Probing the Spatial Organization of Measles Virus Fusion Complexes

The spatial organization of metastable paramyxovirus fusion (F) and attachment glycoprotein hetero-oligomers is largely unknown. To further elucidate the organization of functional fusion complexes of measles virus (MeV), an archetype of the paramyxovirus family, we subjected central predictions of alternative docking models to experimental testing using three distinct approaches. Carbohydrate shielding through engineered N-glycans indicates close proximity of a membrane-distal, but not membrane-proximal, section of the MeV attachment (H) protein stalk domain to F. Directed mutagenesis of this section identified residues 111, 114, and 118 as modulators of avidity of glycoprotein interactions and determinants of F triggering. Stalk-length variation through deletion or insertion of HR elements at positions flanking this section demonstrates that the location of the stalk segment containing these residues cannot be altered in functional fusion complexes. In contrast, increasing the distance between the H head domains harboring the receptor binding sites and this section through insertion of structurally rigid α-helical domains with a pitch of up to approximately 75 Å downstream of stalk position 118 partially maintains functionality in transient expression assays and supports efficient growth of recombinant virions. In aggregate, these findings argue against specific protein-protein contacts between the H head and F head domains but instead support a docking model that is characterized by short-range contacts between the prefusion F head and the attachment protein stalk, possibly involving H residues 111, 114, and 118, and extension of the head domain of the attachment protein above prefusion F.Paramyxoviruses infect cells through fusion of the viral envelope with target cell membranes. For all members of the Paramyxovirinae subfamily, this involves the concerted action of two envelope glycoproteins, the fusion (F) and attachment (H, HN, or G, depending on the Paramyxovirinae genus) proteins. Both proteins feature short lumenal tails, a single transmembrane domain, and large ectodomains. The F protein, in type I orientation, forms homotrimers, while homodimers or homotetramers have been suggested as functional units for attachment proteins of different Paramyxovirinae subfamily members (7, 14, 28, 41, 49, 50, 66). For entry, upon receptor binding, the attachment protein is considered to initiate a series of conformational rearrangements in the metastable prefusion F protein (15, 77), which ultimately brings together transmembrane domains and fusion peptides and, thus, donor and target membranes (3, 32, 45, 53, 80).Multiple studies have demonstrated that specific interactions between compatible F and attachment proteins of paramyxovirinae are imperative for the formation of functional fusion complexes (6, 29, 36, 42, 43, 56, 75). However, the molecular nature of these interactions and the spatial organization of functional glycoprotein hetero-oligomers remain largely unknown. Individual ectodomain and partial ectodomain crystal structures have been obtained for different paramyxovirus F (13, 76, 77) and attachment (8, 14, 17, 28, 35, 79) proteins, respectively. For F, a stabilized human parainfluenza virus type 5 (HPIV5) ectodomain that is believed to represent a prefusion conformation folds into a globular head structure that is attached to the transmembrane domains through a helical stalk consisting of the membrane-proximal heptad repeat B (HR-B) domains (77). For the attachment protein, a globular head that harbors the receptor binding sites is considered to be connected to the transmembrane region through extended stalk domains (34, 78). Crystal structures of isolated head domains have been solved for several paramyxovirus attachment proteins, including measles virus (MeV) H, and reveal the six-blade propeller fold typical of sialidase structures (8, 14, 17, 28, 79). However, morbilliviruses recognize proteinaceous receptors (for MeV, the regulator of complement activation [CD46] and/or signaling lymphocytic activation molecule [SLAM], depending on the virus strain) (21, 40, 46, 51, 64, 65). X-ray data do not extend to the stalk domains, but circular dichroism analysis (78) and structure predictions (36, 78) support an α-helical coiled-coil configuration of the stalk.The nature of individual residues that engage in specific intermolecular interactions between glycoproteins of paramyxovirinae prior to refolding has been studied most extensively for the attachment protein. The stalk domains of several paramyxovirus HN proteins have been implicated in mediating specificity for their homotypic F proteins (18, 20, 43, 63, 70, 72). We have found that this extends to MeV and canine distemper virus H and, thus, to paramyxovirinae recognizing proteinaceous receptors (36), supporting the general hypothesis that F-interacting residues may reside in the stalk region of the attachment protein (30, 78).Considerably less information concerning the nature of F microdomains that mediate attachment protein specificity is available. Among the few exceptions are peptides derived from Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and Sendai virus F HR-B domains, which interact with soluble variants of the respective HN proteins in vitro (25, 67). Multiple domains have been suggested to mediate specificity of HPIV2 F for its HN (69). However, a conclusive N-glycan shielding study (43) and structural information (77, 78) argue against direct contacts between NDV F HR-B domains and HN in native glycoprotein complexes. Thus, the role of individual HPIV2 F residues in HN binding is unclear (25, 43).Building on the observation that MeV H is able to engage in productive heterotypic interactions with F proteins derived from some but not all isolates of closely related canine distemper virus, we have recently identified residues in morbillivirus F (MeV F residue 121) and H (H stalk residues 110 to 114) that interdependently contribute to physical MeV glycoprotein interaction and F triggering for fusion (36). While these residues could mediate reciprocal glycoprotein specificity through long-range effects, molecular modeling of the MeV H stalk in an α-helical conformation has posited F residue 121 at the same level above the viral envelope as H residues 110 to 114, making direct contacts structurally conceivable (36). This spatial organization of functional fusion complexes furthermore provides a comprehensive explanation for previous demonstrations of a specific role for attachment protein stalk domains of paramyxovirinae in functional and physical interactions with F (18, 43, 63, 70, 72). However, this “staggered-head” model mandates positioning the globular head of the attachment protein above the prefusion F trimer (36), as opposed to a suggested “parallel-head” alignment of the glycoproteins (31, 47). The latter is mostly based on transmission electron microscopy micrographs of viral particles apparently showing glycoprotein spikes of equal length (33). Unfortunately, these images lack the resolution for an identification of the molecular nature of the spikes (attachment or F protein) or the distinguishing between densely packaged H and F head domains of different heights and laterally aligned head domains. Indeed, a recent single-particle reconstruction based on cryo-electron microscopy images of HPIV5 particles revealed that defined spikes correspond to F in a postfusion conformation, which was interpreted as a product of possible premature F refolding (38). These two-dimensional images of heavy-metal-stained particles did not reveal F spikes in a prefusion conformation. Rather, a dense surface layer was considered to correspond to prefusion glycoprotein hetero-oligomers (38). In addition to further-advanced image reconstructions, biochemical assessment of alternative docking modes is imperative for the elucidation of the organization of functional fusion complexes of paramyxovirinae.In this study, we subjected central predictions of the hypothetical alignment models to experimental analysis. By employing carbohydrate shielding, directed mutagenesis, and variation of the length of the H stalk domain, we examined the proximity of different regions of the H stalk to F, probed a role of individual residues around the previously identified H stalk section from positions 110 to 114 in the formation of functional fusion complexes, tested the effect of varying the length of the H stalk membrane proximal and membrane distal to this section, and explored the general possibility of whether specific contacts between the prefusion F and H head domains are required for F triggering. Experimental data were interpreted in the light of a working model of MeV glycoprotein hetero-oligomers prior to receptor binding.     

Mutations in the Stalk Region of the Measles Virus Hemagglutinin Inhibit Syncytium Formation but Not Virus Entry

Measles virus (MV) entry requires at least 2 viral proteins, the hemagglutinin (H) and fusion (F) proteins. We describe the rescue and characterization of a measles virus with a specific mutation in the stalk region of H (I98A) that is able to bind normally to cells but infects at a lower rate than the wild type due to a reduction in fusion triggering. The mutant H protein binds to F more avidly than the parent H protein does, and the corresponding virus is more sensitive to inhibition by fusion-inhibitory peptide. We show that after binding of MV to its receptor, H-F dissociation is required for productive infection.Measles virus (MV) infection requires binding of the hemagglutinin (H) protein to its cognate receptors (9, 20, 21, 29, 41) while the fusion (F) protein triggers membrane lipid mixing and fusion. The H protein is a type II transmembrane homodimeric, disulfide-linked glycoprotein (33). The F protein is a type I membrane glycoprotein that exists as a homotrimeric complex. The protein is cleaved by furin in the trans-Golgi network into a metastable heterodimer with a membrane-spanning F₁ domain and a membrane-distal F₂ domain (16). Expressed alone, neither H nor F leads to membrane fusion, and therefore, both proteins are required and have to interact for productive infection of a target cell (46). There is evidence that these interactions start within the endoplasmic reticulum (34).The H proteins of Paramyxoviridae family members have a globular head with a six-blade β-propellor structure that is responsible for receptor binding (4, 7, 13), a stalk region composed of alpha-helical coiled coils (18, 48) that anchors the complex to the plasma membrane, and a short cytoplasmic domain that can interact with the matrix (M) protein and modulate fusion (2). Given that the F protein does not interact with a receptor on the target cell but undergoes conformational changes to enable membrane fusion, it seems likely that the F protein must interact with the H protein that enables fusion (14, 19, 23, 24, 35, 47). The molecular interactions between the F and H proteins are being increasingly understood (6, 8, 24, 25, 30, 35, 42). Hummel and Bellini have described a mutation in the H glycoprotein where threonine replaced isoleucine 98, which led to loss of fusion in chronically infected cells, but the virus was not rescued (15). Corey and Iorio performed alanine-scanning mutagenesis to determine the role of specific, membrane-proximal residues in the stalk region of the H protein responsible for H-F interactions (6). Substitution of alanine for specific residues in this region altered cell-to-cell fusion and the strength of the H-F interaction in transient-transfection experiments (6). Replacement of isoleucine with alanine at position 98 reduced fusion but did not significantly alter hemadsorption, implying that binding of the mutant H protein to CD46 was not affected (6). More recently, Paal et al. showed that the H protein can tolerate significant additions to its alpha-helical coiled coils without loss of binding or fusion in transient-transfection assays (30). Although these studies confirm the importance of the interactions between the H protein stalk and the metastable F protein for enabling fusion after receptor binding, the exact steps leading to fusion are still unclear. Moreover, studies evaluating H-F interactions were performed with transient protein expression and not in the presence of the actual virus. This is potentially an important shortcoming since the M protein can modulate infection and fusion (1).     

