Alignment of the c-Type Cytochrome OmcS along Pili of Geobacter sulfurreducens

Immunogold localization revealed that OmcS, a cytochrome that is required for Fe(III) oxide reduction by Geobacter sulfurreducens, was localized along the pili. The apparent spacing between OmcS molecules suggests that OmcS facilitates electron transfer from pili to Fe(III) oxides rather than promoting electron conduction along the length of the pili.There are multiple competing/complementary models for extracellular electron transfer in Fe(III)- and electrode-reducing microorganisms (8, 18, 20, 44). Which mechanisms prevail in different microorganisms or environmental conditions may greatly influence which microorganisms compete most successfully in sedimentary environments or on the surfaces of electrodes and can impact practical decisions on the best strategies to promote Fe(III) reduction for bioremediation applications (18, 19) or to enhance the power output of microbial fuel cells (18, 21).The three most commonly considered mechanisms for electron transfer to extracellular electron acceptors are (i) direct contact between redox-active proteins on the outer surfaces of the cells and the electron acceptor, (ii) electron transfer via soluble electron shuttling molecules, and (iii) the conduction of electrons along pili or other filamentous structures. Evidence for the first mechanism includes the necessity for direct cell-Fe(III) oxide contact in Geobacter species (34) and the finding that intensively studied Fe(III)- and electrode-reducing microorganisms, such as Geobacter sulfurreducens and Shewanella oneidensis MR-1, display redox-active proteins on their outer cell surfaces that could have access to extracellular electron acceptors (1, 2, 12, 15, 27, 28, 31-33). Deletion of the genes for these proteins often inhibits Fe(III) reduction (1, 4, 7, 15, 17, 28, 40) and electron transfer to electrodes (5, 7, 11, 33). In some instances, these proteins have been purified and shown to have the capacity to reduce Fe(III) and other potential electron acceptors in vitro (10, 13, 29, 38, 42, 43, 48, 49).Evidence for the second mechanism includes the ability of some microorganisms to reduce Fe(III) that they cannot directly contact, which can be associated with the accumulation of soluble substances that can promote electron shuttling (17, 22, 26, 35, 36, 47). In microbial fuel cell studies, an abundance of planktonic cells and/or the loss of current-producing capacity when the medium is replaced is consistent with the presence of an electron shuttle (3, 14, 26). Furthermore, a soluble electron shuttle is the most likely explanation for the electrochemical signatures of some microorganisms growing on an electrode surface (26, 46).Evidence for the third mechanism is more circumstantial (19). Filaments that have conductive properties have been identified in Shewanella (7) and Geobacter (41) species. To date, conductance has been measured only across the diameter of the filaments, not along the length. The evidence that the conductive filaments were involved in extracellular electron transfer in Shewanella was the finding that deletion of the genes for the c-type cytochromes OmcA and MtrC, which are necessary for extracellular electron transfer, resulted in nonconductive filaments, suggesting that the cytochromes were associated with the filaments (7). However, subsequent studies specifically designed to localize these cytochromes revealed that, although the cytochromes were extracellular, they were attached to the cells or in the exopolymeric matrix and not aligned along the pili (24, 25, 30, 40, 43). Subsequent reviews of electron transfer to Fe(III) in Shewanella oneidensis (44, 45) appear to have dropped the nanowire concept and focused on the first and second mechanisms.Geobacter sulfurreducens has a number of c-type cytochromes (15, 28) and multicopper proteins (12, 27) that have been demonstrated or proposed to be on the outer cell surface and are essential for extracellular electron transfer. Immunolocalization and proteolysis studies demonstrated that the cytochrome OmcB, which is essential for optimal Fe(III) reduction (15) and highly expressed during growth on electrodes (33), is embedded in the outer membrane (39), whereas the multicopper protein OmpB, which is also required for Fe(III) oxide reduction (27), is exposed on the outer cell surface (39).OmcS is one of the most abundant cytochromes that can readily be sheared from the outer surfaces of G. sulfurreducens cells (28). It is essential for the reduction of Fe(III) oxide (28) and for electron transfer to electrodes under some conditions (11). Therefore, the localization of this important protein was further investigated.     

