Archaeal Host Cell Recognition and Viral Binding of HFTV1 to Its
            <i>Haloferax</i>
            Host

Schwarzer, Sabine; Hackl, Thomas; Oksanen, Hanna M.; Quax, Tessa E. F.

doi:10.1128/mbio.01833-22

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Archaeal S-layers maintain the cell shape under mechanical, osmotic, and thermal stress, selectively allow molecules to enter or leave the cell, and create a quasiperiplasmic compartment (similar to the periplasmic space in Gram-negative bacteria) ( Klingl et al, 2019 ; Albers and Meyer, 2011 ; Rodrigues-Oliveira et al, 2017 ). S-layer glycoproteins are also involved in cell–cell recognition ( Shalev et al, 2017 ) and mediate virus–host interactions ( Tittes et al, 2021 ; Schwarzer et al, 2023 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure of the two-component S-layer of the archaeon Sulfolobus acidocaldarius

Gambelli,

McLaren,

Conners

et al. 2024

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface layers (S-layers) are resilient two-dimensional protein lattices that encapsulate many bacteria and most archaea. In archaea, S-layers usually form the only structural component of the cell wall and thus act as the final frontier between the cell and its environment. Therefore, S-layers are crucial for supporting microbial life. Notwithstanding their importance, little is known about archaeal S-layers at the atomic level. Here, we combined single particle cryo electron microscopy (cryoEM), cryo electron tomography (cryoET) and Alphafold2 predictions to generate an atomic model of the two-component S-layer of Sulfolobus acidocaldarius. The outer component of this S-layer (SlaA) is a flexible, highly glycosylated, and stable protein. Together with the inner and membrane-bound component (SlaB), they assemble into a porous and interwoven lattice. We hypothesise that jackknife-like conformational changes, changes play important roles in S-layer assembly.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure of the two-component S-layer of the archaeon Sulfolobus acidocaldarius

Gambelli,

McLaren,

Conners

et al. 2024

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In haloarchaea, chronic viral infections are common [9][10][11] , yet unlike lytic infection 12 , there was no good model system to study chronic infection until very recently. The newly established system of Haloferax volcanii pleomorphic virus 1 9 , uses a virus isolated from an environmental sample, whose original host remains unknown, to successfully infect the lab strain of H. volcanii (DS2), the best studied archaeal model organism 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new archaeal virus that suppresses the transcription of host immunity genes

Turgeman-Grott,

Golan,

Neri

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In some extreme environments, archaeal cells have been shown to have chronic viral infections, and such infections are well-tolerated by the hosts and may potentially protect against more lethal infections by lytic viruses. We have discovered that a natural Haloferax strain (48N), which is closely related to the model organism Haloferax volcanii, is chronically infected by a lemon-shaped virus, which we could purify from the medium. The chronic infection by this virus, which we named LSV-48N, is never cleared, despite the multiple defense systems of the host that include CRISPR-Cas, and two CBASS systems. Curing 48N of its virus by genetic engineering, led to radical changes in the gene expression profile of 48N and a dramatic improvement in its growth rate. Remarkably, the cured 48N is the fastest-growing haloarchaeon reported to date, with a generation time of approximately 1 hour at 45C compared to the typical 2.5 hours of H. volcanii or its infected isogen, and faster than any known haloarchaeon. The virus subverts host defenses by reducing their transcription and interfering with the CRISPR spacer acquisition machinery. Our results suggest that the slow growth of many halophilic archaea could be due to the effects of proviruses within their genomes that consume resources and alter the gene expression of their hosts.

show abstract

“…1B ). Similarly, Haloferax tailed virus 1 (HFTV1) binds to the S-layer of its euryarchaeal host Haloferax gibbonsii (Schwarzer et al 2023 ). HFTV1 appears to absorb to the cell surface in two ways, via its tail or via its icosahedral head.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…HFTV1 appears to absorb to the cell surface in two ways, via its tail or via its icosahedral head. A 50% frequency of both binding modes suggests a possible sequence of binding events (Schwarzer et al 2023 ). The sequence of H.gibbonsii LR2-5 escape mutants showed alterations in the gene HfgLR_11210 , which encodes for one of the two S-layer proteins.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sequence of H.gibbonsii LR2-5 escape mutants showed alterations in the gene HfgLR_11210 , which encodes for one of the two S-layer proteins. Hence, this glycoprotein probably displays a binding site for HFTV1 (Schwarzer et al 2023 ). Adsorption of HFTV1 to the host surface occurs very fast (1.8 × 10 −9 ml/min), compared to other haloarchaeal viruses (Schwarzer et al 2023 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Archaeal virus entry and egress

Kuiper,

Schöntag,

Oksanen

et al. 2024

microLife

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archaeal viruses display a high degree of structural and genomic diversity. Few details are known about the mechanisms by which these viruses enter and exit their host cells. Research on archaeal viruses has lately made significant progress due to advances in genetic tools and imaging techniques, such as cryo-electron tomography (cryo-ET). In recent years, a steady output of newly identified archaeal viral receptors and egress mechanisms has offered the first insight into how archaeal viruses interact with the archaeal cell envelope. As more details about archaeal viral entry and egress are unravelled, patterns are starting to emerge. This helps to better understand the interactions between viruses and the archaeal cell envelope and how these compare to infection strategies of viruses infecting other domains of life. Here we provide an overview of recent developments in the field of archaeal viral entry and egress, shedding light onto the most elusive part of the virosphere.

show abstract

Archaeal Host Cell Recognition and Viral Binding of HFTV1 to Its Haloferax Host

Abstract: Archaeal viruses are the most enigmatic members of the virosphere. These viruses infect ubiquitous archaea and display an unusually high structural and genetic diversity.

Cited by 6 publications

References 61 publications

Structure of the two-component S-layer of the archaeon Sulfolobus acidocaldarius

Structure of the two-component S-layer of the archaeon Sulfolobus acidocaldarius

A new archaeal virus that suppresses the transcription of host immunity genes

Archaeal virus entry and egress

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About