,比较不同HBV转导质粒、剂量(5μg和10μg)、小鼠品系(Balb/c和C57BL/6)及鼠龄(6周龄和18周龄)对建立HBV感染模型的影响。不同的时间点尾静脉采血,ELISA检测血清HBsAg、HBeAg的表达水平及动力变化,Real-time PCR检测血清及肝组织病毒载量;免疫组织化学法检测肝组织HBcAg的定位与表达。1.3倍HBV基因组慢病毒载体转导质粒(pCSHBV1.3)优于1.1倍与1.2倍HBV基因组转导质粒(pCS-HBV1.1or pCS-HBV1.2);pCS-HBV1.3注射Balb/c小鼠后抗原表达维持时间短,抗体出现早;pCS-HBV1.3注射C57BL/6小鼠后,HBsAg、HBeAg抗原表达及血清HBV DNA水平维持时间长;且注射5μg质粒相对于10μg质粒注射小鼠后抗原表达维持时间更长;而6周龄和18周龄小鼠血清均可在较长时间内检测到HBsAg、HBeAg及HBV DNA的表达,但在注射后35周内,前者的表达量均高于后者;所有注射质粒的小鼠肝组织中均可检测到HBcAg的表达,且在血清HBV感染标志转阴时均可检测到肝内HBV DNA的存在。注射质粒的HBV基因组长度、剂量以及宿主的遗传背景均对建立乙肝成体转基因小鼠模型有影响,且发现以5μg含1.3倍HBV基因组的转导质粒pCS-HBV1.3注射6周龄C57BL/6小鼠,HBV抗原表达和HBV DNA水平维持时间长,更适合建立HBV持续感染模型。     

利用乙型肝炎病毒共价闭合环状DNA构建慢性乙型肝炎病毒感染的小鼠模型

目的通过水动力法注射乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)共价闭合环状DNA(cccDNA)构建C57BL/6小鼠慢性乙型肝炎病毒感染的模型。方法取29只C57BL/6小鼠,分为实验组、对照组和空白组,应用水动力法分别注射HBV cccDNA、pAAV-HBV1.2及等渗盐水,于注射后收集不同时间点的血清和肝组织。利用放射免疫法检测血清样本中乙型肝炎病毒表面抗原(HBsAg)和乙型肝炎病毒e抗原(HBeAg);荧光定量PCR检测血清和肝组织中HBV DNA拷贝数;免疫组织化学法检测肝组织中HBsAg和乙型肝炎病毒核心抗原(HBc Ag)的表达;苏木精-伊红(HE)染色观察肝组织病理变化;使用SPSS 17.0对数据进行统计学分析。结果实验组HBsAg和HBeAg表达均呈现4个上升-下降曲线:HBsAg峰值分别出现在第3天、第3周、第7周和第9周;HBeAg峰值分别出现在第1天、第1周、第4周和第10周。对照组HBsAg和HBeAg表达分别呈现2个或3个明显的峰:HBsAg峰值分别出现在第3天和第8周;HBeAg峰值分别出现在第1天、第3周和第10周。空白组未检测出HBsAg和HBeAg。实验组HBV DNA拷贝数高于对照组的拷贝数(P<0.01);肝组织中HBV DNA拷贝数高于同期血清中的拷贝数(P<0.01);实验组和对照组的肝组织中均有HBsAg和HBc Ag的表达;实验组与对照组出现肝脏细胞炎症、肝细胞纤维化、肝细胞坏死等病理变化,而空白组正常。结论利用水动力法向C57BL/6小鼠体内转入HBV cccDNA,成功建立了慢性乙型肝炎病毒感染的小鼠模型,与对照组比较,新建立的小鼠乙肝模型具有更高的HBV表达,动物模型为研究乙型肝炎病毒HBV cccDNA的感染及其引起肝损伤的机制奠定了基础。     

乙型肝炎病毒急性感染小鼠模型的建立

采用高压水注射方法,通过尾静脉将具有复制能力的HBV质粒导入BABL/cJ小鼠体内,应用real-timePCR、ELISA、RIA、Southern Blot、Northern Blot,以及免疫组化等方法,检测小鼠病毒血症、血清和肝组织中HBV抗原表达动态变化、肝组织中HBV转录和复制情况,以及小鼠免疫应答状况.结果HBV基因可以在小鼠体内表达和复制,并诱导小鼠产生特异性免疫应答,其应答模式及HBV清除过程与人类的HBV急性感染类似.实验显示高压注射具有复制能力的HBV质粒可以在小鼠体内建立HBV急性感染模型,这种模型可以用于HBV病毒学、免疫学以及抗病毒药物筛选等方面的研究.     

pRNA介导的RNA干扰抑制HBV表达和复制的研究

为了研究由pRNA携带的siRNA(HBVsi18-42)所介导的RNAi过程能有效地抑制HBV的基因表达和病毒复制,我们利用细胞模型和高压注射小鼠模型评价HBVsi18-42对HBV复制和基因表达的抑制作用.通过Western印迹检测细胞内的HBsAg含量,用ELISA检测细胞培养上清和小鼠血清中的HBsAg水平,采用Southern印迹检测HBV的复制中间体,通过免疫组织化学检测肝组织切片中HBcAg的表达情况.试验结果显示,HBVsi18-42能以剂量依赖的方式在293T细胞中抑制HBsAg的表达以及在HepG2细胞中下调病毒HBsAg和HBeAg的表达和病毒复制中间体的水平.在小鼠模型中,注射后的3d内HBVsi18-42使小鼠血清中HBsAg的水平分别下降了98.98%、77.07%和60.73%,免疫组织化学检测显示,在注射后的第3天小鼠肝组织内HBcAg阳性细胞数减少了79.1%.初步结果显示HBVsi18-42无论是在细胞或是在小鼠模型中都能下调HBV的复制和基因的表达.本研究为我们下一步实现由pRNA介导的靶向RNAi及基因治疗提供了理论和技术支持.     