Previously Unrecognized Amino Acid Substitutions in the Hemagglutinin and Fusion Proteins of Measles Virus Modulate Cell-Cell Fusion,Hemadsorption, Virus Growth,and Penetration Rate

Wild-type measles virus (MV) isolated in B95a cells could be adapted to Vero cells after several blind passages. In this study, we have determined the complete nucleotide sequences of the genomes of the wild type (T11wild) and its Vero cell-adapted (T11Ve-23) MV strain and identified amino acid substitutions R516G, E271K, D439E and G464W (D439E/G464W), N481Y/H495R, and Y187H/L204F in the nucleocapsid, V, fusion (F), hemagglutinin (H), and large proteins, respectively. Expression of mutated H and F proteins from cDNA revealed that the H495R substitution, in addition to N481Y, in the H protein was necessary for the wild-type H protein to use CD46 efficiently as a receptor and that the G464W substitution in the F protein was important for enhanced cell-cell fusion. Recombinant wild-type MV strains harboring the F protein with the mutations D439E/G464W [F(D439E/G464W)] and/or H(N481Y/H495R) protein revealed that both mutated F and H proteins were required for efficient syncytium formation and virus growth in Vero cells. Interestingly, a recombinant wild-type MV strain harboring the H(N481Y/H495R) protein penetrated slowly into Vero cells, while a recombinant wild-type MV strain harboring both the F(D439E/G464W) and H(N481Y/H495R) proteins penetrated efficiently into Vero cells, indicating that the F(D439E/G464W) protein compensates for the inefficient penetration of a wild-type MV strain harboring the H(N481Y/H495R) protein. Thus, the F and H proteins synergistically function to ensure efficient wild-type MV growth in Vero cells.Measles virus (MV), which belongs to the genus Morbillivirus in the family Paramyxoviridae, is an enveloped virus with a nonsegmented negative-strand RNA genome. The MV genome encodes six structural proteins: the nucleocapsid (N), phosphoprotein (P), matrix (M), fusion (F), hemagglutinin (H), and large (L) proteins. The P gene also encodes two other accessory proteins, the C and V proteins. The C protein is translated from an alternative translational initiation site leading a different reading frame, and the V protein is synthesized from an edited mRNA. MV has two envelope glycoproteins, the F and H proteins. The former is responsible for envelope fusion, and the latter is responsible for receptor binding (12).Wild-type MV strains isolated in B95a cells and laboratory-adapted MV strains have distinct phenotypes (18). Wild-type MV strains can grow in B95a cells but not in Vero cells, while laboratory-adapted MV strains can grow in both B95a and Vero cells. Wild-type MV strains do not cause hemadsorption (HAd) in African green monkey red blood cells (AGM-RBC), while most of laboratory-adapted MV strains cause HAd. Importantly, wild-type MV strains are pathogenic and induce clinical signs that resemble human measles in experimentally infected monkeys while laboratory-adapted MV strains do not.One approach to identify amino acid substitutions responsible for these phenotypic differences is the comparison of a wild-type MV strain with a standard laboratory-adapted MV strain such as the Edmonston strain. With regard to the H protein, amino acid substitutions important for HAd activity and cell-cell fusion in tissue culture cells were identified by expressing the H proteins in mammalian cells (15, 21). Recently, Tahara et al. revealed that the M, H, and L proteins are responsible for efficient growth in Vero cells by constructing a series of recombinant viruses in which part of the genome of the wild-type MV was replaced with the corresponding sequences of the Edmonston strain (45, 46, 47).Another approach is the comparison of wild-type MV strains with their Vero cell-adapted MV strains. It was reported that Vero cell-adapted MV strains could be obtained by successive blind passages of wild-type MV strains in Vero cells (18, 24, 30, 43). Interestingly, in vivo and in vitro phenotypes of Vero cell-adapted MV strains were similar to those of laboratory-adapted standard MV strains (18, 19, 24, 30, 43). Comparison of the complete nucleotide sequences of the genomes of wild-type MV strains with those of Vero cell-adapted wild-type MV strains revealed amino acid substitutions in the P, C, V, M, H, and L proteins (27, 42, 48, 53).At present, these phenotypic differences are explained mainly by the receptor usage of MV. Wild-type MV strains can use signaling lymphocyte activation molecule (SLAM; also called CD150) but not CD46 as a cellular receptor, whereas laboratory-adapted MV strains can use both SLAM and CD46 as cellular receptors (7, 10, 16, 29, 56, 60).However, receptor usage per se cannot explain all of the phenotypic differences (20, 25, 48, 53). For example, recombinant Edmonston strains expressing wild-type H proteins can grow in Vero cells to some extent (17, 54). Several reports suggested the presence of the third MV receptor on Vero cells (14, 44, 54, 60). Other reports indicated the contribution of the M protein on cell-cell fusion and growth of MV in Vero cells (4, 27, 47). Recently, the unidentified epithelial cell receptor for MV was predicted in primary culture of human cells (1, 55) and several epithelial cell lines (23, 51). However, the identity of the third receptor on Vero cells and the unidentified epithelial cell receptor is not clear yet. Thus, the mechanism of Vero cell adaptation of wild-type MV is not completely understood.In order to understand the molecular mechanism of these phenotypic changes of wild-type MV strains during adaptation in Vero cells, we determined the complete nucleotide sequences of the genomes of the wild-type (T11wild) and its Vero cell-adapted (T11Ve-23) MV strains (43) and examined the effect of individual amino acid substitutions using a mammalian cell expression system and reverse genetics. We show here that previously unrecognized new amino acid substitutions in the H and F proteins are important for MV adaptation and HAd activity.     

Neutralization of Human Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infectivity by Antibodies and Low-Molecular-Weight Compounds Targeted against the Fusion Glycoprotein

Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) fusion (F) protein is an essential component of the virus envelope that mediates fusion of the viral and cell membranes, and, therefore, it is an attractive target for drug and vaccine development. Our aim was to analyze the neutralizing mechanism of anti-F antibodies in comparison with other low-molecular-weight compounds targeted against the F molecule. It was found that neutralization by anti-F antibodies is related to epitope specificity. Thus, neutralizing and nonneutralizing antibodies could bind equally well to virions and remained bound after ultracentrifugation of the virus, but only the former inhibited virus infectivity. Neutralization by antibodies correlated with inhibition of cell-cell fusion in a syncytium formation assay, but not with inhibition of virus binding to cells. In contrast, a peptide (residues 478 to 516 of F protein [F478-516]) derived from the F protein heptad repeat B (HRB) or the organic compound BMS-433771 did not interfere with virus infectivity if incubated with virus before ultracentrifugation or during adsorption of virus to cells at 4°C. These inhibitors must be present during virus entry to effect HRSV neutralization. These results are best interpreted by asserting that neutralizing antibodies bind to the F protein in virions interfering with its activation for fusion. Binding of nonneutralizing antibodies is not enough to block this step. In contrast, the peptide F478-516 or BMS-433771 must bind to F protein intermediates generated during virus-cell membrane fusion, blocking further development of this process.Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), a member of the Pneumovirus genus of the Paramyxoviridae family, is the main cause of severe lower respiratory tract infections in very young children (36), and it is a pathogen of considerable importance in the elderly (24, 26) and in immunocompromised adults (22). Currently, there is no effective vaccine against the virus although it is known that passive administration of neutralizing antibodies to individuals at high risk is an effective immunoprophylaxis (37, 38).The HRSV genome is a single-stranded negative-sense RNA molecule of approximately 15 kb that encodes 11 proteins (16, 53). Two of these proteins are the main surface glycoproteins of the virion. These are (i) the attachment (G) protein, which mediates virus binding to cells (44), and (ii) the fusion (F) protein, which promotes both fusion of the viral and cell membranes at the initial stages of the infectious cycle and fusion of the membrane of infected cells with those of adjacent cells to form characteristic syncytia (72). These two glycoproteins are the only targets of neutralizing antibodies either induced in animal models (19, 63, 65, 70) or present in human sera (62).The G protein is a highly variable type II glycoprotein that shares neither sequence identity nor structural features with the attachment protein of other paramyxoviruses (75). It is synthesized as a precursor of about 300 amino acids (depending on the strain) that is modified posttranslationally by the addition of a large number of N- and O-linked oligosaccharides and is also palmitoylated (17). The G protein is oligomeric (probably a homotetramer) (23) and promotes binding of HRSV to cell surface proteoglycans (35, 40, 49, 67). Whether this is the only interaction of G with cell surface components is presently unknown.The F protein is a type I glycoprotein that is synthesized as an inactive precursor of 574 amino acids (F0) which is cleaved by furin during transport to the cell surface to yield two disulfide-linked polypeptides, F2 from the N terminus and F1 from the C terminus (18). Like other viral type I fusion proteins, the mature F protein is a homotrimer which is in a prefusion, metastable, conformation in the virus particle. After fusion, the F protein adopts a highly stable postfusion conformation. Stability of the postfusion conformation is determined to great extent by two heptad repeat (HR) sequences, HRA and HRB, present in the F1 chain. Mixtures of HRA and HRB peptides form spontaneously heterotrimeric complexes (43, 51) that assemble in six-helix bundles (6HB), consisting of an internal core of three HRA helices surrounded by three antiparallel HRB helices, as determined by X-ray crystallography (79).The three-dimensional (3D) structure of the HRSV F protein has not been solved yet. Nevertheless, the structures of the pre- and postfusion forms of two paramyxovirus F proteins have revealed substantial conformational differences between the pre- and postfusion conformations (77, 78). The present hypothesis about the mechanism of membrane fusion mediated by paramyxovirus F proteins proposes that, following binding of the virus to the cell surface, the prefusion form of the F glycoprotein is activated, and membrane fusion is triggered. The F protein experiences then a series of conformational changes which include the exposure of a hydrophobic region, called the fusion peptide, and its insertion into the target membrane. Subsequent refolding of this intermediate leads to formation of the HRA and HRB six-helix bundle, concomitant with approximation of the viral and cell membranes that finally fuse, placing the fusion peptide and the transmembrane domain in the same membrane (4, 20). The formation of the 6HB and the associated free energy change are tightly linked to the merger of the viral and cellular membranes (60).Antibodies play a major role in protection against HRSV. Animal studies have demonstrated that immunization with either F or G glycoproteins induces neutralizing antibodies and protects against a viral challenge (19, 63, 70). Furthermore, transfer of these antibodies (31, 56) or of anti-F or anti-G monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) protects mice, cotton rats, or calves against either a human or bovine RSV challenge, respectively (65, 68, 73). Likewise, infants at high risk of severe HRSV disease are protected by the prophylactic administration of immunoglobulins with high anti-HRSV neutralizing titers (33). Finally, a positive correlation was found between high titers of serum neutralizing antibodies and protection in adult volunteers challenged with HRSV (34, 74), while an inverse correlation was found between high titers of neutralizing antibodies and risk of infection in children (29) and in the elderly (25).Whereas all the anti-G monoclonal antibodies reported to date are poorly neutralizing (1, 28, 48, 71), some anti-F monoclonal antibodies have strong neutralization activity (1, 3, 5, 28, 46). It is believed that HRSV neutralization by anti-G antibodies requires simultaneous binding of several antibodies to different epitopes, leading to steric hindrance for interaction of the G glycoprotein with the cell surface. Indeed, it has been shown that neutralization is enhanced by mixtures of anti-G monoclonal antibodies (1, 50), mimicking the effect of polyclonal anti-G antibodies. In contrast, highly neutralizing anti-F monoclonal antibodies do not require cooperation by other antibodies to block HRSV infectivity efficiently (1).In addition to neutralizing antibodies, other low-molecular-weight compounds directed against the F protein are potent inhibitors of HRSV infectivity. Synthetic peptides that reproduce sequences of heptad repeat B inhibit both membrane fusion promoted by the F protein and HRSV infectivity (42). Also, other small molecules obtained by chemical synthesis have been shown to interact with F protein and inhibit HRSV infectivity. These HRSV entry inhibitors have been the topic of intense research in recent years (55).This study explores the mechanisms of HRSV neutralization by different inhibitors of membrane fusion, including anti-F monoclonal antibodies, an HRB peptide, and the synthetic compound BMS-433771 (13-15). The results obtained indicate that antibodies and low-molecular-weight compounds block membrane fusion at different stages during virus entry.     

