Origin and Rapid Evolution of a Novel Murine Erythroleukemia Virus of the Spleen Focus-Forming Virus Family

The Friend spleen focus-forming virus (SFFV) env gene encodes a glycoprotein with apparent M_r of 55,000 that binds to erythropoietin receptors (EpoR) to stimulate erythroblastosis. A retroviral vector that does not encode any Env glycoprotein was packaged into retroviral particles and was coinjected into mice in the presence of a nonpathogenic helper virus. Although most mice remained healthy, one mouse developed splenomegaly and polycythemia at 67 days; the virus from this mouse reproducibly caused the same symptoms in secondary recipients by 2 to 3 weeks postinfection. This disease, which was characterized by extramedullary erythropoietin-independent erythropoiesis in the spleens and livers, was also reproduced in long-term bone marrow cultures. Viruses from the diseased primary mouse and from secondary recipients converted an erythropoietin-dependent cell line (BaF3/EpoR) into factor-independent derivatives but had no effect on the interleukin-3-dependent parental BaF3 cells. Most of these factor-independent cell clones contained a major Env-related glycoprotein with an M_r of 60,000. During further in vivo passaging, a virus that encodes an M_r-55,000 glycoprotein became predominant. Sequence analysis indicated that the ultimate virus is a new SFFV that encodes a glycoprotein of 410 amino acids with the hallmark features of classical gp55s. Our results suggest that SFFV-related viruses can form in mice by recombination of retroviruses with genomic and helper virus sequences and that these novel viruses then evolve to become increasingly pathogenic.The independently isolated Friend and Rauscher erythroleukemia viruses (18, 48) are complexes of a replication competent murine leukemia virus (MuLV) and a replication-defective spleen focus-forming virus (SFFV) (39, 42, 47). The SFFVs encode Env glycoproteins (gp55) that are inefficiently processed to form larger cell surface derivatives (gp55^p) (19). The gp55 binds to erythropoietin receptors (EpoR) to cause erythroblast proliferation and splenomegaly in susceptible mice. Evidence has suggested that the critical mitogenic interaction occurs exclusively on cell surfaces (7, 16).SFFVs are structurally closely related to mink cell focus-inducing viruses (MCFs) (2, 5, 10, 50), a class of replication-competent murine retroviruses that has a broad host range termed polytropic (15, 21). Although MCFs are not inherited as replication-competent intact proviruses, the mouse genome contains numerous dispersed polytropic env gene sequences (8, 17, 27). MCFs apparently readily form de novo by recombination when ecotropic host range MuLVs replicate in mice (14, 15, 26, 43). MCF env genes typically are hybrid recombinants that contain a 5′ polytropic-specific region and a 3′ ecotropic-specific portion (26). They encode a gPr90 Env glycoprotein that is cleaved by partial proteolysis to form the products gp70 surface (SU) glycoprotein plus p15E transmembrane (TM) protein (32, 39, 47). In addition, MCFs often differ from ecotropic MuLVs in their long terminal repeat (LTR) sequences (8, 20, 26, 28, 29, 45).Based on their sequences, SFFVs could have derived from MCFs by a 585-base deletion and by a single-base addition in the ecotropic-specific portion of the env gene (10). Evidence suggests that both the 585-bp deletion and the frameshift mutation probably contribute to SFFV pathogenesis (3, 49). Several pathogenic differences among SFFV strains have also been ascribed to amino acid sequence differences in the ecotropic-specific portion of the Env glycoproteins (9, 41).This report describes the origin and rapid stepwise evolution of a new SFFV. This new pathogenic virus initially formed in a mouse that had been injected with an ecotropic strain of MuLV in the presence of a retroviral vector that does not encode any Env glycoprotein. The mouse developed erythroleukemia, splenomegaly, and polycythemia after a long lag phase. At that time the spleen contained viruses with env genes that were able to activate EpoR. Serial passage of this initial virus isolate resulted in selection of a novel SFFV that encodes a gp55 glycoprotein of 410 amino acids. This experimental system provides a method for isolating new SFFVs and for mapping the stages in their genesis.     

Epstein-Barr Virus Lacking Glycoprotein gp42 Can Bind to B Cells but Is Not Able To Infect

