You will be shown a paragraph from a biomedical research paper, followed by a question about the paper. Please extract text from the paragraph to answer the question. Do not include any text in your repsonse other than the answer.

Paragraph: Accelerated viral dynamics in bat cell lines, with implications for zoonotic emergence

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7064339/

SHA: f2cc0d63ff2c4aaa127c4caae21d8f3a0067e3d5

Authors: Brook, Cara E; Boots, Mike; Chandran, Kartik; Dobson, Andrew P; Drosten, Christian; Graham, Andrea L; Grenfell, Bryan T; Müller, Marcel A; Ng, Melinda; Wang, Lin-Fa; van Leeuwen, Anieke
Date: 2020-02-03
DOI: 10.7554/elife.48401
License: cc-by

Abstract: Bats host virulent zoonotic viruses without experiencing disease. A mechanistic understanding of the impact of bats’ virus hosting capacities, including uniquely constitutive immune pathways, on cellular-scale viral dynamics  is needed to elucidate zoonotic emergence. We carried out virus infectivity assays on bat cell lines expressing induced and constitutive immune phenotypes, then developed a theoretical model of our in vitro system, which we fit to empirical data. Best fit models recapitulated expected immune phenotypes for representative cell lines, supporting robust antiviral defenses in bat cells that correlated with higher estimates for within-host viral propagation rates. In general, heightened immune responses limit pathogen-induced cellular morbidity, which can facilitate the establishment of rapidly-propagating persistent infections within-host. Rapidly-transmitting viruses that have evolved with bat immune systems will likely cause enhanced virulence following emergence into secondary hosts with immune systems that diverge from those unique to bats. Text: Bats have received much attention in recent years for their role as reservoir hosts for emerging viral zoonoses, including rabies and related lyssaviruses, Hendra and Nipah henipaviruses, Ebola and Marburg filoviruses, and SARS coronavirus (Calisher et al., 2006; Wang and Anderson, 2019) . In most non-Chiropteran mammals, henipaviruses, filoviruses, and coronaviruses induce substantial morbidity and mortality, display short durations of infection, and elicit robust, long-term immunity in hosts surviving infection (Nicholls et al., 2003; Hooper et al., 2001; Mahanty and Bray, 2004) . Bats, by contrast, demonstrate no obvious disease symptoms upon infection with pathogens that are highly virulent in non-volant mammals (Schountz et al., 2017) but may, instead, support viruses as longterm persistent infections, rather than transient, immunizing pathologies (Plowright et al., 2016) . Recent research advances are beginning to shed light on the molecular mechanisms by which bats avoid pathology from these otherwise virulent pathogens (Brook and Dobson, 2015) . Bats leverage a suite of species-specific mechanisms to limit viral load, which include host receptor sequence incompatibilities for some bat-virus combinations (Ng et al., 2015; Takadate et al., 2020) and constitutive expression of the antiviral cytokine, IFN-a, for others (Zhou et al., 2016) . Typically, the presence of viral RNA or DNA in the cytoplasm of mammalian cells will induce secretion of type I interferon proteins (IFN-a and IFN-b), which promote expression and translation of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) in neighboring cells and render them effectively antiviral (Stetson and Medzhitov, 2006) . In some bat cells, the transcriptomic blueprints for this IFN response are expressed constitutively, even in the absence of stimulation by viral RNA or DNA (Zhou et al., 2016) . In non-flying mammals, constitutive IFN expression would likely elicit widespread inflammation and concomitant immunopathology upon viral infection, but bats support unique adaptations to combat inflammation (Zhang et al., 2013; Ahn et al., 2019; Xie et al., 2018; Pavlovich et al., 2018) that may have evolved to mitigate metabolic damage induced during flight (Kacprzyk et al., 2017) . The extent to which constitutive IFN-a expression signifies constitutive antiviral defense in the form of functional IFN-a protein remains unresolved. In bat cells constitutively expressing IFN-a, some protein-stimulated, downstream ISGs appear to be also constitutively expressed, but additional ISG induction is nonetheless possible following viral challenge and stimulation of IFN-b (Zhou et al., 2016; Xie et al., 2018) . Despite recent advances in molecular understanding of bat viral tolerance, the consequences of this unique bat immunity on within-host virus dynamics-and its implications for understanding zoonotic emergence-have yet to be elucidated. The field of 'virus dynamics' was first developed to describe the mechanistic underpinnings of long-term patterns of steady-state viral load exhibited by patients in chronic phase infections with HIV, who appeared to produce and clear virus at equivalent rates (Nowak and May, 2000; Ho et al., 1995) . Models of simple target cell depletion, in which viral load is dictated by a bottom-eLife digest Bats can carry viruses that are deadly to other mammals without themselves showing serious symptoms. In fact, bats are natural reservoirs for viruses that have some of the highest fatality rates of any viruses that people acquire from wild animals -including rabies, Ebola and the SARS coronavirus. Bats have a suite of antiviral defenses that keep the amount of virus in check. For example, some bats have an antiviral immune response called the interferon pathway perpetually switched on. In most other mammals, having such a hyper-vigilant immune response would cause harmful inflammation. Bats, however, have adapted anti-inflammatory traits that protect them from such harm, include the loss of certain genes that normally promote inflammation. However, no one has previously explored how these unique antiviral defenses of bats impact the viruses themselves. Now, Brook et al. have studied this exact question using bat cells grown in the laboratory. The experiments made use of cells from one bat species -the black flying fox -in which the interferon pathway is always on, and another -the Egyptian fruit bat -in which this pathway is only activated during an infection. The bat cells were infected with three different viruses, and then Brook et al. observed how the interferon pathway helped keep the infections in check, before creating a computer model of this response. The experiments and model helped reveal that the bats' defenses may have a potential downside for other animals, including humans. In both bat species, the strongest antiviral responses were countered by the virus spreading more quickly from cell to cell. This suggests that bat immune defenses may drive the evolution of faster transmitting viruses, and while bats are well protected from the harmful effects of their own prolific viruses, other creatures like humans are not. The findings may help to explain why bats are often the source for viruses that are deadly in humans. Learning more about bats' antiviral defenses and how they drive virus evolution may help scientists develop better ways to predict, prevent or limit the spread of viruses from bats to humans. More studies are needed in bats to help these efforts. In the meantime, the experiments highlight the importance of warning people to avoid direct contact with wild bats. up resource supply of infection-susceptible host cells, were first developed for HIV (Perelson, 2002) but have since been applied to other chronic infections, including hepatitis-C virus (Neumann et al., 1998) , hepatitis-B virus (Nowak et al., 1996) and cytomegalovirus (Emery et al., 1999) . Recent work has adopted similar techniques to model the within-host dynamics of acute infections, such as influenza A and measles, inspiring debate over the extent to which explicit modeling of top-down immune control can improve inference beyond the basic resource limitation assumptions of the target cell model (Baccam et al., 2006; Pawelek et al., 2012; Saenz et al., 2010; Morris et al., 2018) . To investigate the impact of unique bat immune processes on in vitro viral kinetics, we first undertook a series of virus infection experiments on bat cell lines expressing divergent interferon phenotypes, then developed a theoretical model elucidating the dynamics of within-host viral spread. We evaluated our theoretical model analytically independent of the data, then fit the model to data recovered from in vitro experimental trials in order to estimate rates of within-host virus transmission and cellular progression to antiviral status under diverse assumptions of absent, induced, and constitutive immunity. Finally, we confirmed our findings in spatially-explicit stochastic simulations of fitted time series from our mean field model. We hypothesized that top-down immune processes would overrule classical resource-limitation in bat cell lines described as constitutively antiviral in the literature, offering a testable prediction for models fit to empirical data. We further predicted that the most robust antiviral responses would be associated with the most rapid within-host virus propagation rates but also protect cells against virus-induced mortality to support the longest enduring infections in tissue culture. We first explored the influence of innate immune phenotype on within-host viral propagation in a series of infection experiments in cell culture. We conducted plaque assays on six-well plate monolayers of three immortalized mammalian kidney cell lines: [1] Vero (African green monkey) cells, which are IFN-defective and thus limited in antiviral