Identification of Key Residues in Virulent Canine Distemper Virus Hemagglutinin That Control CD150/SLAM-Binding Activity

Morbillivirus cell entry is controlled by hemagglutinin (H), an envelope-anchored viral glycoprotein determining interaction with multiple host cell surface receptors. Subsequent to virus-receptor attachment, H is thought to transduce a signal triggering the viral fusion glycoprotein, which in turn drives virus-cell fusion activity. Cell entry through the universal morbillivirus receptor CD150/SLAM was reported to depend on two nearby microdomains located within the hemagglutinin. Here, we provide evidence that three key residues in the virulent canine distemper virus A75/17 H protein (Y525, D526, and R529), clustering at the rim of a large recessed groove created by β-propeller blades 4 and 5, control SLAM-binding activity without drastically modulating protein surface expression or SLAM-independent F triggering.Paramyxoviruses are enveloped nonsegmented negative-strand RNA viruses that inject their genetic information into target cells by fusing their lipid envelope with the plasma membrane of the host cell at a neutral pH. Plasma membrane fusion activity is achieved by the concerted action of two viral membrane-bound glycoproteins. The attachment protein (hemagglutinin [H], hemagglutinin-neuraminidase [HN], or attachment [G], depending on the viral genus) is thought to bind a host cell surface receptor, in turn activating the fusion (F) protein, which will then undergo large-scale structural rearrangements, leading to plasma membrane fusion activity (9, 10, 19). In addition, both viral surface glycoproteins may mediate fusion activity between two contacting neighboring cells (22, 27). Virus-induced cell-cell fusion activity eventually leads to multinucleated cell formation (also termed syncytium formation) and, ultimately, to cell lysis.The crystal structure of the measles virus hemagglutinin (MeV-H) has recently become available (3, 7, 8). Interestingly, the overall β-propeller structure consisting of six β-sheets was well conserved compared to already determined paramyxovirus HN structures (4, 12, 29). The canine distemper virus H (CDV-H) protein has a short N-terminal cytoplasmic tail followed by a transmembrane domain and a large C-terminal ectodomain (1). It is suggested that the ectodomain consists of a stalk region with an α-helical coiled-coil configuration (13, 28) that supports a globular head domain containing the receptor recognition site and antigenic regions of the protein (11).Recently, site-directed mutagenesis aimed at identifying residues throughout the MeV-H ectodomain that might selectively control membrane fusion activity in a receptor-dependent manner (CD150/SLAM, CD46, or a yet-unidentified putative epithelial cell receptor [EpR]) was conducted. Indeed, four key residues, located in two connected microdomains (site 1 and site 2) on MeV-H globular head β-propeller blade 5, were necessary to uphold SLAM-dependent fusogenicity. Mutations in each one of the four amino acids resulted in a selective inhibition of SLAM-dependent fusion activity (H-SLAM-blind; HSB [25]). Interestingly, the latter quartet of residues were subsequently demonstrated not to be involved in SLAM-binding activity but presumably were involved in controlling SLAM-dependent F triggering (14). An additional residue (isoleucine 194), located within MeV-H β-propeller blade 6 but in contact with site 2, was next shown to govern interaction with the universal morbillivirus SLAM receptor (14). Consequently, the corresponding residues of both microdomains were mutated in the H protein of the virulent CDV strain 5804P and were also demonstrated to control SLAM-dependent fusion activity (24), although for CDV, full ablation of fusion activity required the substitutions in both microdomains and in two additional neighboring amino acids (CDV-H residues in site 1, D526, I527, S528, and R529; in site 2, Y547 and T548). Moreover, using a CDV-H 3D homology model, the two microdomains were demonstrated to be in very close proximity to one another (compared to those of MeV-H) but not in direct contact (24). Subsequently, a recombinant CDV bearing a SLAM-blind H protein was reported to be completely attenuated in ferrets, a phenotype associated with reduced immunosuppression and lack of neurovirulence (26). However, the precise molecular mechanisms sustaining HSB-dependent lack of fusion support activity was not elucidated and remains to be determined.     

Viral Entry Inhibitors Targeted to the Membrane Site of Action

The fusion of enveloped viruses with the host cell is driven by specialized fusion proteins to initiate infection. The “class I” fusion proteins harbor two regions, typically two heptad repeat (HR) domains, which are central to the complex conformational changes leading to fusion: the first heptad repeat (HRN) is adjacent to the fusion peptide, while the second (HRC) immediately precedes the transmembrane domain. Peptides derived from the HR regions can inhibit fusion, and one HR peptide, T20 (enfuvirtide), is in clinical use for HIV-1. For paramyxoviruses, the activities of two membrane proteins, the receptor-binding protein (hemagglutinin-neuraminidase [HN] or G) and the fusion protein (F), initiate viral entry. The binding of HN or G to its receptor on a target cell triggers the activation of F, which then inserts into the target cell and mediates the membrane fusion that initiates infection. We have shown that for paramyxoviruses, the inhibitory efficacy of HR peptides is inversely proportional to the rate of F activation. For HIV-1, the antiviral potency of an HRC-derived peptide can be dramatically increased by targeting it to the membrane microdomains where fusion occurs, via the addition of a cholesterol group. We report here that for three paramyxoviruses—human parainfluenza virus type 3 (HPIV3), a major cause of lower respiratory tract diseases in infants, and the emerging zoonotic viruses Hendra virus (HeV) and Nipah virus (NiV), which cause lethal central nervous system diseases—the addition of cholesterol to a paramyxovirus HRC-derived peptide increased antiviral potency by 2 log units. Our data suggest that this enhanced activity is indeed the result of the targeting of the peptide to the plasma membrane, where fusion occurs. The cholesterol-tagged peptides on the cell surface create a protective antiviral shield, target the F protein directly at its site of action, and expand the potential utility of inhibitory peptides for paramyxoviruses.Fusion of enveloped viruses with the host cell is a key step in viral infectivity, and interference with this process can lead to highly effective antivirals. Viral fusion is driven by specialized proteins that undergo an ordered series of conformational changes. These changes facilitate the initial, close apposition of the viral and host membranes, and they ultimately result in the formation of a fusion pore (reviewed in reference 12). The “class I” fusion proteins harbor two regions, typically two heptad repeat (HR) domains: the first one (HRN) adjacent to the fusion peptide and the second one (HRC) immediately preceding the transmembrane domain. Peptides derived from the HR regions can inhibit fusion, and one of them, T20 (enfuvirtide), is in clinical use for HIV-1 (19). Peptides derived from the HRN and HRC regions of paramyxovirus fusion (F) proteins can interact with fusion intermediates of F (3, 20, 22, 37, 46, 49) and provide a promising antiviral strategy.The current model for class I-driven fusion postulates the existence of a so-called prehairpin intermediate, a high-energy structure that bridges the viral and cell membranes, where the HRN and the HRC are separated. The prehairpin intermediate spontaneously collapses into the postfusion structure—a six-helical bundle (6HB), with an inner trimeric coiled-coil formed by the HRN onto which the HRC folds (12, 14, 30, 40). The key to these events is the initial activation step, whereby HN triggers F to initiate the process. Structural and biophysical analyses of the paramyxovirus 6HB (30, 50, 51) suggest that inhibitors bind to the prehairpin intermediate and prevent its transition to the 6HB, thus inhibiting viral entry. The peptides bind to their complementary HR region and thereby prevent HRN and HRC from refolding into the stable 6HB structure required for fusion (3, 10, 40). The efficiency of F triggering by HN critically influences the degree of fusion mediated by F and thus the extent of viral entry (35). In addition, differences in the efficiency of triggering of the fusion process impact the efficacy of potential antiviral molecules that target intermediate states of the fusion protein (36).Paramyxoviruses cause important human illnesses, significantly contributing to global disease and mortality, ranging from lower-respiratory-tract diseases in infants caused by human parainfluenza virus types 1, 2, and 3 (HPIV1, -2, and -3) (9, 48), to highly lethal central nervous system diseases caused by the emerging paramyxoviruses HeV and NiV. No antiviral therapies or vaccines yet exist for these paramyxoviruses, and vaccines would be unlikely to protect the youngest infants. Antiviral agents, therefore, would be particularly beneficial. All paramyxoviruses possess two envelope glycoproteins directly involved in viral entry and pathogenesis: a fusion protein (F) and a receptor-binding protein (HN, H, or G). The paramyxovirus F proteins belong to the group of “class I” fusion proteins (44, 45), which also include the influenza virus hemagglutinin protein and the HIV-1 fusion protein gp120. The F protein is synthesized as a precursor protein (F0) that is proteolytically processed posttranslationally to form a trimer of disulfide-linked heterodimers (F1-F2). This cleavage event places the fusion peptide at the F1 terminus in the mature F protein and is essential for membrane fusion activity. The exact triggers that initiate a series of conformational changes in F leading to membrane fusion differ depending on the pathway the virus uses to enter the cell. In the case of HPIV, HeV, and NiV, the receptor-binding protein, hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) (in HPIV3) or G (in HeV and NiV), binds to cellular surface receptors, brings the viral envelope into proximity with the plasma membrane, and activates the viral F protein. This receptor-ligand interaction is required for the F protein to mediate the fusion of the viral envelope with the host cell membrane (23, 33, 35).The HRC peptide regions of a number of paramyxoviruses, including Sendai virus, measles virus, Newcastle disease virus (NDV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), simian virus 5 (SV5), Hendra virus (HeV), and Nipah virus (NiV), can inhibit the infectivity of the homologous virus (17, 20, 31, 37, 47, 49, 52, 53). Recently, we showed that peptides derived from the HRC region of the F protein of HPIV3 are effective inhibitors of both HPIV and HeV/NiV fusion (31) and that, for HeV, the strength of HRC peptide binding to the corresponding HRN region correlates with the potency of fusion and infection inhibition (30). However, peptides derived from the HPIV3 F protein HRC region are more effective at inhibiting HeV/NiV fusion than HPIV3 fusion, despite a stronger homotypic HRN-HRC interaction for HPIV3 (30, 31). We showed (36) that the kinetics of fusion (kinetics of F activation) impacts sensitivity to inhibition by peptides, as is the case for HIV (39). Alterations in HPIV3 HN′s property of F activation affect the kinetics of F''s progression through its conformational changes, thus altering inhibitor efficacy. Once the extended intermediate stage of F has passed, and fusion proceeds, peptide inhibitors are ineffective. We have proposed that the design of effective inhibitors may require either targeting an earlier stage of F activation or increasing the concentration of inhibitor at the location of receptor binding, in order to enhance the access and association of the inhibitor with the intermediate-stage fusion protein (36).A substantial body of evidence supports the notion that viral fusion occurs in confined areas of the interacting viral and host membranes (26). For HIV-1, the lipid composition of the viral membrane is strikingly different from that of the host cell membrane; the former is particularly enriched in cholesterol and sphingomyelin (4, 5, 7, 8). Cholesterol and sphingolipids are often laterally segregated in membrane microdomains or “lipid rafts” (7, 11). In fact, the antiviral potency of the HIV-inhibitory HRC peptide C34 is dramatically increased by targeting it to the “lipid rafts” via the addition of a cholesterol group (16).We applied the targeting strategy based on cholesterol derivatization to paramyxoviruses, and we show here that by adding a cholesterol tag to HPIV3-derived HRC E459V (30) inhibitory peptides, we increased antiviral potency by 2 log units (50% inhibitory concentrations [IC₅₀], <2 nM). We chose to use the HPIV3-derived peptides for HeV/NiV, because we have previously shown that they are far more effective inhibitors of HeV and NiV than the homotypic peptides (30, 31). We propose that the enhanced activity resulting from the addition of a cholesterol tag is a result of the targeting of the peptide to the plasma membrane, where fusion occurs.     

The Amino Terminus of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 Glycoprotein K (gK) Modulates gB-Mediated Virus-Induced Cell Fusion and Virion Egress

Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1)-induced cell fusion is mediated by viral glycoproteins and other membrane proteins expressed on infected cell surfaces. Certain mutations in the carboxyl terminus of HSV-1 glycoprotein B (gB) and in the amino terminus of gK cause extensive virus-induced cell fusion. Although gB is known to be a fusogenic glycoprotein, the mechanism by which gK is involved in virus-induced cell fusion remains elusive. To delineate the amino-terminal domains of gK involved in virus-induced cell fusion, the recombinant viruses gKΔ31-47, gKΔ31-68, and gKΔ31-117, expressing gK carrying in-frame deletions spanning the amino terminus of gK immediately after the gK signal sequence (amino acids [aa] 1 to 30), were constructed. Mutant viruses gKΔ31-47 and gKΔ31-117 exhibited a gK-null (ΔgK) phenotype characterized by the formation of very small viral plaques and up to a 2-log reduction in the production of infectious virus in comparison to that for the parental HSV-1(F) wild-type virus. The gKΔ31-68 mutant virus formed substantially larger plaques and produced 1-log-higher titers than the gKΔ31-47 and gKΔ31-117 mutant virions at low multiplicities of infection. Deletion of 28 aa from the carboxyl terminus of gB (gBΔ28syn) caused extensive virus-induced cell fusion. However, the gBΔ28syn mutation was unable to cause virus-induced cell fusion in the presence of the gKΔ31-68 mutation. Transient expression of a peptide composed of the amino-terminal 82 aa of gK (gKa) produced a glycosylated peptide that was efficiently expressed on cell surfaces only after infection with the HSV-1(F), gKΔ31-68, ΔgK, or UL20-null virus. The gKa peptide complemented the gKΔ31-47 and gKΔ31-68 mutant viruses for infectious-virus production and for gKΔ31-68/gBΔ28syn-mediated cell fusion. These data show that the amino terminus of gK modulates gB-mediated virus-induced cell fusion and virion egress.Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) specifies at least 11 virally encoded glycoproteins, as well as several nonglycosylated and lipid-anchored membrane-associated proteins, which serve important functions in virion infectivity and virus spread. Although cell-free enveloped virions can efficiently spread viral infection, virions can also spread by causing cell fusion of adjacent cellular membranes. Virus-induced cell fusion, which is caused by viral glycoproteins expressed on infected cell surfaces, enables transmission of virions from one cell to another, avoiding extracellular spaces and exposure of free virions to neutralizing antibodies (reviewed in reference 56). Most mutations that cause extensive virus-induced cell-to-cell fusion (syncytial or syn mutations) have been mapped to at least four regions of the viral genome: the UL20 gene (5, 42, 44); the UL24 gene (37, 58); the UL27 gene, encoding glycoprotein B (gB) (9, 51); and the UL53 gene, coding for gK (7, 15, 35, 53, 54, 57).Increasing evidence suggests that virus-induced cell fusion is mediated by the concerted action of glycoproteins gD, gB, and gH/gL. Recent studies have shown that gD interacts with both gB and gH/gL (1, 2). Binding of gD to its cognate receptors, including Nectin-1, HVEM, and others (12, 29, 48, 59, 60, 62, 63), is thought to trigger conformation changes in gH/gL and gB that cause fusion of the viral envelope with cellular membranes during virus entry and virus-induced cell fusion (32, 34). Transient coexpression of gB, gD, and gH/gL causes cell-to-cell fusion (49, 68). However, this phenomenon does not accurately model viral fusion, because other viral glycoproteins and membrane proteins known to be important for virus-induced cell fusion are not required (6, 14, 31). Specifically, gK and UL20 were shown to be absolutely required for virus-induced cell fusion (21, 46). Moreover, syncytial mutations within gK (7, 15, 35, 53, 54, 57) or UL20 (5, 42, 44) promote extensive virus-induced cell fusion, and viruses lacking gK enter more slowly than wild-type virus into susceptible cells (25). Furthermore, transient coexpression of gK carrying a syncytial mutation with gB, gD, and gH/gL did not enhance cell fusion, while coexpression of the wild-type gK with gB, gD, and gH/gL inhibited cell fusion (3).Glycoproteins gB and gH are highly conserved across all subfamilies of herpesviruses. gB forms a homotrimeric type I integral membrane protein, which is N glycosylated at multiple sites within the polypeptide. An unusual feature of gB is that syncytial mutations that enhance virus-induced cell fusion are located exclusively in the carboxyl terminus of gB, which is predicted to be located intracellularly (51). Single-amino-acid substitutions within two regions of the intracellular cytoplasmic domain of gB were shown to cause syncytium formation and were designated region I (amino acid [aa] positions 816 and 817) and region II (aa positions 853, 854, and 857) (9, 10, 28, 69). Furthermore, deletion of 28 aa from the carboxyl terminus of gB, disrupting the small predicted alpha-helical domain H17b, causes extensive virus-induced cell fusion as well as extensive glycoprotein-mediated cell fusion in the gB, gD, and gH/gL transient-coexpression system (22, 49, 68). The X-ray structure of the ectodomain of gB has been determined and is predicted to assume at least two major conformations, one of which may be necessary for the fusogenic properties of gB. Therefore, perturbation of the carboxyl terminus of gB may alter the conformation of the amino terminus of gB, thus favoring one of the two predicted conformational structures that causes membrane fusion (34).The UL53 (gK) and UL20 genes encode multipass transmembrane proteins of 338 and 222 aa, respectively, which are conserved in all alphaherpesviruses (15, 42, 55). Both proteins have multiple sites where posttranslational modification can occur; however, only gK is posttranslationally modified by N-linked carbohydrate addition (15, 35, 55). The specific membrane topologies of both gK and UL20 protein (UL20p) have been predicted and experimentally confirmed using epitope tags inserted within predicted intracellular and extracellular domains (18, 21, 44). Syncytial mutations in gK map predominantly within extracellular domains of gK and particularly within the amino-terminal portion of gK (domain I) (18), while syncytial mutations of UL20 are located within the amino terminus of UL20p, shown to be located intracellularly (44). A series of recent studies have shown that HSV-1 gK and UL20 functionally and physically interact and that these interactions are necessary for their coordinate intracellular transport and cell surface expression (16, 18, 21, 26, 45). Specifically, direct protein-protein interactions between the amino terminus of HSV-1 UL20 and gK domain III, both of which are localized intracellularly, were recently demonstrated by two-way coimmunoprecipitation experiments (19).According to the most prevalent model for herpesvirus intracellular morphogenesis, capsids initially assemble within the nuclei and acquire a primary envelope by budding into the perinuclear spaces. Subsequently, these virions lose their envelope through fusion with the outer nuclear lamellae. Within the cytoplasm, tegument proteins associate with the viral nucleocapsid and final envelopment occurs by budding of cytoplasmic capsids into specific trans-Golgi network (TGN)-associated membranes (8, 30, 47, 70). Mature virions traffic to cell surfaces, presumably following the cellular secretory pathway (33, 47, 61). In addition to their significant roles in virus-induced cell fusion, gK and UL20 are required for cytoplasmic virion envelopment. Viruses with deletions in either the gK or the UL20 gene are unable to translocate from the cytoplasm to extracellular spaces and accumulated as unenveloped virions in the cytoplasm (5, 15, 20, 21, 26, 35, 36, 38, 44, 55). Current evidence suggests that the functions of gK and UL20 in cytoplasmic virion envelopment and virus-induced cell fusion are carried out by different, genetically separable domains of UL20p. Specifically, UL20 mutations within the amino and carboxyl termini of UL20p allowed cotransport of gK and UL20p to cell surfaces, virus-induced cell fusion, and TGN localization, while effectively inhibiting cytoplasmic virion envelopment (44, 45).In this paper, we demonstrate that the amino terminus of gK expressed as a free peptide of 82 aa (gKa) is transported to infected cell surfaces by viral proteins other than gK or UL20p and facilitates virus-induced cell fusion caused by syncytial mutations in the carboxyl terminus of gB. Thus, functional domains of gK can be genetically separated, as we have shown previously (44, 45), as well as physically separated into different peptide portions that retain functional activities of gK. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the amino terminus of gK directly or indirectly interacts with and modulates the fusogenic properties of gB.     