乙型肝炎病毒急性感染小鼠模型的建立

采用高压水注射方法,通过尾静脉将具有复制能力的HBV质粒导入BABL/cJ小鼠体内,应用real-time PCR、ELISA、RIA、Southern Blot、Northern Blot,以及免疫组化等方法,检测小鼠病毒血症、血清和肝组织中HBV 抗原表达动态变化、肝组织中HBV转录和复制情况,以及小鼠免疫应答状况。结果HBV基因可以在小鼠体内表 达和复制,并诱导小鼠产生特异性免疫应答,其应答模式及HBV清除过程与人类的HBV急性感染类似。实验显 示高压注射具有复制能力的HBV质粒可以在小鼠体内建立HBV急性感染模型,这种模型可以用于HBV病毒 学、免疫学以及抗病毒药物筛选等方向的研究。     

pRNA介导的RNA干扰抑制HBV表达和复制的研究

为了研究由pRNA携带的siRNA(HBVsi18-42)所介导的RNAi过程能有效地抑制HBV的基因表达和病毒复制,我们利用细胞模型和高压注射小鼠模型评价HBVsi18-42对HBV复制和基因表达的抑制作用。通过Western印迹检测细胞内的HBsAg含量,用ELISA检测细胞培养上清和小鼠血清中的HBsAg水平,采用Southern印迹检测HBV的复制中间体,通过免疫组织化学检测肝组织切片中HBcAg的表达情况。试验结果显示,HBVsi18-42能以剂量依赖的方式在293T细胞中抑制HBsAg的表达以及在HepG2细胞中下调病毒HBsAg和HBeAg的表达和病毒复制中间体的水平。在小鼠模型中,注射后的3d内HBVsi18-42使小鼠血清中HBsAg的水平分别下降了98.98%、77.07%和60.73%,免疫组织化学检测显示,在注射后的第3天小鼠肝组织内HBcAg阳性细胞数减少了79.1%。初步结果显示HBVsi18-42无论是在细胞或是在小鼠模型中都能下调HBV的复制和基因的表达。本研究为我们下一步实现由pRNA介导的靶向RNAi及基因治疗提供了理论和技术支持。     

RNA干扰抑制人乙型肝炎病毒复制的研究

采用表达shRNA的载体构建了表达针对病毒HBsAg mRNA保守区的shRNA的质粒psiHBs,利用细胞模型和高压注射小鼠模型评价RNA干扰对HBV复制和基因表达的抑制作用.通过Western印迹检测细胞内的HBsAg,用ELISA检测细胞培养上清和血清中的HBsAg,采用Southern印迹检测HBV的复制中间体,最后通过免疫组化的方法检测肝组织切片中HBcAg的表达情况.结果显示pHBV1.3和psiHBs共转染HepG2后,与对照组相比病毒HBsAg和HBeAg的表达和病毒复制中间体的水平下降了90%以上,并且shRNA的作用效率存在序列特异性和剂量依赖性.在高压注射小鼠模型中,psiHBs表达的shRNA使小鼠血清中HBsAg的水平下降了80%以上,免疫组化检测显示,小鼠肝组织内HBcAg阳性细胞数减少了75.1%,而且shRNA的抑制作用至少能持续4d.研究显示载体表达的shRNA无论是在细胞或是在小鼠模型中都能对HBV的复制和基因的表达发挥序列特异性的抑制作用.本研究为我们下一步实现由RNAi介导的基因治疗提供了理论和技术支持.     

NIRF对HBV复制的影响及其对组蛋白H3乙酰化水平的修饰

为研究NIRF(Np95/ICBP-90 like RING finger protein)对乙型肝炎病毒(hepatitis B virus,HBV)的复制以及与乙型肝炎病毒共价环状闭合DNA(HBV cccDNA)结合的组蛋白H3乙酰化的影响,采用脂质体转染将pGEM-HBV1.3+pFLAG、pGEM-HBV1.3+pFLAG-NIRF、pGEM-HBV1.3质粒分别转入HepG2细胞,Western blot检测NIRF蛋白的表达,用ELISA结合RT-PCR检测HBsAg、HBeAg以及HBV cccDNA的量并同时说明HBV在细胞内是完成完整复制表达的,采用染色质免疫共沉淀(ChIP)的方法检测与HBV cccDNA结合的组蛋白H3以及H3乙酰化水平的动态变化。结果显示,NIRF蛋白下调HBV标志物HBeAg、HBsAg的分泌以及HBV cccDNA的表达,表明其对HBV复制具有抑制作用;组蛋白H3及乙酰化的组蛋白H3都与HBV cccDNA的动态变化水平呈现相似的平行性,而NIRF蛋白也明显抑制组蛋白H3的表达水平和乙酰化水平。结论证实NIRF不仅能抑制HBV在肝癌细胞中的复制,而且能下调与HBV cccDNA结合的组蛋白H3和乙酰化组蛋白H3的表达。期待NIRF能为后续的HBV致病机理、HBV复制表观遗传学水平研究及有效抗病毒药物的研究与开发提供理论上的支持与帮助。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor