Identification of two distinct structural regions in a human porcine endogenous retrovirus receptor, HuPAR2, contributing to function for viral entry

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Of the three subclasses of Porcine Endogenous Retrovirus (PERV), PERV-A is able to infect human cells via one of two receptors, HuPAR1 or HuPAR2. Characterizing the structure-function relationships of the two HuPAR receptors in PERV-A binding and entry is important in understanding receptor-mediated gammaretroviral entry and contributes to evaluating the risk of zoonosis in xenotransplantation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Chimeras of the non-permissive murine PAR and the permissive HuPAR2, which scanned the entire molecule, revealed that the first 135 amino acids of HuPAR2 are critical for PERV-A entry. Within this critical region, eighteen single residue differences exist. Site-directed mutagenesis used to map single residues confirmed the previously identified L109 as a binding and infectivity determinant. In addition, we identified seven residues contributing to the efficiency of PERV-A entry without affecting envelope binding, located in multiple predicted structural motifs (intracellular, extracellular and transmembrane). We also show that expression of HuPAR2 in a non-permissive cell line results in an average 11-fold higher infectivity titer for PERV-A compared to equal expression of HuPAR1, although PERV-A envelope binding is similar. Chimeras between HuPAR-1 and -2 revealed that the region spanning amino acids 152–285 is responsible for the increase of HuPAR2. Fine mapping of this region revealed that the increased receptor function required the full sequence rather than one or more specific residues.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>HuPAR2 has two distinct structural regions. In one region, a single residue determines binding; however, in both regions, multiple residues influence receptor function for PERV-A entry.</p

Functional hierarchy of two L domains in porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV) that influence release and infectivity

AbstractThe porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV) Gag protein contains two late (L) domain motifs, PPPY and P(F/S)AP. Using viral release assays we demonstrate that PPPY is the dominant L domain involved in PERV release. PFAP represents a novel retroviral L domain variant and is defined by abnormal viral assembly phenotypes visualized by electron microscopy and attenuation of early PERV release as measured by viral genomes. PSAP is functionally dominant over PFAP in early PERV release. PSAP virions are 3.5-fold more infectious in vitro by TCID50 and in vivo results in more RNA positive tissues and higher levels of proviral DNA using our human PERV-A receptor (HuPAR-2) transgenic mouse model [Martina, Y., Marcucci, K.T., Cherqui, S., Szabo, A., Drysdale, T., Srinivisan, U., Wilson, C.A., Patience, C., Salomon, D.R., 2006. Mice transgenic for a human porcine endogenous retrovirus receptor are susceptible to productive viral infection. J. Virol. 80 (7), 3135–3146]. The functional hierarchies displayed by PERV L domains, demonstrates that L domain selection in viral evolution exists to promote efficient viral assembly, release and infectivity in the virus–host context

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field