A Chimeric Alphavirus Replicon Particle Vaccine Expressing the Hemagglutinin and Fusion Proteins Protects Juvenile and Infant Rhesus Macaques from Measles

Measles remains a major cause of child mortality, in part due to an inability to vaccinate young infants with the current live attenuated virus vaccine (LAV). To explore new approaches to infant vaccination, chimeric Venezuelan equine encephalitis/Sindbis virus (VEE/SIN) replicon particles were used to express the hemagglutinin (H) and fusion (F) proteins of measles virus (MV). Juvenile rhesus macaques vaccinated intradermally with a single dose of VEE/SIN expressing H or H and F proteins (VEE/SIN-H or VEE/SIN-H+F, respectively) developed high titers of MV-specific neutralizing antibody and gamma-interferon (IFN-γ)-producing T cells. Infant macaques vaccinated with two doses of VEE/SIN-H+F also developed neutralizing antibody and IFN-γ-producing T cells. Control animals were vaccinated with LAV or with a formalin-inactivated measles vaccine (FIMV). Neutralizing antibody remained above the protective level for more than 1 year after vaccination with VEE/SIN-H, VEE/SIN-H+F, or LAV. When challenged with wild-type MV 12 to 17 months after vaccination, all vaccinated juvenile and infant monkeys vaccinated with VEE/SIN-H, VEE/SIN-H+F, and LAV were protected from rash and viremia, while FIMV-vaccinated monkeys were not. Antibody was boosted by challenge in all groups. T-cell responses to challenge were biphasic, with peaks at 7 to 25 days and at 90 to 110 days in all groups, except for the LAV group. Recrudescent T-cell activity coincided with the presence of MV RNA in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. We conclude that VEE/SIN expressing H or H and F induces durable immune responses that protect from measles and offers a promising new approach for measles vaccination. The viral and immunological factors associated with long-term control of MV replication require further investigation.Measles remains a major cause of child mortality despite the availability of a safe and effective live attenuated virus vaccine (LAV). Recent efforts to improve routine vaccination and implement national immunization days have moved measles control toward the World Health Organization''s goal of a 90% reduction in mortality by 2010 compared to 2000 (7). One persistent impediment to measles control in many countries remains the inability to successfully immunize young infants due to the immaturity of the immune system and interference of maternal antibodies with immune responses to LAV (1, 15, 65).Because the decrease in maternal antibody varies from one infant to another, many children in areas with high measles virus (MV) transmission rates are at risk of acquiring measles prior to vaccination (3, 5, 12). Immaturity also affects the quality and quantity of antibody produced in response to the current vaccine, with lower levels of neutralizing antibody and deficient avidity and isotype maturation in younger than in older infants (15, 16, 37, 59). As a result, the recommended age for vaccination is generally 9 months in developing countries to balance the risk of infection with the likelihood of response to the vaccine (24).A vaccine that could be given to children under the age of 6 months would improve measles control by allowing delivery with other infant vaccines and by closing the window of susceptibility prior to delivery of the current vaccine. Increasing the dose of LAV improved the antibody responses in young infants but resulted in an unexpected increase in mortality for girls, so this is not an acceptable approach to lowering the age of vaccination (18, 26, 29). Experience with a formalin-inactivated measles vaccine (FIMV) in the 1960s also led to unexpected complications. FIMV provided only short-term protection, and vaccinated individuals were at risk for more severe disease (atypical measles) upon infection with wild-type MV (14, 36, 54). Therefore, other strategies are necessary for development of a vaccine for young infants.One particularly promising approach for delivery of vaccine antigens is the use of alphavirus replicon particles (55). Alphaviruses are small positive-strand RNA viruses with the nonstructural replicase proteins encoded in the 5′ two-thirds of the genome and the structural proteins in the 3′ one-third. A subgenomic promoter is used to synthesize an abundant, smaller RNA from which the structural proteins are translated (61). Replicons contain the nonstructural protein genes, the 5′ and 3′ end cis-active replication sequences, and the subgenomic promoter that directs expression of a heterologous gene rather than the viral structural proteins. The replicon RNA can be packaged into virus-like particles by providing the structural proteins in trans using transient transfection (6, 33) or with stable packaging cell lines (51) and can be engineered for efficient delivery to antigen-presenting cells (17). Advantages include high-level expression of the vaccine antigen (68), stimulation of innate immunity (25, 31, 32, 64), and general lack of preexisting immunity in the human population.MV encodes six structural proteins of which two, hemagglutinin (H) and fusion (F), are surface glycoproteins involved in attachment and entry. Antibodies that inhibit MV infection in neutralization assays are directed primarily against the H protein, which also contains important CD8⁺ T-cell epitopes (39, 41). Nonhuman primates, particularly rhesus macaques, develop a disease similar to that of humans and offer the opportunity for assessing both protection from wild-type MV challenge and priming for enhanced disease after immunization with new experimental vaccines (2, 48, 50, 66). Because protection from measles correlates best with the quality and quantity of neutralizing antibodies at the time of exposure (9, 50), most experimental vaccines have used H alone or H and F for induction of MV protective immunity (44, 50, 65, 70).Alphaviruses that have been used for construction of replicon particle vaccines include Sindbis virus (SINV) (6, 68), Semliki Forest virus (33), and Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) (53). Each of the alphavirus vectors studied has its own advantages and disadvantages. For instance, VEEV replicon particles have high levels of gene expression (47), but vaccine production is disadvantaged by the requirement for biosafety level 3 manufacturing. SINV replicon particles avoid the safety concerns of VEEV, but expression levels are lower. Previous studies of a SINV-based replicon particle vaccine expressing MV H (SIN-H) in macaques showed good induction of neutralizing antibody and T-cell responses and protection from rash (44). However, vaccinated monkeys developed viremias after challenge, indicating that they were not protected from infection. In this study, we sought to improve the alphavirus replicon particle approach to vaccination for measles by using a chimeric VEE/SIN vaccine (47) expressing both the MV H and F proteins.     