The Epstein-Barr virus gH-gL complex includes a third glycoprotein, gp42, which is the product of the BZLF2 open reading frame (ORF). gp42 has been implicated as critical to infection of the B lymphocyte by virtue of its interaction with HLA class II on the B-cell surface. A neutralizing antibody that reacts with gp42 inhibits virus-cell fusion and blocks binding of gp42 to HLA class II; antibody to HLA class II can inhibit infection, and B cells that lack HLA class II can only be infected if HLA class II expression is restored. To confirm whether gp42 is an essential component of the virion, we derived a recombinant virus with a selectable marker inserted into the BZLF2 ORF to interrupt expression of the protein. A complex of gH and gL was expressed by the recombinant virus in the absence of gp42. Recombinant virus egressed from the cell normally and could bind to receptor-positive cells. It had, however, lost the ability to infect or transform B lymphocytes. Treatment with polyethylene glycol restored the infectivity of recombinant virus, confirming that gp42 is essential for penetration of the B-cell membrane.Entry of enveloped viruses into mammalian cells requires that the virion envelope fuse with the cell membrane after attachment to the cell surface. Herpesviruses require the functions of multiple protein species to mediate this event, and in keeping with the common origin and diverse habitats of these viruses, some of the proteins involved in penetration appear to be conserved throughout the family and some appear to be restricted to individual members or more closely related members with similar tropism. The two glycoproteins gH and gL fall into the first category of conserved proteins. Glycoprotein gH has been implicated as a major player in virus-cell fusion in many herpesviruses (8, 10, 11, 22, 28, 32, 34), and gL is an essential partner which is required for folding and transport of gH out of the endoplasmic reticulum (6, 19, 21, 27, 28, 35, 38, 45). The gH and gL homologs of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) are gp85, the product of the BXLF2 open reading frame (ORF) (13, 31), and gp25, the product of the BKRF2 ORF (45), and these homologs appear to behave much as their counterparts in other herpesviruses do (45). However, a third glycoprotein, gp42, associates with the EBV gH-gL complex and falls into the second category of proteins, those with a more restricted distribution.Glycoprotein gp42 is the product of the BZLF2 ORF (26), and although there may be a functionally similar protein in cytomegalovirus (18, 24), it is not predicted to have a homolog in other human herpesviruses. It does, however, have a homolog in ORF51 of equine herpes virus 2 (43). Both EBV and equine herpes virus 2 infect B lymphocytes (1), and several lines of evidence suggest that, at least in the case of EBV, gp42 is critical to the infection of this cell type. A monoclonal antibody (MAb) called F-2-1 that reacts with gp42 has no affect on EBV attachment to its receptor, complement receptor type 2 (CR2) (CD21), but inhibits fusion of the virus with the B-cell membrane and neutralizes infection (29). Glycoprotein gp42 interacts with the β₁ domain of the HLA class II protein HLA-DR (39), and MAb F-2-1 interferes with this interaction (25). Like F-2-1, a MAb to HLA-DR or a soluble form of gp42 can block B-cell transformation, and B-cell lines which lack expression of HLA class II are not susceptible to superinfection with EBV unless expression of HLA class II is restored (25). Collectively these observations suggest that gp42, probably by virtue of its interaction with HLA class II, is essential to infection of the B lymphocyte. To answer directly the question of whether gp42 is an indispensable glycoprotein, we derived a virus that could be definitively shown to lack expression of the molecule and examined its ability to infect normal resting B lymphocytes. We report here that virus with expression of gp42 blocked can exit cells normally and can bind to receptor-positive target cells. However, it is unable to penetrate into cells and initiate infection.     

Evidence that Antibody-Mediated Neutralization of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 by Sera from Infected Individuals Is Independent of Coreceptor Usage

