Replication of Vesicular Stomatitis Virus: the Effect of Purified Interfering Component

Abstract

SUMMARYHigh concentrations of interfering component added to BHK cells infected with the Indiana strain of vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) inhibited the synthesis of virus and interfering component. The inhibition was at an early stage in virus replication. Lower concentrations of interfering component led to the formation of interfering component and depression of virus synthesis. When virus replication was depressed with interfering component prepared from a second strain of VSV (Brazil strain) the RNA of the Brazil interfering component was also replicated at the expense of the Indiana virus. The proteins of the progeny interfering component particles were of the Indiana virus type. It is proposed that interference can take place at different stages during infection, depending upon the amount of interfering component present.

Comprehensive Virology

“…(1969) were able to produce T particles by serial undiluted passage of aT-free clone of B virions, but lower concentrations of T virions in the presence of B virions promoted greater production of progeny T virions. Also worthy of note is the demonstration that the T interfering component of the VS-Brazil serotype could replicate in the presence of the antigenically distinct VS-Indiana B virions; the progeny T particles emerging from this mixed infection were thought to be of the Brazil genotype, based on a somewhat tenuous difference in sedimentation of RNA, but of the Indiana phenotype, as evidenced by their antigenic composition (Wild, 1972). This finding lends additional weight to the hypothesis that all the functional components except the RNA are supplied by the infectious helper virion in this mixed infection.…”

Review Article: An Analytical Review of Defective Infections of Vesicular Stomatitis Virus

“…This may be the case where superinfection with too great a multiplicity of DI particles leads to repression of both DI and ND progeny (Bellett & Cooper, 1959;Stampfer et al, 1969;Wild, 1972;Holland & Villareal, 1975;Khan & Lazzarini, 1977). This defective autointerference now might be attributed to a surfeit of easily suppressed DI terminators.…”