An Antibody Directed against the Fusion Peptide of Junín Virus Envelope Glycoprotein GPC Inhibits pH-Induced Membrane Fusion

The arenavirus envelope glycoprotein (GPC) initiates infection in the host cell through pH-induced fusion of the viral and endosomal membranes. As in other class I viral fusion proteins, this process proceeds through a structural reorganization in GPC in which the ectodomain of the transmembrane fusion subunit (G2) engages the host cell membrane and subsequently refolds to form a highly stable six-helix bundle structure that brings the two membranes into apposition for fusion. Here, we describe a G2-directed monoclonal antibody, F100G5, that prevents membrane fusion by binding to an intermediate form of the protein on the fusion pathway. Inhibition of syncytium formation requires that F100G5 be present concomitant with exposure of GPC to acidic pH. We show that F100G5 recognizes neither the six-helix bundle nor the larger trimer-of-hairpins structure in the postfusion form of G2. Rather, Western blot analysis using recombinant proteins and a panel of alanine-scanning GPC mutants revealed that F100G5 binding is dependent on an invariant lysine residue (K283) near the N terminus of G2, in the so-called fusion peptide that inserts into the host cell membrane during the fusion process. The F100G5 epitope is located in the internal segment of the bipartite GPC fusion peptide, which also contains four conserved cysteine residues, raising the possibility that this fusion peptide may be highly structured. Collectively, our studies indicate that F100G5 identifies an on-path intermediate form of GPC. Binding to the transiently exposed fusion peptide may interfere with G2 insertion into the host cell membrane. Strategies to effectively target fusion peptide function in the endosome may lead to novel classes of antiviral agents.Enveloped viruses enter their target cells through fusion of the virus and cell membranes, in a process promoted by the viral envelope glycoprotein. For some viruses, such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), entry is initiated by interaction of the envelope glycoprotein with cell surface receptor proteins. Other viruses, such as influenza virus, are endocytosed and membrane fusion is triggered by exposure to acidic pH in the maturing endosome. The subsequent merger of the viral and cell membranes is accomplished through a major structural reorganization of the envelope glycoprotein. Antiviral strategies that target virus entry by using neutralizing antibodies or small-molecule fusion inhibitors can, in many cases, prevent virus infection and disease.The Arenaviridae comprise a diverse group of rodent-borne viruses, some of which are responsible for severe hemorrhagic fevers in humans. Lassa fever virus (LASV) is endemic in western Africa (59), and at least five New World species are recognized to cause fatal disease in the Americas, including the Argentine hemorrhagic fever virus Junín (JUNV) (63). New pathogenic arenavirus species continue to emerge from their distinct animal reservoirs (1, 11, 24). At present, there are no licensed vaccines or effective therapies to address the threat of arenavirus infection.Arenaviruses are enveloped, negative-strand RNA viruses whose bipartite genome encodes ambisense expression of four viral proteins (12, 22). The arenavirus envelope glycoprotein, GPC, is a member of the class I virus fusion proteins (33, 40, 75), a group that includes HIV Env, influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA), and paramyxovirus F protein. These envelope glycoproteins share several salient features. The precursor glycoproteins assemble as trimeric complexes and are subsequently rendered competent for membrane fusion by a proteolytic cleavage that results in the formation of the mature receptor-binding and transmembrane fusion subunits. The GPC precursor glycoprotein is cleaved by the cellular SKI-1/S1P protease (6, 51, 54) to generate the respective G1 and G2 subunits, which remain noncovalently associated. The ectodomain of the class I fusion subunit is distinguished by the presence of two 4-3 heptad repeat (HR1 and HR2) sequences that, in the course of membrane fusion, refold to form the now-classical six-helix bundle structure, which defines this class of envelope glycoproteins. Unlike other class I fusion proteins, GPC also contains a cleaved and stable signal peptide (SSP) as a third and essential subunit in the mature complex (2, 32, 69, 77, 81).Arenavirus infection is initiated by G1 binding to a cell surface receptor. The pathogenic clade B New World arenaviruses utilize transferrin receptor 1 (TfR1) for entry (1, 64, 65), whereas those in clades A and C, as well as the Old World viruses, bind α-dystroglycan and/or an unknown receptor (15, 34, 71). The virion particle is subsequently endocytosed (9), and membrane fusion is initiated by acidification in the maturing endosome (17, 28, 29). pH-dependent activation of GPC is modulated through a unique interaction between SSP and G2 (79, 80) and can be targeted by small-molecule inhibitors that block membrane fusion (76) and protect against arenavirus infection (8, 52).A generally accepted model for membrane fusion by the class I envelope glycoproteins (reviewed in references 45 and 73) posits that the native complex exists in a metastable state that is established on proteolytic maturation of the biosynthetic precursor. Upon activation, whether by acidic pH in the endosome or receptor binding at the plasma membrane, the fusion subunit that was sequestered in the prefusion state is exposed and undergoes a series of dramatic conformational changes leading to membrane fusion. In this process, a hydrophobic region at or near the N terminus of the fusion subunit (the fusion peptide) inserts into the host cell membrane, thus allowing the protein to bridge the two membranes. This so-called prehairpin intermediate subsequently collapses upon itself to form the highly stable six-helix bundle structure, in which the three HR2 helices pack into hydrophobic grooves on the trimeric HR1 coiled-coil in an antiparallel manner, bringing the virus and cell membranes into apposition. Free energy made available in the formation of this stable structure is thought to drive fusion of the lipid bilayers. Peptides that correspond in sequence to HR2 (C-peptides) bind to the putative prehairpin intermediate and interfere with its refolding, thereby preventing membrane fusion (18, 57, 74). While the structure of the six-helix bundle core has been elucidated in atomic detail (45, 73), information regarding the molecular pathway leading to this postfusion state is largely indirect. Indeed, the prehairpin intermediate is conceptualized through the activity of C-peptide fusion inhibitors (57, 74).In this report, we describe a G2-directed monoclonal antibody (MAb), F100G5, that recognizes a pH-induced intermediate of JUNV GPC and prevents GPC-mediated membrane fusion. This MAb binds at or near the internal fusion peptide of G2 and may act by interfering with its penetration into the host cell membrane. These studies highlight the feasibility of targeting short-lived GPC intermediates for inhibition of membrane fusion.     

Crystallographic Definition of the Epitope Promiscuity of the Broadly Neutralizing Anti-Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Antibody 2F5: Vaccine Design Implications

The quest to create a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) vaccine capable of eliciting broadly neutralizing antibodies against Env has been challenging. Among other problems, one difficulty in creating a potent immunogen resides in the substantial overall sequence variability of the HIV envelope protein. The membrane-proximal region (MPER) of gp41 is a particularly conserved tryptophan-rich region spanning residues 659 to 683, which is recognized by three broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (bnMAbs), 2F5, Z13, and 4E10. In this study, we first describe the variability of residues in the gp41 MPER and report on the invariant nature of 15 out of 25 amino acids comprising this region. Subsequently, we evaluate the ability of the bnMAb 2F5 to recognize 31 varying sequences of the gp41 MPER at a molecular level. In 19 cases, resulting crystal structures show the various MPER peptides bound to the 2F5 Fab′. A variety of amino acid substitutions outside the ⁶⁶⁴DKW⁶⁶⁶ core epitope are tolerated. However, changes at the ⁶⁶⁴DKW⁶⁶⁶ motif itself are restricted to those residues that preserve the aspartate''s negative charge, the hydrophobic alkyl-π stacking arrangement between the β-turn lysine and tryptophan, and the positive charge of the former. We also characterize a possible molecular mechanism of 2F5 escape by sequence variability at position 667, which is often observed in HIV-1 clade C isolates. Based on our results, we propose a somewhat more flexible molecular model of epitope recognition by bnMAb 2F5, which could guide future attempts at designing small-molecule MPER-like vaccines capable of eliciting 2F5-like antibodies.Eliciting broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) against primary isolates of human immunodeficiency virus type I (HIV-1) has been identified as a major milestone to attain in the quest for a vaccine in the fight against AIDS (12, 28). These antibodies would need to interact with HIV-1 envelope glycoproteins gp41 and/or gp120 (Env), target conserved regions and functional conformations of gp41/gp120 trimeric complexes, and prevent new HIV-1 fusion events with target cells (21, 57, 70, 71). Although a humoral response generating neutralizing antibodies against HIV-1 can be detected in HIV-1-positive individuals, the titers are often very low, and virus control is seldom achieved by these neutralizing antibodies (22, 51, 52, 66, 67). The difficulty in eliciting a broad and potent neutralizing antibody response against HIV-1 is thought to reside in the high degree of genetic diversity of the virus, in the heterogeneity of Env on the surface of HIV-1, and in the masking of functional regions by conformational covering, by an extensive glycan shield, or by the ability of some conserved domains to partition to the viral membrane (24, 25, 29, 30, 38, 39, 56, 68, 69). So far, vaccine trials using as immunogens mimics of Env in different conformations have primarily elicited antibodies with only limited neutralization potency across different HIV-1 clades although recent work has demonstrated more encouraging results (4, 12, 61).The use of conserved regions on gp41 and gp120 Env as targets for vaccine design has been mostly characterized by the very few anti-HIV-1 broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (bnMAbs) that recognize them: the CD4 binding-site on gp120 (bnMAb b12), a CD4-induced gp120 coreceptor binding site (bnMAbs 17b and X5), a mannose cluster on the outer face of gp120 (bnMAb 2G12), and the membrane proximal external region (MPER) of gp41 (bnMAbs 2F5, Z13 and 4E10) (13, 29, 44, 58, 73). The gp41 MPER region is a particularly conserved part of Env that spans residues 659 to 683 (HXB2 numbering) (37, 75). Substitution and deletion studies have linked this unusually tryptophan-rich region to the fusion process of HIV-1, possibly involving a series of conformational changes (5, 37, 41, 49, 54, 74). Additionally, the gp41 MPER has been implicated in gp41 oligomerization, membrane leakage ability facilitating pore formation, and binding to the galactosyl ceramide receptor on epithelial cells for initial mucosal infection mediated by transcytosis (2, 3, 40, 53, 63, 64, 72). This wide array of roles for the gp41 MPER will put considerable pressure on sequence conservation, and any change will certainly lead to a high cost in viral fitness.Monoclonal antibody 2F5 is a broadly neutralizing monoclonal anti-HIV-1 antibody isolated from a panel of sera from naturally infected asymptomatic individuals. It reacts with a core gp41 MPER epitope spanning residues 662 to 668 with the linear sequence ELDKWAS (6, 11, 42, 62, 75). 2F5 immunoglobulin G binding studies and screening of phage display libraries demonstrated that the DKW core is essential for 2F5 recognition and binding (15, 36, 50). Crystal structures of 2F5 with peptides representing its core gp41 epitope reveal a β-turn conformation involving the central DKW residues, flanked by an extended conformation and a canonical α-helical turn for residues located at the N terminus and C terminus of the core, respectively (9, 27, 45, 47). In addition to binding to its primary epitope, evidence is accumulating that 2F5 also undergoes secondary interactions: multiple reports have demonstrated affinity of 2F5 for membrane components, possibly through its partly hydrophobic flexible elongated complementarity-determining region (CDR) H3 loop, and it has also been suggested that 2F5 might interact in a secondary manner with other regions of gp41 (1, 10, 23, 32, 33, 55). Altogether, even though the characteristics of 2F5 interaction with its linear MPER consensus epitope have been described extensively, a number of questions persist about the exact mechanism of 2F5 neutralization at a molecular level.One such ambiguous area of the neutralization mechanism of 2F5 is investigated in this study. Indeed, compared to bnMAb 4E10, 2F5 is the more potent neutralizing antibody although its breadth across different HIV-1 isolates is more limited (6, 35). In an attempt to shed light on the exact molecular requirements for 2F5 recognition of its primary gp41 MPER epitope, we performed structural studies of 2F5 Fab′ with a variety of peptides. The remarkable breadth of possible 2F5 interactions reveals a somewhat surprising promiscuity of the 2F5 binding site. Furthermore, we link our structural observations with the natural variation observed within the gp41 MPER and discuss possible routes of 2F5 escape from a molecular standpoint. Finally, our discovery of 2F5''s ability to tolerate a rather broad spectrum of amino acids in its binding, a spectrum that even includes nonnatural amino acids, opens the door to new ways to design small-molecule immunogens potentially capable of eliciting 2F5-like neutralizing antibodies.     