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) uses a variety of chemokine receptors as coreceptors for virus entry, and the ability of the virus to be neutralized by antibody may depend on which coreceptors are used. In particular, laboratory-adapted variants of the virus that use CXCR4 as a coreceptor are highly sensitive to neutralization by sera from HIV-1-infected individuals, whereas primary isolates that use CCR5 instead of, or in addition to, CXCR4 are neutralized poorly. To determine whether this dichotomy in neutralization sensitivity could be explained by differential coreceptor usage, virus neutralization by serum samples from HIV-1-infected individuals was assessed in MT-2 cells, which express CXCR4 but not CCR5, and in mitogen-stimulated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), where multiple coreceptors including CXCR4 and CCR5 are available for use. Our results showed that three of four primary isolates with a syncytium-inducing (SI) phenotype and that use CXCR4 and CCR5 were neutralized poorly in both MT-2 cells and PBMC. The fourth isolate, designated 89.6, was more sensitive to neutralization in MT-2 cells than in PBMC. We showed that the neutralization of 89.6 in PBMC was not improved when CCR5 was blocked by having RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β in the culture medium, indicating that CCR5 usage was not responsible for the decreased sensitivity to neutralization in PBMC. Consistent with this finding, a laboratory-adapted strain of virus (IIIB) was significantly more sensitive to neutralization in CCR5-deficient PBMC (homozygous Δ32-CCR5 allele) than were two of two SI primary isolates tested. The results indicate that the ability of HIV-1 to be neutralized by sera from infected individuals depends on factors other than coreceptor usage.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), the etiologic agent of AIDS, utilizes the HLA class II receptor, CD4, as its primary receptor to gain entry into cells (17, 30). Entry is initiated by a high-affinity interaction between CD4 and the surface gp120 of the virus (32). Subsequent to this interaction, conformational changes that permit fusion of the viral membrane with cellular membranes occur within the viral transmembrane gp41 (9, 58, 59). In addition to CD4, one or more recently described viral coreceptors are needed for fusion to take place. These coreceptors belong to a family of seven-transmembrane G-protein-coupled proteins and include the CXC chemokine receptor CXCR4 (3, 4, 24, 44), the CC chemokine receptors CCR5 (1, 12, 13, 18, 21, 23, 45) and, less commonly, CCR3 and CCR2b (12, 21), and two related orphan receptors termed BONZO/STRL33 and BOB (19, 34). Coreceptor usage by HIV-1 can be blocked by naturally occurring ligands, including SDF-1 for CXCR4 (4, 44), RANTES, MIP-1α, and MIP-1β in the case of CCR5 (13, 45), and eotaxin for CCR3 (12).The selective cellular tropisms of different strains of HIV-1 may be determined in part by coreceptor usage. For example, all culturable HIV-1 variants replicate initially in mitogen-stimulated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), but only a minor fraction are able to infect established CD4⁺ T-cell lines (43). This differential tropism is explained by the expression of CXCR4 together with CCR5 and other CC chemokine coreceptors on PBMC and the lack of expression of CCR5 on most T-cell lines (5, 10, 19, 35, 39, 50, 53). Indeed, low-passage field strains (i.e., primary isolates) of HIV-1 that fail to replicate in T-cell lines use CCR5 as their major coreceptor and are unable to use CXCR4 (1, 12, 18, 21, 23, 28). Because these isolates rarely produce syncytia in PBMC and fail to infect MT-2 cells, they are often classified as having a non-syncytium-inducing (NSI) phenotype. Primary isolates with a syncytium-inducing (SI) phenotype are able to use CXCR4 alone or, more usually, in addition to CCR5 (16, 20, 51). HIV-1 variants that have been passaged multiple times in CD4⁺ T-cell lines, and therefore considered to be laboratory adapted, exhibit a pattern of coreceptor usage that resembles that of SI primary isolates. Most studies have shown that the laboratory-adapted strain IIIB uses CXCR4 alone (3, 13, 20, 24, 51) and that MN and SF-2 use CXCR4 primarily and CCR5 to a lesser degree (11, 13). Sequences within the V3 loop of gp120 have been shown to be important, either directly or indirectly, for the interaction of HIV-1 with both CXCR4 (52) and CCR5 (12, 14, 54, 60). This region of gp120 contains multiple determinants of cellular tropism (43) and is a major target for neutralizing antibodies to laboratory-adapted HIV-1 but not to primary isolates (29, 46, 57).It has been known for some time that the ability of sera from HIV-1-infected individuals to neutralize laboratory-adapted strains of HIV-1 does not predict their ability to neutralize primary isolates in vitro (7). In general, the former viruses are highly sensitive to neutralization whereas the latter viruses are neutralized poorly by antibodies induced in response to HIV-1 infection (7, 43). Importantly, neutralizing antibodies generated by candidate HIV-1 subunit vaccines have been highly specific for laboratory-adapted viruses (26, 37, 38). In principle, the dichotomy in neutralization sensitivity between these two categories of virus could be related to coreceptor usage. To test this, we investigated whether the use of CXCR4 in the absence of CCR5 would render SI primary isolates highly sensitive to neutralization in vitro by sera from HIV-1-infected individuals. Two similar studies using human monoclonal antibodies and soluble CD4 have been reported (31a, 55).     

Syncytium-Inhibiting Monoclonal Antibodies Produced against Human T-Cell Lymphotropic Virus Type 1-Infected Cells Recognize Class II Major Histocompatibility Complex Molecules and Block by Protein Crowding

