Improving recombinant Adeno-Associated Virus production through plasmid design and host cell line optimization

Please click Additional Files below to see the full abstract

Organization of Cellular Receptors into a Nanoscale Junction during HIV-1 Adhesion

The fusion of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) with its host cell is the target for new antiretroviral therapies. Viral particles interact with the flexible plasma membrane via viral surface protein gp120 which binds its primary cellular receptor CD4 and subsequently the coreceptor CCR5. However, whether and how these receptors become organized at the adhesive junction between cell and virion are unknown. Here, stochastic modeling predicts that, regarding binding to gp120, cellular receptors CD4 and CCR5 form an organized, ring-like, nanoscale structure beneath the virion, which locally deforms the plasma membrane. This organized adhesive junction between cell and virion, which we name the viral junction, is reminiscent of the well-characterized immunological synapse, albeit at much smaller length scales. The formation of an organized viral junction under multiple physiopathologically relevant conditions may represent a novel intermediate step in productive infection

Single-Molecule Analysis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 gp120-Receptor Interactions in Living Cells

A quantitative description of the binding interactions between human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 envelope glycoproteins and their host cell surface receptors remains incomplete. Here, we introduce a single-molecule analysis that directly probes the binding interactions between an individual viral subunit gp120 and a single receptor CD4 and/or chemokine coreceptor CCR5 in living cells. This analysis differentiates single-molecule binding from multimolecule avidity and shows that, while the presence of CD4 is required for gp120 binding to CCR5, the force required to rupture a single gp120-coreceptor bond is significantly higher and its lifetime is much longer than those of a single gp120-receptor bond. The lifetimes of these bonds are themselves shorter than those of the P-selectin/PSGL-1 bond involved in leukocyte attachment to the endothelium bonds during an inflammation response. These results suggest an amended model of HIV entry in which, immediately after the association of gp120 to its receptor, gp120 seeks its coreceptor to rapidly form a new bond. This “bond transfer” occurs only if CCR5 is in close proximity to CD4 and CD4 is still attached to gp120. The analysis presented here may serve as a general framework to study mechanisms of receptor-mediated interactions between viral envelope proteins and host cell receptors at the single-molecule level in living cells

Monitoring Early Fusion Dynamics of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 at Single-Molecule Resolution ▿ †

The fusion of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) to host cells is a dynamic process governed by the interaction between glycoproteins on the viral envelope and the major receptor, CD4, and coreceptor on the surface of the cell. How these receptors organize at the virion-cell interface to promote a fusion-competent site is not well understood. Using single-molecule force spectroscopy, we map the tensile strengths, lifetimes, and energy barriers of individual intermolecular bonds between CCR5-tropic HIV-1 gp120 and its receptors CD4 and CCR5 or CXCR4 as a function of the interaction time with the cell. According to the Bell model, at short times of contact between cell and virion, the gp120-CD4 bond is able to withstand forces up to 35 pN and has an initial lifetime of 0.27 s and an intermolecular length of interaction of 0.34 nm. The initial bond also has an energy barrier of 6.7 kBT (where kB is Boltzmann's constant and T is absolute temperature). However, within 0.3 s, individual gp120-CD4 bonds undergo rapid destabilization accompanied by a shortened lifetime and a lowered tensile strength. This destabilization is significantly enhanced by the coreceptor CCR5, not by CXCR4 or fusion inhibitors, which suggests that it is directly related to a conformational change in the gp120-CD4 bond. These measurements highlight the instability and low tensile strength of gp120-receptor bonds, uncover a synergistic role for CCR5 in the progression of the gp120-CD4 bond, and suggest that the cell-virus adhesion complex is functionally arranged about a long-lived gp120-coreceptor bond

Differences in the Microrheology of Human Embryonic Stem Cells and Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells

Embryonic and adult fibroblasts can be returned to pluripotency by the expression of reprogramming genes. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that these human induced pluripotent stem (hiPS) cells and human embryonic stem (hES) cells are behaviorally, karyotypically, and morphologically similar. Here we sought to determine whether the physical properties of hiPS cells, including their micromechanical properties, are different from those of hES cells. To this end, we use the method of particle tracking microrheology to compare the viscoelastic properties of the cytoplasm of hES cells, hiPS cells, and the terminally differentiated parental human fibroblasts from which our hiPS cells are derived. Our results indicate that although the cytoplasm of parental fibroblasts is both viscous and elastic, the cytoplasm of hiPS cells does not exhibit any measurable elasticity and is purely viscous over a wide range of timescales. The viscous phenotype of hiPS cells is recapitulated in parental cells with disassembled actin filament network. The cytoplasm of hES cells is predominantly viscous but contains subcellular regions that are also elastic. This study supports the hypothesis that intracellular elasticity correlates with the degree of cellular differentiation and reveals significant differences in the mechanical properties of hiPS cells and hES cells. Because mechanical stimuli have been shown to mediate the precise fate of differentiating stem cells, our results support the concept that stem cell “softness” is a key feature of force-mediated differentiation of stem cells and suggest there may be subtle functional differences between force-mediated differentiation of hiPS cells and hES cells