A Novel Genotype H9N2 Influenza Virus Possessing Human H5N1 Internal Genomes Has Been Circulating in Poultry in Eastern China since 1998

Many novel reassortant influenza viruses of the H9N2 genotype have emerged in aquatic birds in southern China since their initial isolation in this region in 1994. However, the genesis and evolution of H9N2 viruses in poultry in eastern China have not been investigated systematically. In the current study, H9N2 influenza viruses isolated from poultry in eastern China during the past 10 years were characterized genetically and antigenically. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that these H9N2 viruses have undergone extensive reassortment to generate multiple novel genotypes, including four genotypes (J, F, K, and L) that have never been recognized before. The major H9N2 influenza viruses represented by A/Chicken/Beijing/1/1994 (Ck/BJ/1/94)-like viruses circulating in poultry in eastern China before 1998 have been gradually replaced by A/Chicken/Shanghai/F/1998 (Ck/SH/F/98)-like viruses, which have a genotype different from that of viruses isolated in southern China. The similarity of the internal genes of these H9N2 viruses to those of the H5N1 influenza viruses isolated from 2001 onwards suggests that the Ck/SH/F/98-like virus may have been the donor of internal genes of human and poultry H5N1 influenza viruses circulating in Eurasia. Experimental studies showed that some of these H9N2 viruses could be efficiently transmitted by the respiratory tract in chicken flocks. Our study provides new insight into the genesis and evolution of H9N2 influenza viruses and supports the notion that some of these viruses may have been the donors of internal genes found in H5N1 viruses.Wild birds, including wild waterfowls, gulls, and shorebirds, are the natural reservoirs for influenza A viruses, in which they are thought to be in evolutionary stasis (2, 33). However, when avian influenza viruses are transmitted to new hosts such as terrestrial poultry or mammals, they evolve rapidly and may cause occasional severe systemic infection with high morbidity (20, 29). Despite the fact that avian influenza virus infection occurs commonly in chickens, it is unable to persist for a long period of time due to control efforts and/or a failure of the virus to adapt to new hosts (29). In the past 20 years, greater numbers of outbreaks in poultry have occurred, suggesting that the avian influenza virus can infect and spread in aberrant hosts for an extended period of time (5, 14-16, 18, 32).During the past 10 years, H9N2 influenza viruses have become panzootic in Eurasia and have been isolated from outbreaks in poultry worldwide (3, 5, 11, 14-16, 18, 24). A great deal of previous studies demonstrated that H9N2 influenza viruses have become established in terrestrial poultry in different Asian countries (5, 11, 13, 14, 18, 21, 24, 35). In 1994, H9N2 viruses were isolated from diseased chickens in Guangdong province, China, for the first time (4), and later in domestic poultry in other provinces in China (11, 16, 18, 35). Two distinct H9N2 virus lineages represented by A/Chicken/Beijing/1/94 (H9N2) and A/Quail/Hong Kong/G1/98 (H9N2), respectively, have been circulating in terrestrial poultry of southern China (9). Occasionally these viruses expand their host range to other mammals, including pigs and humans (6, 17, 22, 34). Increasing epidemiological and laboratory findings suggest that chickens may play an important role in expanding the host range for avian influenza virus. Our systematic surveillance of influenza viruses in chickens in China showed that H9N2 subtype influenza viruses continued to be prevalent in chickens in mainland China from 1994 to 2008 (18, 19, 36).Eastern China contains one metropolitan city (Shanghai) and five provinces (Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui, Shandong, and Jiangxi), where domestic poultry account for approximately 50% of the total poultry population in China. Since 1996, H9N2 influenza viruses have been isolated regularly from both chickens and other minor poultry species in our surveillance program in the eastern China region, but their genetic diversity and the interrelationships between H9N2 influenza viruses and different types of poultry have not been determined. Therefore, it is imperative to explore the evolution and properties of these viruses. The current report provides insight into the genesis and evolution of H9N2 influenza viruses in eastern China and presents new evidence for the potential crossover between H9N2 and H5N1 influenza viruses in this region.     

Disulfide Bond Formation at the C Termini of Vaccinia Virus A26 and A27 Proteins Does Not Require Viral Redox Enzymes and Suppresses Glycosaminoglycan-Mediated Cell Fusion

Vaccinia virus A26 protein is an envelope protein of the intracellular mature virus (IMV) of vaccinia virus. A mutant A26 protein with a truncation of the 74 C-terminal amino acids was expressed in infected cells but failed to be incorporated into IMV (W. L. Chiu, C. L. Lin, M. H. Yang, D. L. Tzou, and W. Chang, J. Virol 81:2149-2157, 2007). Here, we demonstrate that A27 protein formed a protein complex with the full-length form but not with the truncated form of A26 protein in infected cells as well as in IMV. The formation of the A26-A27 protein complex occurred prior to virion assembly and did not require another A27-binding protein, A17 protein, in the infected cells. A26 protein contains six cysteine residues, and in vitro mutagenesis showed that Cys441 and Cys442 mediated intermolecular disulfide bonds with Cys71 and Cys72 of viral A27 protein, whereas Cys43 and Cys342 mediated intramolecular disulfide bonds. A26 and A27 proteins formed disulfide-linked complexes in transfected 293T cells, showing that the intermolecular disulfide bond formation did not depend on viral redox pathways. Finally, using cell fusion from within and fusion from without, we demonstrate that cell surface glycosaminoglycan is important for virus-cell fusion and that A26 protein, by forming complexes with A27 protein, partially suppresses fusion.Vaccinia virus, the prototype of the Orthopoxvirus genus of the family Poxviridae, infects many cell lines and animals (13) and produces several forms of infectious particles, among which the intracellular mature virus (IMV) is the most abundant form inside cells. The IMV can be wrapped with additional Golgi membrane, transported through microtubules, and released from cells as extracellular enveloped viruses (10). The IMV has evolved to enter host cells through plasma membrane fusion (1, 3, 12, 29, 47) or endocytosis (11, 48). Recently, Mercer et al. reported that IMV entered HeLa cells through apoptotic mimicry and macropinocytosis (32), and Huang et al. reported that IMV enters into HeLa cells through a dynamin-dependent fluid-phase endocytosis that required the cellular protein VPEF (22).The IMV contains more than 75 viral proteins. Of these, more than 10 viral envelope proteins are known to be involved in vaccinia virus entry into cells (6, 34, 55). Vaccinia virus contains at least five attachment proteins, with H3, A27, and D8 binding to cell surface glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) (7, 21, 28), A26 protein binding to the extracellular matrix protein laminin (5), and L1 protein binding to unidentified cell surface molecules (14). A27 protein also binds to the viral A17 protein through its C-terminal region (35, 50), and it was recently shown that the coexpression of A17 and A27 proteins resulted in cell fusion in transiently transfected 293T cells (27). In this study, we demonstrate the formation through disulfide bonds of complexes between two viral attachment proteins, A26 and A27, and we determine the cysteine residues that are critical for these disulfide bonds. We also address the biological role of the A26-A27 protein complex formation in cell fusion regulation.     

Insertion Mutations in Herpes Simplex Virus 1 Glycoprotein H Reduce Cell Surface Expression,Slow the Rate of Cell Fusion,or Abrogate Functions in Cell Fusion and Viral Entry