Four new monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) that inhibit human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1)-induced syncytium formation were produced by immunizing BALB/c mice with HTLV-1-infected MT2 cells. Immunoprecipitation studies and binding assays of transfected mouse cells showed that these MAbs recognize class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules. Previously produced anti-class II MHC antibodies also blocked HTLV-1-induced cell fusion. Coimmunoprecipitation and competitive MAb binding studies indicated that class II MHC molecules and HTLV-1 envelope glycoproteins are not associated in infected cells. Anti-MHC antibodies had no effect on human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) syncytium formation by cells coinfected with HIV-1 and HTLV-1, ruling out a generalized disruption of cell membrane function by the antibodies. High expression of MHC molecules suggested that steric effects of bound anti-MHC antibodies might explain their inhibition of HTLV-1 fusion. An anti-class I MHC antibody and a polyclonal antibody consisting of several nonblocking MAbs against other molecules bound to MT2 cells at levels similar to those of class II MHC antibodies, and they also blocked HTLV-1 syncytium formation. Dose-response experiments showed that inhibition of HTLV-1 syncytium formation correlated with levels of antibody bound to the surface of infected cells. The results show that HTLV-1 syncytium formation can be blocked by protein crowding or steric effects caused by large numbers of immunoglobulin molecules bound to the surface of infected cells and have implications for the structure of the cellular HTLV-1 receptor(s).Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) is a type C retrovirus and the etiologic agent of adult T-cell leukemia (43, 56, 59) and HTLV-1-associated myelopathy or tropical spastic paraparesis (15, 17, 49, 61). Although HTLV-1 shows tropism primarily for T cells, it can infect a variety of cell types including cells from some nonhuman species (6, 9, 27, 46, 48, 60, 62). Infection by free HTLV-1 tends to be highly inefficient, and the virus appears to be transmitted primarily by the cell-to-cell route (37). The HTLV-1 envelope glycoprotein is synthesized as a 61-kDa precursor which is cleaved into surface (gp46) and transmembrane (gp21) proteins (40, 57). gp46 is thought to serve as the virus attachment protein, as does gp120 for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (40, 57). Although previous reports have identified host cell molecules which might potentially mediate virus binding (9, 14), the cellular receptor for HTLV-1 has not been definitively identified. A recent study in which affinity chromatography was carried out with a gp46 peptide has provided evidence that the heat shock protein HSC70 binds directly to gp46 and may serve as a virus receptor (47).gp21 contains an N-terminal hydrophobic fusion domain and likely serves as a fusion protein similar to HIV gp41 (12, 61). Like many other retroviruses, HTLV-1 can induce syncytium formation between infected cells and certain uninfected cell types (28, 39). However, there are no data to indicate that virus transmission or virus persistence in vivo depends on syncytium formation. It is thought that cell-cell fusion involves the same receptors and occurs in a manner similar to virus-cell fusion. For this reason, HTLV-1 syncytium assays have been used to screen for cell surface molecules that may serve as virus receptors (13, 14, 25, 29). Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) against a number of membrane proteins including members of the tetraspanner family (30, 31) have been found to block syncytium formation. My colleagues and I recently reported that expression of the cell adhesion molecule vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1) on uninfected cells can confer sensitivity to HTLV-1-mediated syncytium formation (25). In this previous study, we were not able to block HTLV-1 cell fusion with MAbs against the major VCAM-1 counterreceptor VLA-4 (25). Others have reported that MAbs to other adhesion molecules including intercellular adhesion molecule 3 (ICAM-3) also block HTLV-1 syncytium formation (29). We have demonstrated that adhesion molecules also facilitate HIV type 1 (HIV-1) infection and syncytium formation (16, 24). Thus, adhesion molecules may be important accessory molecules for retroviruses generally.Earlier studies on accessory molecules involved in HTLV-1 biology have been extended by immunizing mice with HTLV-1-infected cells and screening for MAbs that block VCAM-1-supported HTLV-1 syncytium formation. Four new MAbs that completely block HTLV-1-mediated cell fusion have been generated. The MAbs were all determined to be specific for class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules. These MAbs had no effect on syncytium formation induced by HIV-1. Studies on the mechanism by which the MAbs mediate this effect have revealed a novel mode of antibody blockade of virus-induced cell fusion: protein crowding at the infected cell surface resulting in steric blockade of critical receptor-ligand interactions.     

Role of Mouse Hepatitis Virus (MHV) Receptor Murine CEACAM1 in the Resistance of Mice to MHV Infection: Studies of Mice with Chimeric mCEACAM1a and mCEACAM1b

