2022
DOI: 10.1099/jgv.0.001740
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mutations within scavenger receptor cysteine-rich (SRCR) protein domain 5 of porcine CD163 involved in infection with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRS)

Abstract: CD163, a macrophage-specific membrane scavenger receptor, serves as a cellular entry receptor for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). The removal of scavenger receptor cysteine-rich (SRCR) domain 5 (SRCR5) of CD163 is sufficient to make transfected cells or genetically modified pigs resistant to PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 genotypes, and substitution of SRCR5 with SRCR8 from human CD163-like protein (hCD163L1) confers resistance to PRRSV-1 but not PRRSV-2 isolates. However, the specific region… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
16
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
2
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the exact amino acid sequences within SRCR5 domain involved in PRRSV infection remain unclear. To address it, mutational research within CD163 SRCR5 was performed and all four disulfide bonds in SRCR5 are critical and required to support PRRSV infection and proliferation (Stoian et al, 2022). Further, replacement of cysteine at positions 10, 39, 70, and 90 with alanine in SRCR5 region confers resistance of cells to PRRSV infection (Stoian et al, 2022), which suggests that these amino acids are necessary for virus infection (Figure 2).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, the exact amino acid sequences within SRCR5 domain involved in PRRSV infection remain unclear. To address it, mutational research within CD163 SRCR5 was performed and all four disulfide bonds in SRCR5 are critical and required to support PRRSV infection and proliferation (Stoian et al, 2022). Further, replacement of cysteine at positions 10, 39, 70, and 90 with alanine in SRCR5 region confers resistance of cells to PRRSV infection (Stoian et al, 2022), which suggests that these amino acids are necessary for virus infection (Figure 2).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To address it, mutational research within CD163 SRCR5 was performed and all four disulfide bonds in SRCR5 are critical and required to support PRRSV infection and proliferation (Stoian et al, 2022). Further, replacement of cysteine at positions 10, 39, 70, and 90 with alanine in SRCR5 region confers resistance of cells to PRRSV infection (Stoian et al, 2022), which suggests that these amino acids are necessary for virus infection (Figure 2). This research also provides an explanation for our study that pigs lacking 41 amino acids which includes three disulfide bonds within SRCR5 domain are not susceptible to infection by PRRSV.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The construction of the recombinant plasmids, which express the viral GP2, GP3, GP4 and GP5 from P129 strain [39] fused to a HA epitope, have been described previously [33]. The plasmids expressing the different viral glycoproteins, a Q5 site-directed mutagenesis kit (New England Biolabs) and specific primers (Table S2) were used according to the manufacturer's specifications…”
Section: Plasmidsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The crystal structure of the CD163 SRCR5 domain determined by us greatly facilitates precise control and prevention of PRRS from the receptor perspective ( Ma et al, 2017 , 2021 ). Site-directed mutagenesis of the CD163 SRCR5 domain will be beneficial for breeding gene-edited pigs resistant to PRRSV while maintaining CD163 biological functions ( Stoian et al, 2022 ). Based on the crystal structure, a set of small molecule compounds targeting CD163 SRCR5 have been screened through artificial intelligence molecular screening and validated against PRRSV infection in vitro ( Huang et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Previously Identified Host Cellular Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%