2019
DOI: 10.1099/jgv.0.001261
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of the function and intergenus-compatibility of Ebola and Lloviu virus proteins

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, our results also clearly show that it is the origin of the RNP proteins, rather than regulatory RNA elements in the genome termini, or their compatibility with the RNP proteins, that is responsible for this difference. Interestingly, EBOV RNP proteins also show a higher efficiency of viral RNA synthesis in comparison to other newly discovered filoviruses with potentially restricted pathogenicity, for example, when comparing them with RNP proteins from the related LLOV [ 36 ]. Again, this is seen irrespective of whether the RNPs are acting on an EBOV minigenome or a LLOV minigenome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, our results also clearly show that it is the origin of the RNP proteins, rather than regulatory RNA elements in the genome termini, or their compatibility with the RNP proteins, that is responsible for this difference. Interestingly, EBOV RNP proteins also show a higher efficiency of viral RNA synthesis in comparison to other newly discovered filoviruses with potentially restricted pathogenicity, for example, when comparing them with RNP proteins from the related LLOV [ 36 ]. Again, this is seen irrespective of whether the RNPs are acting on an EBOV minigenome or a LLOV minigenome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…LLOV minigenome assays were performed as described previously ( 40 ). Briefly, HEK 293T cells were transfected with the PolII-driven LLOV minigenome (pCAGGS-LLOV-vRNA-hrluc; 125 ng), pCAGGS-LLOV-L (500 ng), pCAGGS-LLOV-VP30 (37.5 ng), and pCAGGS-LLOV-VP35 (62.5 ng), as well as the different myc-tagged NP mutants or NP-WT (62.5 ng), using Transit LT-1, according to manufacturer's instructions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For validation of CAD knockdown efficiency and analyses of coIP input and lysates, samples were subjected to SDS-PAGE and Western blotting as previously described [34]. FLAG-tagged CAD was detected using a monoclonal anti-FLAG antibody (1:2000), while NP, wild type CAD, and GAPDH were detected using anti-NP (1:1000), anti-CAD (1:250), and anti-GAPDH (1:1000) antibodies.…”
Section: Western Blottingmentioning
confidence: 99%