Although most inbred mouse strains are highly susceptible to mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) infection, the inbred SJL line of mice is highly resistant to its infection. The principal receptor for MHV is murine CEACAM1 (mCEACAM1). Susceptible strains of mice are homozygous for the 1a allele of mCeacam1, while SJL mice are homozygous for the 1b allele. mCEACAM1a (1a) has a 10- to 100-fold-higher receptor activity than does mCEACAM1b (1b). To explore the hypothesis that MHV susceptibility is due to the different MHV receptor activities of 1a and 1b, we established a chimeric C57BL/6 mouse (cB61ba) in which a part of the N-terminal immunoglobulin (Ig)-like domain of the mCeacam1a (1a) gene, which is responsible for MHV receptor function, is replaced by the corresponding region of mCeacam1b (1b). We compared the MHV susceptibility of these chimeric mice to that of SJL and B6 mice. B6 mice that are homozygous for 1a are highly susceptible to MHV-A59 infection, with a 50% lethal dose (LD₅₀) of 10^2.5 PFU, while chimeric cB61ba mice and SJL mice homozygous for 1ba and 1b, respectively, survived following inoculation with 10⁵ PFU. Unexpectedly, cB61ba mice were more resistant to MHV-A59 infection than SJL mice as measured by virus replication in target organs, including liver and brain. No infectious virus or viral RNA was detected in the organs of cB61ba mice, while viral RNA and infectious virus were detected in target organs of SJL mice. Furthermore, SJL mice produced antiviral antibodies after MHV-A59 inoculation with 10⁵ PFU, but cB61ba mice did not. Thus, cB61ba mice are apparently completely resistant to MHV-A59 infection, while SJL mice permit low levels of MHV-A59 virus replication during self-limited, asymptomatic infection. When expressed on cultured BHK cells, the mCEACAM1b and mCEACAM1ba proteins had similar levels of MHV-A59 receptor activity. These results strongly support the hypothesis that although alleles of mCEACAM1 are the principal determinants of mouse susceptibility to MHV-A59, other as-yet-unidentified murine genes may also play a role in susceptibility to MHV.Differences in susceptibility to a number of viral infections have been documented among inbred mouse strains (20). These differences have been studied as models for the various degrees of susceptibility of individual humans to some viral infections. Numerous host factors have been found to be involved in such differences (2, 15). For example, allelic variations in the virus receptor and coreceptor for HIV-1 are important host factors influencing susceptibility to HIV-1 infection (36).A virus receptor is a molecule with which the virus interacts at an initial step of infection. Therefore, receptors are crucial host determinants of virus susceptibility (15, 16). A variety of receptor proteins has been identified for many different viruses, including the murine coronavirus mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) (12, 50). The principal receptor for MHV is murine carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 1 (mCEACAM1; previously called Bgp or MHVR [3]), which is in the immunoglobulin (Ig) superfamily (12, 50). Four isoforms of mCEACAM1a (1a) are expressed on the plasma membranes of a variety of murine cells and tissues (14). The two mCEACAM1 isoforms with a molecular mass of 100 to 120 kDa are composed of four Ig-like ectodomains, a transmembrane (TM) domain, and either a long or a short cytoplasmic tail (Cy) (3, 22). Two other isoforms consist of two Ig-like domains, with either long or short Cy (3, 22). The N-terminal (N) domain is responsible for virus binding (10, 24), the induction of conformational changes in the viral spike protein (S), and membrane fusion during virus entry and syncytium formation (13, 24). The replacement of the N-terminal domain of mCEACAM1a with that of the murine homolog of the poliovirus receptor (PVR) yields a functional receptor for MHV (10), and Ceacam1a-knockout mice are completely resistant to infection with the hepatotropic A59 strain of MHV (17, 25).Wild mice have two alleles of the mCeacam1 gene, called mCeacam1a and mCeacam1b. Inbred mouse strains that are homozygous for mCeacam1a, including BALB/c, C57BL/6 (B6), C3H, and A/J mice, etc., are highly susceptible to infection with strains of MHV. In contrast, the SJL line of inbred mice, which is resistant to death from MHV infection, is homozygous for the mCeacam1b allele (5, 11, 50). The most extensive differences in amino acid sequence between mCEACAM1a and mCEACAM1b are found in the N-terminal domain, where the virus-binding region is located (21, 22, 32). It was initially reported by Boyle et al. that mCEACAM1a proteins had MHV-A59 virus-binding activity in a virus overlay protein blot, while mCEACAM1b did not (5). Those authors speculated that the different viral affinities of these mCEACAM1 proteins may account for the various MHV-A59 susceptibilities of BALB/c mice compared to those of SJL mice (49). However, Yokomori and Lai (53) and Dveksler et al. (11) previously showed that when recombinant CEACAM1a and CEACAM1b proteins are expressed at high levels on cultured cells, both proteins have MHV-A59 receptor activity. Yokomori and Lai suggested that the difference in MHV susceptibility between BALB/c and SJL mice does not depend solely upon the interaction of the virus with mCEACAM1 proteins (52, 53). Dveksler et al. suggested that small differences in MHV-A59 receptor activity between mCEACAM1a and mCEACAM1b could result in very large biological differences during multiple cycles of infection in in vivo infection (11). We then quantitatively showed that recombinant mCEACAM1a expressed in BHK cells has 10- to 30-times-higher MHV-binding activity than mCEACAM1b (31). Similar results were observed in other laboratories (7, 32). Because the mCeacam1 gene is located on chromosome 7 (34) and the gene controlling MHV-A59 susceptibility and the resistance of BALB/c mice versus SJL mice is also located on chromosome 7 close to the mCeacam1 gene (40), we speculated that the mCeacam1 gene is identical to the gene that determines the susceptibility and/or resistance of mice to MHV-A59 and MHV-JHM infection.To examine the above-described hypothesis, we used progeny mice produced by crossing BALB/c and SJL mice. F₂ mice and F₁ mice backcrossed to SJL mice were examined for the mCeacam1 genotype and for MHV-JHM susceptibility (30). Mice homozygous for mCeacam1a (1a/1a) and heterozygous mice (1a/1b) were susceptible to lethal MHV-JHM infection, while mice homozygous for mCeacam1b (1b/1b) were not killed by inoculation with MHV-JHM. These data are consistent with the hypothesis that the susceptibility of mice to MHV is determined by the mCeacam1a allele (30). However, this classical genetic analysis could not prove that mCeacam1 alone determines the susceptibility or resistance of mice to MHV-JHM infection, because this methodology cannot rule out the possibility that a different unknown host gene located close to mCeacam1 on chromosome 7 could also affect MHV-JHM susceptibility. Therefore, we used gene replacement in B6 embryonic stem (ES) cells to create a mouse strain in which the exon encoding the N-terminal part of the N-terminal Ig domain of mCeacam1a was replaced with the corresponding region of mCeacam1b from SLJ mice. We bred the chimeric mCeacam1 gene on the B6 background (called B6 chimeric mCeacam1ba, or cB61ba). We compared these mice, wild-type B6 mice, and SJL mice for their susceptibilities to MHV-A59 infection. We confirmed that the expression of mCEACAM1a makes mice susceptible to lethal infection with MHV-A59. However, surprisingly, we found that cB61ba mice were profoundly resistant to MHV-A59 infection, while the virus could replicate at low levels in SJL mice in a self-limited, unapparent infection. Our results suggest that one or more as-yet-unidentified murine genes may also contribute to murine susceptibility and/or resistance to MHV-A59 infection.     

