2008
DOI: 10.1099/vir.0.83342-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

GP64 of group I nucleopolyhedroviruses cannot readily rescue infectivity of group II f-null nucleopolyhedroviruses

Abstract: The genus Nucleopolyhedrovirus (NPV) of the family Baculoviridae can be subdivided phylogenetically into two groups. The same division can be made on the basis of their budded virus (BV) envelope fusion protein. Group I NPVs are characterized by the presence of a GP64-like major envelope fusion protein, which is involved in viral attachment and the fusion of virus and cell membrane, and is required for budding of progeny nucleocapsids. Group II NPVs have an envelope fusion protein unrelated to GP64, named F. I… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, cells exposed to high MOIs do not appear to experience saturation of cellular receptors (37)(38)(39)(40), even when inocula comprise high titers of defective particles (11). In contrast, MOI values in insect larvae infected by a baculovirus have been estimated at 4 or 5 genomes/cell (41).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, cells exposed to high MOIs do not appear to experience saturation of cellular receptors (37)(38)(39)(40), even when inocula comprise high titers of defective particles (11). In contrast, MOI values in insect larvae infected by a baculovirus have been estimated at 4 or 5 genomes/cell (41).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, GP64 failed to conversely rescue an F-null SeMNPV (group II NPV) in many transfection trials (35). Since the virus backbones (SeMNPV in the previous study and HearNPV in this study) taken for these substitution assays are different, there are many possible reasons that could have led to the different results, including (i) a rate of transfection of the SeMNPV bacmid into Se301 cells (35) that is lower (Ͻ0.1%) than that of the HearNPV bacmid into HzAM1 cells (0.1 to 1%), (ii) a lower compatibility of GP64 with SeMNPV viral proteins, or (iii) a lower affinity of the Se301 cellular receptor with GP64. In this study, it is also very difficult to generate infectious pseudotyped virus vHaBac⌬F-gp64 since the virus titers in the early passages (P 1 to P 3 ) are very low (Ͻ10 3 TCID 50 units/ml).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since it was postulated that GP64 was captured by a baculovirus during evolution (24), one would expect the functional incorporation of GP64 into the BV of an F-null group II NPV. However, the reverse substitution of a group II NPV (SeMNPV) F protein by GP64 failed to produce infectious progeny viruses (35).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the reverse does not occur (Westenberg & Vlak, 2008). In this report, we addressed this issue by replacing the F protein of HearNPV (HaF) with its homologue from SeMNPV (SeF).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%