A New Borrelia Species Defined by Multilocus Sequence Analysis of Housekeeping Genes

Analysis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) spirochetes, using a novel multilocus sequence analysis scheme, revealed that OspA serotype 4 strains (a rodent-associated ecotype) of Borrelia garinii were sufficiently genetically distinct from bird-associated B. garinii strains to deserve species status. We suggest that OspA serotype 4 strains be raised to species status and named Borrelia bavariensis sp. nov. The rooted phylogenetic trees provide novel insights into the evolutionary history of LB spirochetes.Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) have been shown to be powerful and pragmatic molecular methods for typing large numbers of microbial strains for population genetics studies, delineation of species, and assignment of strains to defined bacterial species (4, 13, 27, 40, 44). To date, MLST/MLSA schemes have been applied only to a few vector-borne microbial populations (1, 6, 30, 37, 40, 41, 47).Lyme borreliosis (LB) spirochetes comprise a diverse group of zoonotic bacteria which are transmitted among vertebrate hosts by ixodid (hard) ticks. The most common agents of human LB are Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu stricto), Borrelia afzelii, Borrelia garinii, Borrelia lusitaniae, and Borrelia spielmanii (7, 8, 12, 35). To date, 15 species have been named within the group of LB spirochetes (6, 31, 32, 37, 38, 41). While several of these LB species have been delineated using whole DNA-DNA hybridization (3, 20, 33), most ecological or epidemiological studies have been using single loci (5, 9-11, 29, 34, 36, 38, 42, 51, 53). Although some of these loci have been convenient for species assignment of strains or to address particular epidemiological questions, they may be unsuitable to resolve evolutionary relationships among LB species, because it is not possible to define any outgroup. For example, both the 5S-23S intergenic spacer (5S-23S IGS) and the gene encoding the outer surface protein A (ospA) are present only in LB spirochete genomes (36, 43). The advantage of using appropriate housekeeping genes of LB group spirochetes is that phylogenetic trees can be rooted with sequences of relapsing fever spirochetes. This renders the data amenable to detailed evolutionary studies of LB spirochetes.LB group spirochetes differ remarkably in their patterns and levels of host association, which are likely to affect their population structures (22, 24, 46, 48). Of the three main Eurasian Borrelia species, B. afzelii is adapted to rodents, whereas B. valaisiana and most strains of B. garinii are maintained by birds (12, 15, 16, 23, 26, 45). However, B. garinii OspA serotype 4 strains in Europe have been shown to be transmitted by rodents (17, 18) and, therefore, constitute a distinct ecotype within B. garinii. These strains have also been associated with high pathogenicity in humans, and their finer-scale geographical distribution seems highly focal (10, 34, 52, 53).In this study, we analyzed the intra- and interspecific phylogenetic relationships of B. burgdorferi, B. afzelii, B. garinii, B. valaisiana, B. lusitaniae, B. bissettii, and B. spielmanii by means of a novel MLSA scheme based on chromosomal housekeeping genes (30, 48).     

Levels of the Secreted Vibrio cholerae Attachment Factor GbpA Are Modulated by Quorum-Sensing-Induced Proteolysis

Vibrio cholerae is the etiologic agent of cholera in humans. Intestinal colonization occurs in a stepwise fashion, initiating with attachment to the small intestinal epithelium. This attachment is followed by expression of the toxin-coregulated pilus, microcolony formation, and cholera toxin (CT) production. We have recently characterized a secreted attachment factor, GlcNAc binding protein A (GbpA), which functions in attachment to environmental chitin sources as well as to intestinal substrates. Studies have been initiated to define the regulatory network involved in GbpA induction. At low cell density, GbpA was detected in the culture supernatant of all wild-type (WT) strains examined. In contrast, at high cell density, GbpA was undetectable in strains that produce HapR, the central regulator of the cell density-dependent quorum-sensing system of V. cholerae. HapR represses the expression of genes encoding regulators involved in V. cholerae virulence and activates the expression of genes encoding the secreted proteases HapA and PrtV. We show here that GbpA is degraded by HapA and PrtV in a time-dependent fashion. Consistent with this, ΔhapA ΔprtV strains attach to chitin beads more efficiently than either the WT or a ΔhapA ΔprtV ΔgbpA strain. These results suggest a model in which GbpA levels fluctuate in concert with the bacterial production of proteases in response to quorum-sensing signals. This could provide a mechanism for GbpA-mediated attachment to, and detachment from, surfaces in response to environmental cues.Vibrio cholerae has adapted to lifestyles in dual environments, allowing survival in aquatic locations, as well as the ability to colonize the epithelium of the human small intestine. This intestinal colonization by V. cholerae is a prerequisite for the disease cholera in humans. Intestinal colonization proceeds in a stepwise manner, initiating with attachment to the epithelial cell layer by multiple attachment factors (26). This stable attachment localizes the bacterium in an environment conducive for activation of subsequent virulence factors, including the toxin-coregulated pilus, a type IVb pilus that mediates cell-cell interactions and microcolony formation (27). Cholera toxin (CT) is produced and extracellularly secreted by bacteria within the microcolonies and enters into intestinal epithelial cells. CT causes the disruption of fluid and electrolyte balance and results in the voluminous rice water diarrhea characteristically observed with cholera patients.The ability of V. cholerae to bind to surfaces is crucial for the initial stages of colonization of both the aquatic and intestinal environments. Previous studies observing V. cholerae in the aquatic setting identified the ability of the bacteria to attach to zooplankton and phytoplankton, binding to surface structures that include chitin as a major component (7, 10, 11, 19, 21, 42). Chitin, a polymer consisting primarily of a β-1,4 linkage of GlcNAc monomers, is the most abundant aquatic carbon source and, when presented on the surfaces of zooplankton, aquatic exoskeletons, algae, and plants, provides a substrate for V. cholerae surface binding (8, 19-22). V. cholerae is able to break down chitin into carbon to use as a nutrient source via degradation by secreted chitinases (12). We have described a protein, GbpA (GlcNAc binding protein A), which facilitates the binding of V. cholerae to chitin, specifically to the chitin monomer GlcNAc, a sugar residue that is also found on the surface of epithelial cells (3, 16, 26). GbpA mediates binding to chitin, GlcNAc, and exoskeletons of Daphnia magna, as well as participates in effective intestinal colonization within the infant mouse model of cholera (26). GbpA is a secreted protein that exits the cell via the type 2 secretion system by which it mediates attachment by a yet uncharacterized mechanism (26). Previous studies examining the role of GbpA in binding to surfaces have been conducted utilizing various wild-type (WT) strains of V. cholerae, specifically O395 (26) and N16961 (33). These strains both are of the O1 serogroup but are differentially classified as classical (43) and El Tor biotypes (18), respectively. The classical biotype was responsible for the first six pandemics of cholera, whereas El Tor is the cause of the current pandemic (39).Quorum sensing regulates multiple bacterial processes, including virulence, formation of biofilms, and bioluminescence (25, 35, 36). In contrast to many other bacterial quorum-sensing systems, virulence gene expression and biofilm formation in V. cholerae is expressed under conditions of low cell density and repressed at high cell density (17, 35, 48). HapR, a member of the TetR family of regulatory proteins, is a central regulator on which the three parallel inputs of the V. cholerae quorum-sensing system converge (30, 35). During low-cell-density conditions, characteristic of growth within the aquatic environment or stages of early intestinal colonization, the quorum-sensing system is not engaged. Under conditions of high cell density, bacterial numbers and secreted autoinducer molecules are increased to a level that triggers the V. cholerae quorum-sensing system.HapR regulates gene function in two ways, serving as both an activator and repressor. At high cell density, HapR functions in the capacity of a repressor of the toxin-coregulated pilus and CT virulence cascade (29, 31) as well as a repressor of vps gene expression (17), preventing biofilm formation. In addition to repressing gene expression, at high cell density HapR activates the expression of genes encoding extracellularly secreted proteases HapA and PrtV (14, 17, 23, 45-47). HapA, also referred to as hemagglutinin/protease (HA/P), was first reported as a mucinase by Burnet (6) and later characterized as a zinc- and calcium-dependent metalloprotease (4). Extracellularly secreted via the V. cholerae type 2 secretion pathway (40), HA/P has been demonstrated to cleave fibronectin, lactoferrin, and mucin (15), as well as to participate in the activation of the CT A subunit (5). Further studies have led to the suggestion that HA/P is a detachase, critical for the release of V. cholerae from the surface of intestinal cells (2, 14, 38). PrtV is a second protease encoded by a gene that is activated by HapR (47). It has been demonstrated to be essential for both V. cholerae killing of Caenorhabditis elegans, as well as protecting V. cholerae from predator grazing by various flagellates (32, 45).The data presented here indicate that HapA and PrtV participate in the targeted degradation of the attachment factor GbpA. We demonstrate that GbpA is present during the logarithmic phase of growth and conditions of low cell density but that it is not present in the supernatant of high-cell-density cultures of strains that express functional HapR. Further studies revealed that during stages of high cell density, proteases HapA and PrtV, encoded by HapR-activated genes, are responsible for GbpA degradation in the culture supernatant. These findings suggest that the attachment factor GbpA is potentially a ligand targeted for protease degradation during the epithelial detachment process. This process could aid in the release of V. cholerae back into the aquatic environment following late stages of intestinal colonization.     

Roles of Minor Pilin Subunits Spy0125 and Spy0130 in the Serotype M1 Streptococcus pyogenes Strain SF370

Adhesive pili on the surface of the serotype M1 Streptococcus pyogenes strain SF370 are composed of a major backbone subunit (Spy0128) and two minor subunits (Spy0125 and Spy0130), joined covalently by a pilin polymerase (Spy0129). Previous studies using recombinant proteins showed that both minor subunits bind to human pharyngeal (Detroit) cells (A. G. Manetti et al., Mol. Microbiol. 64:968-983, 2007), suggesting both may act as pilus-presented adhesins. While confirming these binding properties, studies described here indicate that Spy0125 is the pilus-presented adhesin and that Spy0130 has a distinct role as a wall linker. Pili were localized predominantly to cell wall fractions of the wild-type S. pyogenes parent strain and a spy0125 deletion mutant. In contrast, they were found almost exclusively in culture supernatants in both spy0130 and srtA deletion mutants, indicating that the housekeeping sortase (SrtA) attaches pili to the cell wall by using Spy0130 as a linker protein. Adhesion assays with antisera specific for individual subunits showed that only anti-rSpy0125 serum inhibited adhesion of wild-type S. pyogenes to human keratinocytes and tonsil epithelium to a significant extent. Spy0125 was localized to the tip of pili, based on a combination of mutant analysis and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis of purified pili. Assays comparing parent and mutant strains confirmed its role as the adhesin. Unexpectedly, apparent spontaneous cleavage of a labile, proline-rich (8 of 14 residues) sequence separating the N-terminal ∼1/3 and C-terminal ∼2/3 of Spy0125 leads to loss of the N-terminal region, but analysis of internal spy0125 deletion mutants confirmed that this has no significant effect on adhesion.The group A Streptococcus (S. pyogenes) is an exclusively human pathogen that commonly colonizes either the pharynx or skin, where local spread can give rise to various inflammatory conditions such as pharyngitis, tonsillitis, sinusitis, or erysipelas. Although often mild and self-limiting, GAS infections are occasionally very severe and sometimes lead to life-threatening diseases, such as necrotizing fasciitis or streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. A wide variety of cell surface components and extracellular products have been shown or suggested to play important roles in S. pyogenes virulence, including cell surface pili (1, 6, 32). Pili expressed by the serotype M1 S. pyogenes strain SF370 mediate specific adhesion to intact human tonsil epithelia and to primary human keratinocytes, as well as cultured keratinocyte-derived HaCaT cells, but not to Hep-2 or A549 cells (1). They also contribute to adhesion to a human pharyngeal cell line (Detroit cells) and to biofilm formation (29).Over the past 5 years, pili have been discovered on an increasing number of important Gram-positive bacterial pathogens, including Bacillus cereus (4), Bacillus anthracis (4, 5), Corynebacterium diphtheriae (13, 14, 19, 26, 27, 44, 46, 47), Streptococcus agalactiae (7, 23, 38), and Streptococcus pneumoniae (2, 3, 24, 25, 34), as well as S. pyogenes (1, 29, 32). All these species produce pili that are composed of a single major subunit plus either one or two minor subunits. During assembly, the individual subunits are covalently linked to each other via intermolecular isopeptide bonds, catalyzed by specialized membrane-associated transpeptidases that may be described as pilin polymerases (4, 7, 25, 41, 44, 46). These are related to the classical housekeeping sortase (usually, but not always, designated SrtA) that is responsible for anchoring many proteins to Gram-positive bacterial cell walls (30, 31, 33). The C-terminal ends of sortase target proteins include a cell wall sorting (CWS) motif consisting, in most cases, of Leu-Pro-X-Thr-Gly (LPXTG, where X can be any amino acid) (11, 40). Sortases cleave this substrate between the Thr and Gly residues and produce an intermolecular isopeptide bond linking the Thr to a free amino group provided by a specific target. In attaching proteins to the cell wall, the target amino group is provided by the lipid II peptidoglycan precursor (30, 36, 40). In joining pilus subunits, the target is the ɛ-amino group in the side chain of a specific Lys residue in the second subunit (14, 18, 19). Current models of pilus biogenesis envisage repeated transpeptidation reactions adding additional subunits to the base of the growing pilus, until the terminal subunit is eventually linked covalently via an intermolecular isopeptide bond to the cell wall (28, 41, 45).The major subunit (sometimes called the backbone or shaft subunit) extends along the length of the pilus and appears to play a structural role, while minor subunits have been detected either at the tip, the base, and/or at occasional intervals along the shaft, depending on the species (4, 23, 24, 32, 47). In S. pneumoniae and S. agalactiae one of the minor subunits acts as an adhesin, while the second appears to act as a linker between the base of the assembled pilus and the cell wall (7, 15, 22, 34, 35). It was originally suggested that