Epstein-Barr Virus Uses Different Complexes of Glycoproteins gH and gL To Infect B Lymphocytes and Epithelial Cells

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) gH-gL complex includes a third glycoprotein, gp42. gp42 binds to HLA class II on the surfaces of B lymphocytes, and this interaction is essential for infection of the B cell. We report here that, in contrast, gp42 is dispensable for infection of epithelial cell line SVKCR2. A soluble form of gp42, gp42.Fc, can, however, inhibit infection of both cell types. Soluble gp42 can interact with EBV gH and gL and can rescue the ability of virus lacking gp42 to transform B cells, suggesting that a gH-gL-gp42.Fc complex can be formed by extrinsic addition of the soluble protein. Truncated forms of gp42.Fc that retain the ability to bind HLA class II but that cannot interact with gH and gL still inhibit B-cell infection by wild-type virus but cannot inhibit infection of SVKCR2 cells or rescue the ability of recombinant gp42-negative virus to transform B cells. An analysis of wild-type virions indicates the presence of more gH and gL than gp42. To explain these results, we describe a model in which wild-type EBV virions are proposed to contain two types of gH-gL complexes, one that includes gp42 and one that does not. We further propose that these two forms of the complex have mutually exclusive abilities to mediate the infection of B cells and epithelial cells. Conversion of one to the other concurrently alters the ability of virus to infect each cell type. The model also suggests that epithelial cells may express a molecule that serves the same cofactor function for this cell type as HLA class II does for B cells and that the gH-gL complex interacts directly with this putative epithelial cofactor.All herpesviruses examined to date encode a complex of two glycoproteins, gH and gL, that appear to be necessary, if not sufficient, for virus penetration. Glycoprotein gH is generally thought to be the major player in virus cell fusion (5, 6, 8, 14, 20, 25, 26), while the role of gL is to serve as a chaperone, essential for folding and transport of functional gH (3, 11, 13, 20, 21, 28, 29). The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) gH-gL complex follows this pattern. Glycoprotein gp85, the gH homolog, is retained in the endoplasmic reticulum in the absence of gp25, the EBV gL (38), and virosomes made from EBV proteins depleted of the gH-gL complex bind to cells but fail to fuse (9). The EBV gH-gL complex, however, includes a third glycoprotein, gp42, which is the product of the BZLF2 open reading frame (ORF) (18). This third component has also proven to be essential for penetration of the major target cell of EBV, the B lymphocyte. Several lines of evidence indicate that gp42 is a ligand for HLA class II and, further, that HLA class II functions as a cell surface cofactor for EBV entry into this cell type. Glycoprotein gp42 interacts with the β₁ domain of HLA class II protein HLA-DR (30), and a monoclonal antibody (MAb) to gp42 called F-2-1 interferes with this interaction (17). MAb F-2-1 has no effect on EBV attachment via glycoprotein gp350/220 to its primary receptor, complement receptor type 2 (CR2; CD21) but inhibits the fusion of the virus with the B-cell membrane (22). Similarly, a MAb to HLA-DR or a soluble form of gp42 blocks B-cell transformation. Finally, B-cell lines which lack expression of HLA class II are not susceptible to superinfection with EBV unless expression of class II is restored (17). Most recently, we derived a recombinant virus with gp42 expression deleted and confirmed that loss of the glycoprotein resulted in a virus that attached to the B-cell surface but that failed to penetrate unless it was treated with the fusogenic agent polyethylene glycol (36).Although most is known about the early interactions of EBV with B lymphocytes in vitro since these cells are readily available and easy to culture, infection is not restricted to this cell type in vivo. During our initial analysis of the biology of gp42 we had therefore examined its potential role in infection of a then newly derived model epithelial cell line, SVKCR2. SVKCR2 cells are transformed with simian virus 40 and stably transfected with B-cell receptor CR2 (19). They are poorly infectable with many strains of EBV, but in excess of 30% of the cells can be infected with the Akata strain of virus as judged by the expression of EBV latent protein EBNA 1 (18, 19). We found that MAb F-2-1 had no effect on the infection of SVKCR2 cells. At the same time, a second MAb, E1D1, which reacts with an epitope that can be formed by the coexpression of gH and gL in the absence of gp42, neutralized infection of SVKCR2 cells, but had no effect on the infection of lymphocytes. These data strongly suggested that the involvement of the gH-gL complex in the internalization of virus into the two cell types was different. We hypothesized that just as EBV has evolved a glycoprotein, gp350/220, which is uniquely adapted for attachment to B lymphocytes, so it has evolved a second glycoprotein, gp42, uniquely adapted for penetration into the same cell type (18). The implication was that gp42 might be dispensable for infection of epithelial cells.Since we made our initial observations with SVKCR2 cells, several novel reagents, including the Akata strain virus with the expression of gp42 deleted, have become available. The recent insights into the role of HLA class II in B-cell infection also provided new impetus to reexamine the involvement of the gH-gL complex in epithelial cell infection. We report here that gp42 is not required for infection of SVKCR2 cells despite the fact that the soluble form of the protein that inhibits B-cell infection can also neutralize infection of SVKCR2 cells. To explain these apparently anomalous results, we describe a model which proposes that wild-type EBV virions contain two types of gH-gL complexes, one that includes gp42 and one that does not. We further propose that the tripartite “B-cell complexes” are not functional for infection of epithelial cells, just as the bipartite “epithelial cell complexes” are unable to mediate infection of the B lymphocyte.     