Of the four required herpes simplex virus (HSV) entry glycoproteins, the precise role of gH-gL in fusion remains the most elusive. The heterodimer gH-gL has been proposed to mediate hemifusion after the interaction of another required glycoprotein, gD, with a receptor. To identify functional domains of HSV-1 gH, we generated 22 randomized linker-insertion mutants. Analyses of 22 gH mutants revealed that gH is relatively tolerant of insertion mutations, as 15 of 22 mutants permitted normal processing and transport of gH-gL to the cell surface. gH mutants that were not expressed well at the cell surface did not function in fusion or viral entry. The screening of gH mutants for function revealed the following: (i) for wild-type gH and some gH mutants, fusion with nectin-1-expressing target cells occurred more rapidly than with herpesvirus entry mediator (HVEM)-expressing target cells; (ii) some gH mutants reduced the rate of cell fusion without abrogating fusion completely, indicating that gH may play a role in governing the kinetics of fusion and may be responsible for a rate-limiting first stage in HSV-1 fusion; and (iii) only one gH mutant, located within the short cytoplasmic tail, completely abrogated function, indicating that the gH cytoplasmic tail is crucial for cell fusion and viral infectivity.Herpes simplex virus (HSV), an enveloped neurotropic virus, infects target cells via membrane fusion, a process executed by viral fusion proteins capable of inserting into target membranes. Unlike many enveloped viruses that induce fusion through the activity of a single viral fusion protein, HSV requires four glycoproteins, glycoprotein B (gB), glycoprotein D (gD), glycoprotein H (gH), and glycoprotein L (gL), to execute fusion (6, 40, 42). The focus of this study, gH, is expressed as a heterodimer with gL (gH-gL). HSV gH and gL rely on one another for proper folding, posttranslational processing, and transport to the cell and virion surface (5, 23, 35).A sequential model of entry is the prevailing working hypothesis of HSV entry (1-3, 28, 32, 41). Viral attachment is mediated by the binding of glycoprotein C (gC) or gB to cell surface glycosaminoglycans such as heparan sulfate (38). The subsequent fusion between the virion envelope and host cell membrane is thought to result from a series of concerted events. First, gD binds to one of its host cell receptors. These receptors include herpesvirus entry mediator (HVEM), a member of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor family; nectin-1 and nectin-2, cell adhesion molecules of the Ig superfamily; and heparan sulfate modified by specific 3-O-sulfotransferases (39).It was previously proposed that gD binding a receptor induces a conformational change that allows for interactions between gD, gB, and/or gH-gL (1, 2, 8, 10, 16, 25, 32). It is thought that while gD functions primarily in receptor binding, gB and gH-gL function as the core fusion machinery of HSV.Based on its crystal structure, gB has structural features typical of viral fusion proteins in general and is structurally similar to vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) glycoprotein G, the fusion protein of VSV (22, 34). In addition to its resemblance to other viral fusogens, gB also binds its own receptor, paired immunoglobulin-like receptor (PILRalpha) (36, 37). Importantly, HSV gB does not successfully execute fusion in the absence of gD or gH-gL (41). Compared to the other required HSV entry glycoproteins, relatively little is known about the specific roles of gH-gL during fusion. The structure of gH-gL is unknown, although in silico analyses and studies of synthetic gH peptides suggested that gH also has fusogenic properties (12, 13, 17-20).gD, a gD receptor, and gH-gL have been shown to be sufficient for inducing hemifusion, the mixing of the proximal leaflets of the viral and host cell bilayers (41). Several lines of research suggest that the subsequent step in fusion is an interaction between gH-gL and gB, with the latter glycoprotein being required for a committed and expanding fusion pore (1-3, 16, 28, 41). However, it is still unclear whether the gB and gH-gL interaction requires that gD first bind a receptor (1, 3), indicating that another viable model of HSV entry may be nonsequential gD-gB-gH-gL complex formation.Several domains important for fusion within HSV gH have been discerned. The only function associated with the N-terminal domain of HSV gH, to date, is gL binding. Residues 377 to 397 within a predicted alpha-helix in the gH ectodomain are required for cell-cell fusion and complementation of a gH-null virus (18). The mutation of a predicted heptad repeat region spanning residues 443 to 471 abrogated cell-cell fusion (17). Insertion mutations within what has been termed the pretransmembrane region of gH have also been shown to abrogate fusion and viral entry (11). The glycine residue at position 812 within the predicted gH transmembrane domain was shown previously to be important for fusion (21). Finally, although the deletion of the final six residues of gH (residues 832 to 838), which are within its short cytoplasmic tail, has no effect on fusion, further deletions were shown to decrease polykaryocyte formation by a syncytial HSV strain (4, 43).We used a transposon-based comprehensive random linker-insertion mutagenesis strategy to generate a library of mutants spanning the entire length of HSV-1 gH, an 838-amino-acid type I membrane protein. A panel of 22 insertion mutants was generated, 15 of which were expressed at near-normal levels on the cell surface. Interestingly, some insertions reduced the rate of cell fusion rather than abrogating cell fusion activity altogether, suggesting that gH may have a role in governing the kinetics of fusion and may be responsible for a rate-limiting first stage in HSV-1 fusion. Additionally, one insertion mutation that completely abrogated cell fusion and viral infectivity is located within the gH cytoplasmic tail, indicating that the short C-terminal tail of gH is critical for cell fusion and entry mediated by HSV-1.     

The Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 UL20 Protein and the Amino Terminus of Glycoprotein K (gK) Physically Interact with gB

Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) glycoprotein K (gK) and the UL20 protein (UL20p) are strictly required for virus-induced cell fusion, and mutations within either the gK or UL20 gene cause extensive cell fusion (syncytium formation). We have shown that gK forms a functional protein complex with UL20p, which is required for all gK and UL20p-associated functions in the HSV-1 life cycle. Recently, we showed that the amino-terminal 82 amino acids (aa) of gK (gKa) were required for the expression of the syncytial phenotype of the mutant virus gBΔ28 lacking the carboxyl-terminal 28 amino acids of gB (V. N. Chouljenko, A. V. Iyer, S. Chowdhury, D. V. Chouljenko, and K. G. Kousoulas, J. Virol. 83:12301-12313, 2009). This work suggested that the amino terminus of gK may directly or indirectly interact with gB and/or other viral glycoproteins. Two-way coimmunoprecipitation experiments revealed that UL20p interacted with gB in infected cells. Furthermore, the gKa peptide was coimmunoprecipitated with gB but not gD. Three recombinant baculoviruses were constructed, expressing the amino-terminal 82 aa of gKa together with either the extracellular portion of gB (30 to 748 aa), gD (1 to 340 aa), or gH (1 to 792 aa), respectively. Coimmunoprecipitation experiments revealed that gKa physically interacted with the extracellular portions of gB and gH but not gD. Three additional recombinant baculoviruses expressing gKa and truncated gBs encompassing aa 30 to 154, 30 to 364, and 30 to 500 were constructed. Coimmunoprecipitation experiments showed that gKa physically interacted with all three truncated gBs. Computer-assisted prediction of possible gKa binding sites on gB suggested that gKa may interact predominantly with gB domain I (E. E. Heldwein, H. Lou, F. C. Bender, G. H. Cohen, R. J. Eisenberg, and S. C. Harrison, Science 313:217-220, 2006). These results imply that the gK/UL20p protein complex modulates the fusogenic properties of gB and gH via direct physical interactions.Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) can enter into cells via the fusion of its viral envelope with cellular membranes. Also, the virus can spread from infected to uninfected cells by causing virus-induced cell fusion, allowing virions to enter into uninfected cells without being exposed to extracellular spaces. These membrane fusion phenomena are known to be mediated by viral glycoproteins and other viral proteins (reviewed in reference 36). Although wild-type viruses cause a limited amount of virus-induced cell fusion, certain mutations cause extensive virus-induced cell-to-cell fusion (syncytial, or syn, mutations). These syncytial mutations are located predominantly within the UL20 gene (5, 27, 28); the UL24 gene (25, 38); the UL27 gene, encoding glycoprotein gB (7, 15, 18, 32); and the UL53 gene, coding for gK (6, 11, 24, 34, 35, 37).The presence of syncytial mutations within different viral genes, as well as other accumulating evidence, suggests that virus-induced cell fusion is mediated by the concerted action and interactions of the viral glycoproteins gD, gB, and gH/gL as well as gK and the membrane protein UL20p. Specifically, recent studies have shown that gD interacts with both gB and gH/gL (1, 2, 21). However, gB and gH/gL can also interact with each other even in the absence of gD (3). In this membrane fusion model, the binding of gD to its cognate receptors, including nectin-1, herpesvirus entry mediator (HVEM), and other receptors (8, 19, 30, 39-42), is thought to trigger sequential conformational changes in gH/gL and gB causing the fusion of the viral envelope with cellular membranes during virus entry as well as fusion among cellular membranes (22, 23). The transient coexpression of gB, gD, and gH/gL causes cell-to-cell fusion (31, 43), suggesting that these four viral glycoproteins are necessary and sufficient for membrane fusion. However, this transient fusion system does not accurately depict virus-induced cell fusion. Specifically, viral glycoprotein K (gK) and the UL20 membrane protein (UL20p) have been shown to be strictly required for virus-induced cell fusion (10, 27, 29). Moreover, syncytial mutations within gK (6, 11, 24, 34, 35, 37) or UL20 (5, 27, 28) promote extensive virus-induced cell fusion, and viruses lacking gK enter more slowly than the wild-type virus into susceptible cells (17). In contrast, the transient coexpression of gK carrying a syncytial mutation with gB, gD, and gH/gL did not enhance cell fusion, while the coexpression of wild-type gK with gB, gD, and gH/gL was reported previously to inhibit cell fusion in certain cell lines (4). To date, there is no direct evidence that either gK or UL20p interacts with gB, gD, gH, or gL.The X-ray structure of the ectodomain of HSV-1 gB has been determined and was predicted to assume at least two major conformations, one of which may be necessary for the fusogenic properties of gB (23). Single-amino-acid changes within the carboxyl terminus of gB located intracellularly as well as the deletion of the terminal 28 amino acids (aa) of gB cause extensive virus-induced cell fusion, presumably because they alter the extracellular conformation of gB (15, 31, 43). We have previously shown that HSV-1 gK and UL20p functionally and physically interact and that these interactions are absolutely necessary for their coordinate intracellular transport, cell surface expression, and functions in the HSV-1 life cycle (13, 16). In contrast to gB, syncytial mutations in gK map predominantly within extracellular domains of gK and particularly within the amino-terminal portion of gK (domain I) (12), while syncytial mutations of UL20 are located within the amino terminus of UL20p shown to be located intracellularly (27).Recently, we showed that the a peptide composed of the amino-terminal 82 amino acids of gK (gKa) can complement in trans for gB-mediated cell fusion caused by the deletion of the carboxyl-terminal 28 amino acids of gB, suggesting that the gKa peptide interacted with gB or other viral glycoproteins involved in virus-induced cell fusion (10). In this work, we demonstrate that UL20p and the amino terminus of gKa physically interact with gB in infected cells, while the gKa peptide is also capable of binding to the extracellular portion of gH, suggesting that gK/UL20p modulates virus-induced cell fusion via direct interactions with gB and gH.