both minor subunits of C. diphtheriae pili could act as adhesins (27). However, recent data showed one of these has a wall linker role (26, 44) and may therefore not function as an adhesin.S. pyogenes strain SF370 pili are composed of a major (backbone) subunit, termed Spy0128, plus two minor subunits, called Spy0125 and Spy0130 (1, 32). All three are required for efficient adhesion to target cells (1). Studies employing purified recombinant proteins have shown that both of the minor subunits, but not the major subunit, bind to Detroit cells (29), suggesting both might act as pilus-presented adhesins. Here we report studies employing a combination of recombinant proteins, specific antisera, and allelic replacement mutants which show that only Spy0125 is the pilus-presented adhesin and that Spy0130 has a distinct role in linking pili to the cell wall.     

Virus Entry via the Alternative Coreceptors CCR3 and FPRL1 Differs by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding to CD4 and a chemokine receptor, most commonly CCR5. CXCR4 is a frequent alternative coreceptor (CoR) in subtype B and D HIV-1 infection, but the importance of many other alternative CoRs remains elusive. We have analyzed HIV-1 envelope (Env) proteins from 66 individuals infected with the major subtypes of HIV-1 to determine if virus entry into highly permissive NP-2 cell lines expressing most known alternative CoRs differed by HIV-1 subtype. We also performed linear regression analysis to determine if virus entry via the major CoR CCR5 correlated with use of any alternative CoR and if this correlation differed by subtype. Virus pseudotyped with subtype B Env showed robust entry via CCR3 that was highly correlated with CCR5 entry efficiency. By contrast, viruses pseudotyped with subtype A and C Env proteins were able to use the recently described alternative CoR FPRL1 more efficiently than CCR3, and use of FPRL1 was correlated with CCR5 entry. Subtype D Env was unable to use either CCR3 or FPRL1 efficiently, a unique pattern of alternative CoR use. These results suggest that each subtype of circulating HIV-1 may be subject to somewhat different selective pressures for Env-mediated entry into target cells and suggest that CCR3 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtype B while FPRL1 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtypes A and C. These data may provide insight into development of resistance to CCR5-targeted entry inhibitors and alternative entry pathways for each HIV-1 subtype.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding first to CD4 and then to a coreceptor (CoR), of which C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is the most common (6, 53). CXCR4 is an additional CoR for up to 50% of subtype B and D HIV-1 isolates at very late stages of disease (4, 7, 28, 35). Many other seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been identified as alternative CoRs when expressed on various target cell lines in vitro, including CCR1 (76, 79), CCR2b (24), CCR3 (3, 5, 17, 32, 60), CCR8 (18, 34, 38), GPR1 (27, 65), GPR15/BOB (22), CXCR5 (39), CXCR6/Bonzo/STRL33/TYMSTR (9, 22, 25, 45, 46), APJ (26), CMKLR1/ChemR23 (49, 62), FPLR1 (67, 68), RDC1 (66), and D6 (55). HIV-2 and simian immunodeficiency virus SIVmac isolates more frequently show expanded use of these alternative CoRs than HIV-1 isolates (12, 30, 51, 74), and evidence that alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 mediate infection of primary target cells by HIV-1 isolates is sparse (18, 30, 53, 81). Genetic deficiency in CCR5 expression is highly protective against HIV-1 transmission (21, 36), establishing CCR5 as the primary CoR. The importance of alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 has remained elusive despite many studies (1, 30, 70, 81). Expansion of CoR use from CCR5 to include CXCR4 is frequently associated with the ability to use additional alternative CoRs for viral entry (8, 16, 20, 63, 79) in most but not all studies (29, 33, 40, 77, 78). This finding suggests that the sequence changes in HIV-1 env required for use of CXCR4 as an additional or alternative CoR (14, 15, 31, 37, 41, 57) are likely to increase the potential to use other alternative CoRs.We have used the highly permissive NP-2/CD4 human glioma cell line developed by Soda et al. (69) to classify virus entry via the alternative CoRs CCR1, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, CXCR6, APJ, CMKLR1/ChemR23, FPRL1, and CXCR4. Full-length molecular clones of 66 env genes from most prevalent HIV-1 subtypes were used to generate infectious virus pseudotypes expressing a luciferase reporter construct (19, 57). Two types of analysis were performed: the level of virus entry mediated by each alternative CoR and linear regression of entry mediated by CCR5 versus all other alternative CoRs. We thus were able to identify patterns of alternative CoR use that were subtype specific and to determine if use of any alternative CoR was correlated or independent of CCR5-mediated entry. The results obtained have implications for the evolution of env function, and the analyses revealed important differences between subtype B Env function and all other HIV-1 subtypes.     

