Studies With Human Coronaviruses II. Some Properties of Strains 229E and OC43

Bucknall, R. A.; King, Lula M.; Kapikian, Albert Z.; Chanock, Robert M.

doi:10.3181/00379727-139-36224

Cited by 53 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To (MERS-CoV) and SARS-CoV-2 [2,5,9]. HCoV-229E, HCoV-OC43, HCoV-HKU1 and HCoV-NL63 usually cause mild symptoms, like common cold and/or diarrhea [10,11]. In contrast, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and the newly-identified SARS-CoV-2 are highly pathogenic, causing severe lower respiratory tract infection in relatively more patients with a higher chance to develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and extrapulmonary manifestations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zoonotic origins of human coronaviruses

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mutation and adaptation have driven the co-evolution of coronaviruses (CoVs) and their hosts, including human beings, for thousands of years. Before 2003, two human CoVs (HCoVs) were known to cause mild illness, such as common cold. The outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) have flipped the coin to reveal how devastating and lifethreatening an HCoV infection could be. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in central China at the end of 2019 has thrusted CoVs into the spotlight again and surprised us with its high transmissibility but reduced pathogenicity compared to its sister SARS-CoV. HCoV infection is a zoonosis and understanding the zoonotic origins of HCoVs would serve us well. Most HCoVs originated from bats where they are non-pathogenic. The intermediate reservoir hosts of some HCoVs are also known. Identifying the animal hosts has direct implications in the prevention of human diseases. Investigating CoV-host interactions in animals might also derive important insight on CoV pathogenesis in humans. In this review, we present an overview of the existing knowledge about the seven HCoVs, with a focus on the history of their discovery as well as their zoonotic origins and interspecies transmission. Importantly, we compare and contrast the different HCoVs from a perspective of virus evolution and genome recombination. The current CoV disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic is discussed in this context. In addition, the requirements for successful host switches and the implications of virus evolution on disease severity are also highlighted.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zoonotic origins of human coronaviruses

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This report also compares the sensitivity of this fluorescent focus assay with that of other assays for infectious virus. Although tube titration and plaque assay methods have been described previously for HCV 229E (2,3,(6)(7)(8)13), there are no reports of a fluorescent focus assay for HCV 229E or any other coronavirus. We confirm reports showing that plaque assays for infectious HCV 229E are more sensitive than tube titration (7,13).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At present the most common ways of quantifying infectious HCV 229E particles are by tube titration or plaque assay (2,3,(6)(7)(8)13). In this report, we describe a fluorescent focus assay for infectious HCV 229E particles using indirect immunofluorescence.…”

Section: Human Coronavirus Strain 229e (Hcv 229e)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infectivity of human coronavirus strain 229E

Macnaughton¹,

Thomas²,

Davies³

et al. 1980

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The replication of human coronavirus strain 229E was observed by using indirect immunofluorescence in infected monolayers of MRC continuous cells. By 8 h after infection, bright cytoplasmic fluorescence was detected in cells infected with human coronavirus 229E. Discrete foci of infection were observed from 8 to 16 h after infection in cells infected with high dilutions of human coronavirus 229E; each fluorescent focus corresponded to a single virus infection. A fluorescent focus assay is described, using indirect immunofluorescence, which is more sensitive than the established techniques of tube titration and plaque assay. Particle/infectivity ratios for unpurified and purified virus preparations revealed a considerable drop in infectivity on purification.

show abstract

“…Coronaviruses are susceptible to inactivation (of infectivity) by heat, acid and ultraviolet irradiation. 229E virus is more sensitive than OC43 virus to these procedures [22]. In the presence of 2% fetal calf serum, 229E virus has a 99% loss of infectivity after 10 hours at 33°C, whereas OC43 virus requires 40 hours to lose the same amount of infectivity; the same effect is produced in half of the time at 37OC.…”

Section: Physicochemical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%