capacity (Desmyter et al., 1968) ; [2] RoNi/7.1 (Rousettus aegyptiacus) cells which demonstrate idiosyncratic induced interferon responses upon viral challenge (Kuzmin et al., 2017; Arnold et al., 2018; Biesold et al., 2011; Pavlovich et al., 2018) ; and [3] PaKiT01 (Pteropus alecto) cells which constitutively express IFN-a (Zhou et al., 2016; Crameri et al., 2009) . To intensify cell line-specific differences in constitutive immunity, we carried out infectivity assays with GFP-tagged, replication-competent vesicular stomatitis Indiana viruses: rVSV-G, rVSV-EBOV, and rVSV-MARV, which have been previously described (Miller et al., 2012; Wong et al., 2010) . Two of these viruses, rVSV-EBOV and rVSV-MARV, are recombinants for which cell entry is mediated by the glycoprotein of the bat-evolved filoviruses, Ebola (EBOV) and Marburg (MARV), thus allowing us to modulate the extent of structural, as well as immunological, antiviral defense at play in each infection. Previous work in this lab has demonstrated incompatibilities in the NPC1 filovirus receptor which render PaKiT01 cells refractory to infection with rVSV-MARV (Ng and Chandrab, 2018, Unpublished results) , making them structurally antiviral, over and above their constitutive expression of IFN-a. All three cell lines were challenged with all three viruses at two multiplicities of infection (MOI): 0.001 and 0.0001. Between 18 and 39 trials were run at each cell-virus-MOI combination, excepting rVSV-MARV infections on PaKiT01 cells at MOI = 0.001, for which only eight trials were run (see Materials and methods; Figure 1 -figure supplements 1-3, Supplementary file 1). Because plaque assays restrict viral transmission neighbor-to-neighbor in two-dimensional cellular space (Howat et al., 2006) , we were able to track the spread of GFP-expressing virus-infected cells across tissue monolayers via inverted fluorescence microscopy. For each infection trial, we monitored and re-imaged plates for up to 200 hr of observations or until total monolayer destruction, processed resulting images, and generated a time series of the proportion of infectious-cell occupied plate space across the duration of each trial (see Materials and methods). We used generalized additive models to infer the time course of all cell culture replicates and construct the multi-trial dataset to which we eventually fit our mechanistic transmission model for each cell line-virus-specific combination ( Figure 1; Figure 1 -figure supplements 1-5). All three recombinant vesicular stomatitis viruses (rVSV-G, rVSV-EBOV, and rVSV-MARV) infected Vero, RoNi/7.1, and PaKiT01 tissue cultures at both focal MOIs. Post-invasion, virus spread rapidly across most cell monolayers, resulting in virus-induced epidemic extinction. Epidemics were less severe in bat cell cultures, especially when infected with the recombinant filoviruses, rVSV-EBOV and rVSV-MARV. Monolayer destruction was avoided in the case of rVSV-EBOV and rVSV-MARV infections on PaKiT01 cells: in the former, persistent viral infection was maintained throughout the 200 hr duration of each experiment, while, in the latter, infection was eliminated early in the time series, preserving a large proportion of live, uninfectious cells across the duration of the experiment. We assumed this pattern to be the result of immune-mediated epidemic extinction (Figure 1) . Patterns from MOI = 0.001 were largely recapitulated at MOI = 0.0001, though at somewhat reduced total proportions (Figure 1-figure supplement 5 ). A theoretical model fit to in vitro data recapitulates expected immune phenotypes for bat cells We next developed a within-host model to fit to these data to elucidate the effects of induced and constitutive immunity on the dynamics of viral spread in host tissue ( Figure 1 ). The compartmental within-host system mimicked our two-dimensional cell culture monolayer, with cells occupying five distinct infection states: susceptible (S), antiviral (A), exposed (E), infectious (I), and dead (D). We modeled exposed cells as infected but not yet infectious, capturing the 'eclipse phase' of viral integration into a host cell which precedes viral replication. Antiviral cells were immune to viral infection, in accordance with the 'antiviral state' induced from interferon stimulation of ISGs in tissues adjacent to infection (Stetson and Medzhitov, 2006) . Because we aimed to translate available data into modeled processes, we did not explicitly model interferon dynamics but instead scaled the rate of cell progression from susceptible to antiviral (r) by the proportion of exposed cells (globally) in the system.

Question: What is needed to elucidate zoonotic emergence?
A mechanistic understanding of the impact of bats’ virus hosting capacities, including uniquely constitutive immune pathways, on cellular-scale viral dynamics