Replacement of the Replication Factors of Porcine Circovirus (PCV) Type 2 with Those of PCV Type 1 Greatly Enhances Viral Replication In Vitro

Porcine circovirus type 1 (PCV1), originally isolated as a contaminant of PK-15 cells, is nonpathogenic, whereas porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) causes an economically important disease in pigs. To determine the factors affecting virus replication, we constructed chimeric viruses by swapping open reading frame 1 (ORF1) (rep) or the origin of replication (Ori) between PCV1 and PCV2 and compared the replication efficiencies of the chimeric viruses in PK-15 cells. The results showed that the replication factors of PCV1 and PCV2 are fully exchangeable and, most importantly, that both the Ori and rep of PCV1 enhance the virus replication efficiencies of the chimeric viruses with the PCV2 backbone.Porcine circovirus (PCV) is a single-stranded DNA virus in the family Circoviridae (34). Type 1 PCV (PCV1) was discovered in 1974 as a contaminant of porcine kidney cell line PK-15 and is nonpathogenic in pigs (31-33). Type 2 PCV (PCV2) was discovered in piglets with postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome (PMWS) in the mid-1990s and causes porcine circovirus-associated disease (PCVAD) (1, 9, 10, 25). PCV1 and PCV2 have similar genomic organizations, with two major ambisense open reading frames (ORFs) (16). ORF1 (rep) encodes two viral replication-associated proteins, Rep and Rep′, by differential splicing (4, 6, 21, 22). The Rep and Rep′ proteins bind to specific sequences within the origin of replication (Ori) located in the intergenic region, and both are responsible for viral replication (5, 7, 8, 21, 23, 28, 29). ORF2 (cap) encodes the immunogenic capsid protein (Cap) (26). PCV1 and PCV2 share approximately 80%, 82%, and 62% nucleotide sequence identity in the Ori, rep, and cap, respectively (19).In vitro studies using a reporter gene-based assay system showed that the replication factors of PCV1 and PCV2 are functionally interchangeable (2-6, 22), although this finding has not yet been validated in a live infectious-virus system. We have previously shown that chimeras of PCV in which cap has been exchanged between PCV1 and PCV2 are infectious both in vitro and in vivo (15), and an inactivated vaccine based on the PCV1-PCV2 cap (PCV1-cap2) chimera is used in the vaccination program against PCVAD (13, 15, 18, 27).PCV1 replicates more efficiently than PCV2 in PK-15 cells (14, 15); thus, we hypothesized that the Ori or rep is directly responsible for the differences in replication efficiencies. The objectives of this study were to demonstrate that the Ori and rep are interchangeable between PCV1 and PCV2 in a live-virus system and to determine the effects of swapped heterologous replication factors on virus replication efficiency in vitro.     