CD4 Glycoprotein Degradation Induced by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Vpu Protein Requires the Function of Proteasomes and the Ubiquitin-Conjugating Pathway

The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) vpu gene encodes a type I anchored integral membrane phosphoprotein with two independent functions. First, it regulates virus release from a post-endoplasmic reticulum (ER) compartment by an ion channel activity mediated by its transmembrane anchor. Second, it induces the selective down regulation of host cell receptor proteins (CD4 and major histocompatibility complex class I molecules) in a process involving its phosphorylated cytoplasmic tail. In the present work, we show that the Vpu-induced proteolysis of nascent CD4 can be completely blocked by peptide aldehydes that act as competitive inhibitors of proteasome function and also by lactacystin, which blocks proteasome activity by covalently binding to the catalytic β subunits of proteasomes. The sensitivity of Vpu-induced CD4 degradation to proteasome inhibitors paralleled the inhibition of proteasome degradation of a model ubiquitinated substrate. Characterization of CD4-associated oligosaccharides indicated that CD4 rescued from Vpu-induced degradation by proteasome inhibitors is exported from the ER to the Golgi complex. This finding suggests that retranslocation of CD4 from the ER to the cytosol may be coupled to its proteasomal degradation. CD4 degradation mediated by Vpu does not require the ER chaperone calnexin and is dependent on an intact ubiquitin-conjugating system. This was demonstrated by inhibition of CD4 degradation (i) in cells expressing a thermally inactivated form of the ubiquitin-activating enzyme E₁ or (ii) following expression of a mutant form of ubiquitin (Lys₄₈ mutated to Arg₄₈) known to compromise ubiquitin targeting by interfering with the formation of polyubiquitin complexes. CD4 degradation was also prevented by altering the four Lys residues in its cytosolic domain to Arg, suggesting a role for ubiquitination of one or more of these residues in the process of degradation. The results clearly demonstrate a role for the cytosolic ubiquitin-proteasome pathway in the process of Vpu-induced CD4 degradation. In contrast to other viral proteins (human cytomegalovirus US2 and US11), however, whose translocation of host ER molecules into the cytosol occurs in the presence of proteasome inhibitors, Vpu-targeted CD4 remains in the ER in a transport-competent form when proteasome activity is blocked.

The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-specific accessory protein Vpu performs two distinct functions in the viral life cycle (11, 12, 29, 34, 46, 47, 50–52; reviewed in references 31 and 55): enhancement of virus particle release from the cell surface, and the selective induction of proteolysis of newly synthesized membrane proteins. Known targets for Vpu include the primary virus receptor CD4 (63, 64) and major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I molecules (28). Vpu is an oligomeric class I integral membrane phosphoprotein (35, 48, 49) with a structurally and functionally defined domain architecture: an N-terminal transmembrane anchor and C-terminal cytoplasmic tail (20, 34, 45, 47, 50, 65). Vpu-induced degradation of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane proteins involves the phosphorylated cytoplasmic tail of the protein (50), whereas the virion release function is mediated by a cation-selective ion channel activity associated with the membrane anchor (19, 31, 45, 47).CD4 is a 55-kDa class I integral membrane glycoprotein that serves as the primary coreceptor for HIV entry into cells. CD4 consists of a large lumenal domain, a transmembrane peptide, and a 38-residue cytoplasmic tail. It is expressed on the surface of a subset of T lymphocytes that recognize MHC class II-associated peptides, and it plays a pivotal role in the development and maintenance of the immune system (reviewed in reference 30). Down regulation of CD4 in HIV-1-infected cells is mediated through several independent mechanisms (reviewed in references 5 and 55): intracellular complex formation of CD4 with the HIV envelope protein gp160 (8, 14), endocytosis of cell surface CD4 induced by the HIV-1 nef gene product (1, 2), and ER degradation induced by the HIV-1 vpu gene product (63, 64).Vpu-induced degradation of CD4 is an example of ER-associated protein degradation (ERAD). ERAD is a common outcome when proteins in the secretory pathway are unable to acquire their native structure (4). Although it was thought that ERAD occurs exclusively inside membrane vesicles of the ER or other related secretory compartments, this has gained little direct experimental support. Indeed, there are several recent reports that ERAD may actually represent export of the target protein to the cytosol, where it is degraded by cytosolic proteases. It was found that in yeast, a secreted protein, prepro-α-factor (pαF), is exported from microsomes and degraded in the cytosol in a proteasome-dependent manner (36). This process was dependent on the presence of calnexin, an ER-resident molecular chaperone that interacts with N-linked oligosaccharides containing terminal glucose residues (3). In mammalian cells, two human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) proteins, US2 and US11, were found to cause the retranslocation of MHC class I molecules from the ER to the cytosol, where they are destroyed by proteasomes (61, 62). In the case of US2, class I molecules were found to associate with a protein (Sec61) present in the channel normally used to translocate newly synthesized proteins into the ER (termed the translocon), leading to the suggestion that the ERAD substrates are delivered to the cytosol by retrograde transport through the Sec61-containing pore (61). Fujita et al. (24) reported that, similar to these findings, the proteasome-specific inhibitor lactacystin (LC) partially blocked CD4 degradation in transfected HeLa cells coexpressing CD4, Vpu, and HIV-1 Env glycoproteins. In the present study, we show that Vpu-induced CD4 degradation can be completely blocked by proteasome inhibitors, does not require the ER chaperone calnexin, but requires the function of the cytosolic polyubiquitination machinery which apparently targets potential ubiquitination sites within the CD4 cytoplasmic tail. Our findings point to differences between the mechanism of Vpu-mediated CD4 degradation and ERAD processes induced by the HCMV proteins US2 and US11 (61, 62).     

