Control of the gua operon of Escherichia coli K-12

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:D52035/84 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

The receptor binding site of feline leukemia virus surface glycoprotein is distinct from the site involved in virus neutralization

The external surface glycoprotein (SU) of feline leukemia virus (FeLV) contains sites which define the viral subgroup and induce virus-neutralizing antibodies. The subgroup phenotypic determinants have been located to a small variable region, VR1, towards the amino terminus of SU. The sites which function as neutralizing epitopes in vivo are unknown. Recombinant SU proteins were produced by using baculoviruses that contained sequences encoding the SUs of FeLV subgroup A (FeLV-A), FeLV-C, and two chimeric FeLVs (FeLV-215 and FeLV-VC) in which the VR1 domain of FeLV-A had been replaced by the corresponding regions of FeLV-C isolates. The recombinant glycoproteins, designated Bgp70-A, -C, -215, and -VC, respectively, were similar to their wild-type counterparts in several immunoblots and inhibited infection of susceptible cell lines in a subgroup-specific manner. Thus, Bgp70-A interfered with infection by FeLV-A, whereas Bgp70-C, -VC, and -215 did not. Conversely, Bgp70-C, -VC, and -215 blocked infection with FeLV-C, while Bgp70-A had no effect. These results indicate that the site on SU which binds to the FeLV cell surface receptor was preserved in the recombinant glycoproteins. It was also found that the recombinant proteins were able to bind naturally occurring neutralizing antibodies. Bgp70-A, -VC, and -215 interfered with the action of anti-FeLV-A neutralizing antibodies, whereas Bgp70-C did not. Furthermore, Bgp70-C interfered with the action of anti-FeLV-C neutralizing antibodies, while the other proteins did not. These results indicate that the neutralizing epitope(s) of FeLV SU lies outside the subgroup-determining VR1 domain

Canine Parvovirus Type 2 Vaccine Protects Against Virulent Challenge with Type 2c Virus

Abstract The ability of dogs vaccinated with a live attenuated CPV type 2 (Nobivac Intervet) vaccine to resist challenge with a current CPV2c isolate was investigated. Six SPF beagle dogs were given the minimum recommended course of vaccination, comprising a single inoculation of vaccine (Nobivac Lepto + Nobivac Pi) at 8-10 weeks of age followed 3 weeks later with a parvovirus vaccine in combination with distemper, adenovirus and parainfluenza virus (Nobivac DHPPi) and a repeat leptospirosis vaccine. Six control dogs were kept unvaccinated. All animals were challenged orally with a type 2c isolate of CPV and monitored for clinical signs, virus shedding, white blood cell fluctuations and serological responses. All vaccinated dogs were fully protected; showing no clinical signs nor shedding challenge virus in the faeces, in contrast to control animals, which displayed all the typical signs of infection with pathogenic CPV and shed challenge virus in the faeces.

Canine parvovirus in asymptomatic feline carriers

Canine parvovirus (CPV) and feline panleukopaenia virus (FPLV) are two closely related viruses, which are known to cause severe disease in younger unvaccinated animals. As well as causing disease in their respective hosts, CPV has recently acquired the feline host range, allowing it to infect both cats and dogs. As well as causing disease in dogs, there is evidence that under some circumstances CPV may also cause disease in cats. This study has investigated the prevalence of parvoviruses in the faeces of clinically healthy cats and dogs in two rescue shelters. Canine parvovirus was demonstrated in 32.5 (13/50) of faecal samples in a cross sectional study of 50 cats from a feline only shelter, and 33.9 (61/180) of faecal samples in a longitudinal study of 74 cats at a mixed canine and feline shelter. Virus was isolated in cell cultures of both canine and feline origin from all PCR-positive samples suggesting they contained viable, infectious virus. In contrast to the high CPV prevalence in cats, no FPLV was found, and none of 122 faecal samples from dogs, or 160 samples collected from the kennel environment, tested positive for parvovirus by PCR. Sequence analysis of major capsid VP2 gene from all positive samples, as well as the non-structural gene from 18 randomly selected positive samples, showed that all positive cats were shedding CPV2a or 2b, rather than FPLV. Longitudinally sampling in one shelter showed that all cats appeared to shed the same virus sequence type at each date they were positive (up to six weeks), despite a lack of clinical signs. Fifty percent of the sequences obtained here were shown to be similar to those recently obtained in a study of sick dogs in the UK (Clegg et al., 2011).These results suggest that in some circumstances, clinically normal cats may be able to shed CPV for prolonged periods of time, and raises the possibility that such cats may be important reservoirs for the maintenance of infection in both the cat and the dog population. © 2011 Elsevier B.V

Development of AIDS vaccine strategies in a feline animal model

No abstract available

Development of AIDS vaccine strategies in a feline animal model

No abstract available

Protection against feline immunodeficiency virus using replication defective proviral DNA vaccines with feline interleukin-12 and-18

A molecular clone of the Glasgow-8 isolate of FIV (FIVGL8) was rendered replication defective by an in-frame deletion in either reverse transcriptase (ΔRT) or integrase (ΔIN) genes for use as DNA vaccines. To test the ability of these multi-gene vaccines to protect against two feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) isolates of differing virulence, cats were immunized using either DNA vaccine alone or co-administered with interleukin-12 (IL-12) and/or interleukin-18 (IL-18) cytokine DNA. Animals were challenged sequentially with FIV-Petaluma (FIVPET) an FIV isolate of relatively low virulence and subsequently with the more virulent FIVGL8. A proportion of vaccinates (5/18 ΔIN and 2/12 ΔRT) were protected against primary challenge with FIVPET. Five of the vaccinated-protected cats were re-challenged with FIVPET; four (all ΔIN) remained free of viraemia whilst all naive controls became viraemic. Following subsequent challenge with the more virulent FIVGL8 these four vaccinated-protected animals all became viraemic but showed lower proviral loads than naive cats. This study suggests that while our current DNA vaccines may not produce sterilizing immunity against more virulent isolates of FIV, they may nevertheless significantly reduce the impact of infection