Cell-to-Cell Spread of the RNA Interference Response Suppresses Semliki Forest Virus (SFV) Infection of Mosquito Cell Cultures and Cannot Be Antagonized by SFV

In their vertebrate hosts, arboviruses such as Semliki Forest virus (SFV) (Togaviridae) generally counteract innate defenses and trigger cell death. In contrast, in mosquito cells, following an early phase of efficient virus production, a persistent infection with low levels of virus production is established. Whether arboviruses counteract RNA interference (RNAi), which provides an important antiviral defense system in mosquitoes, is an important question. Here we show that in Aedes albopictus-derived mosquito cells, SFV cannot prevent the establishment of an antiviral RNAi response or prevent the spread of protective antiviral double-stranded RNA/small interfering RNA (siRNA) from cell to cell, which can inhibit the replication of incoming virus. The expression of tombusvirus siRNA-binding protein p19 by SFV strongly enhanced virus spread between cultured cells rather than virus replication in initially infected cells. Our results indicate that the spread of the RNAi signal contributes to limiting virus dissemination.In animals, RNA interference (RNAi) was first described for Caenorhabditis elegans (27). The production or introduction of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) in cells leads to the degradation of mRNAs containing homologous sequences by sequence-specific cleavage of mRNAs. Central to RNAi is the production of 21- to 26-nucleotide small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) from dsRNA and the assembly of an RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC), followed by the degradation of the target mRNA (23, 84). RNAi is a known antiviral strategy of plants (3, 53) and insects (21, 39, 51). Study of Drosophila melanogaster in particular has given important insights into RNAi responses against pathogenic viruses and viral RNAi inhibitors (31, 54, 83, 86, 91). RNAi is well characterized for Drosophila, and orthologs of antiviral RNAi genes have been found in Aedes and Culex spp. (13, 63).Arboviruses, or arthropod-borne viruses, are RNA viruses mainly of the families Bunyaviridae, Flaviviridae, and Togaviridae. The genus Alphavirus within the family Togaviridae contains several mosquito-borne pathogens: arboviruses such as Chikungunya virus (16) and equine encephalitis viruses (88). Replication of the prototype Sindbis virus and Semliki Forest virus (SFV) is well understood (44, 71, 74, 79). Their genome consists of a positive-stranded RNA with a 5′ cap and a 3′ poly(A) tail. The 5′ two-thirds encodes the nonstructural polyprotein P1234, which is cleaved into four replicase proteins, nsP1 to nsP4 (47, 58, 60). The structural polyprotein is encoded in the 3′ one-third of the genome and cleaved into capsid and glycoproteins after translation from a subgenomic mRNA (79). Cytoplasmic replication complexes are associated with cellular membranes (71). Viruses mature by budding at the plasma membrane (35).In nature, arboviruses are spread by arthropod vectors (predominantly mosquitoes, ticks, flies, and midges) to vertebrate hosts (87). Little is known about how arthropod cells react to arbovirus infection. In mosquito cell cultures, an acute phase with efficient virus production is generally followed by the establishment of a persistent infection with low levels of virus production (9). This is fundamentally different from the cytolytic events following arbovirus interactions with mammalian cells and pathogenic insect viruses with insect cells. Alphaviruses encode host response antagonists for mammalian cells (2, 7, 34, 38).RNAi has been described for mosquitoes (56) and, when induced before infection, antagonizes arboviruses and their replicons (1, 4, 14, 15, 29, 30, 32, 42, 64, 65). RNAi is also functional in various mosquito cell lines (1, 8, 43, 49, 52). In the absence of RNAi, alphavirus and flavivirus replication and/or dissemination is enhanced in both mosquitoes and Drosophila (14, 17, 31, 45, 72). RNAi inhibitors weakly enhance SFV replicon replication in tick and mosquito cells (5, 33), posing the questions of how, when, and where RNAi interferes with alphavirus infection in mosquito cells.Here we use an A. albopictus-derived mosquito cell line to study RNAi responses to SFV. Using reporter-based assays, we demonstrate that SFV cannot avoid or efficiently inhibit the establishment of an RNAi response. We also demonstrate that the RNAi signal can spread between mosquito cells. SFV cannot inhibit cell-to-cell spread of the RNAi signal, and spread of the virus-induced RNAi signal (dsRNA/siRNA) can inhibit the replication of incoming SFV in neighboring cells. Furthermore, we show that SFV expression of a siRNA-binding protein increases levels of virus replication mainly by enhancing virus spread between cells rather than replication in initially infected cells. Taken together, these findings suggest a novel mechanism, cell-to-cell spread of antiviral dsRNA/siRNA, by which RNAi limits SFV dissemination in mosquito cells.