Enhanced Virus Clearance by Early Inducible Lymphocytic Choriomeningitis Virus-Neutralizing Antibodies in Immunoglobulin-Transgenic Mice

Following infection of mice with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), virus-neutralizing antibodies appear late, after 30 to 60 days. Such neutralizing antibodies play an important role in protection against reinfection. To analyze whether a neutralizing antibody response which developed earlier could contribute to LCMV clearance during the acute phase of infection, we generated transgenic mice expressing LCMV-neutralizing antibodies. Transgenic mice expressing the immunoglobulin μ heavy chain of the LCMV-neutralizing monoclonal antibody KL25 (H25 transgenic mice) mounted LCMV-neutralizing immunoglobulin M (IgM) serum titers within 8 days after infection. This early inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibody response significantly improved the host’s capacity to clear the infection and did not cause an enhancement of disease after intracerebral (i.c.) LCMV infection. In contrast, mice which had been passively administered LCMV-neutralizing antibodies and transgenic mice exhibiting spontaneous LCMV-neutralizing IgM serum titers (HL25 transgenic mice expressing the immunoglobulin μ heavy and the κ light chain) showed an enhancement of disease after i.c. LCMV infection. Thus, early-inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibodies can contribute to viral clearance in the acute phase of the infection and do not cause antibody-dependent enhancement of disease.Against many cytopathic viruses such as poliovirus, influenza virus, rabies virus, and vesicular stomatitis virus, protective virus-neutralizing antibodies are generated early, within 1 week after infection (3, 31, 36, 44, 49). In contrast, several noncytopathic viruses (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis viruses B and C in humans or lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus [LCMV] in mice) elicit poor and delayed virus-neutralizing antibody responses (1, 7, 20, 24, 27, 35, 45, 48).In the mouse, the natural host of LCMV, the acute LCMV infection is predominantly controlled by cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) in an obligatory perforin-dependent manner (13, 18, 28, 50). In addition to the CTL response, LCMV-specific antibodies are generated. Early after infection (by day 8), a strong antibody response specific for the internal viral nucleoprotein (NP) is mounted (7, 19, 23, 28). These early LCMV NP-specific antibodies exhibit no virus-neutralizing capacity (7, 10). Results from studies of B-cell-depleted mice and B-cell-deficient mice implied that the early LCMV NP-specific antibodies are not involved in the clearance of LCMV (8, 11, 12, 40). Late after infection (between days 30 and day 60), LCMV-neutralizing antibodies develop (7, 19, 22, 28, 33); these antibodies are directed against the surface glycoprotein (GP) of LCMV (9, 10). LCMV-neutralizing antibodies have an important function in protection against reinfection (4, 6, 38, 41, 47).In some viral infections, subprotective virus-neutralizing antibody titers can enhance disease rather than promote host recovery (i.e., exhibit antibody-dependent enhancement of disease [ADE] [14, 15, 21, 46]). For example, neutralizing antibodies are involved in the resolution of a primary dengue virus infection and in the protection against reinfection. However, if subprotective neutralizing antibody titers are present at the time of reinfection, a severe form of the disease (dengue hemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome [15, 21]), which might be caused by Fc receptor-mediated uptake of virus-antibody complexes leading to an enhanced infection of monocytes (15, 16, 25, 39), can develop. Similarly, an enhancement of disease after intracerebral (i.c.) LCMV infection was observed in mice which had been treated with virus-neutralizing antibodies before the virus challenge (6). ADE in LCMV-infected mice was either due to an enhanced infection of monocytes by Fc receptor-mediated uptake of antibody-virus complexes or due to CTL-mediated immunopathology caused by an imbalanced virus spread and CTL response.To analyze whether LCMV-neutralizing antibodies generated early after infection improve the host’s capacity to clear the virus or enhance immunopathological disease, immunoglobulin (Ig)-transgenic mice expressing LCMV-neutralizing IgM antibodies were generated. After LCMV infection of transgenic mice expressing the Ig heavy chain (H25 transgenic mice), LCMV-neutralizing serum antibodies were mounted within 8 days, which significantly improved the host’s capacity to eliminate LCMV. H25 transgenic mice did not show any signs of ADE after i.c. LCMV infection.Transgenic mice expressing the Ig heavy and light chains (HL25 transgenic mice) exhibited spontaneous LCMV-neutralizing serum antibodies and confirmed the protective role of preexisting LCMV-neutralizing antibodies, even though the neutralizing serum antibodies were of the IgM isotype. Similar to mice which had been treated with LCMV-neutralizing antibodies, HL25 transgenic mice developed an enhanced disease after i.c. LCMV infection, which indicated that ADE was due to an imbalance between virus spread and CTL response. Thus, the early-inducible LCMV-neutralizing antibody response significantly enhanced clearance of the acute infection without any risk of causing ADE.