A guide to viral inclusions, membrane rearrangements, factories, and viroplasm produced during virus replication.
ABSTRACT Virus replication can cause extensive rearrangement of host cell cytoskeletal and membrane compartments leading to the "cytopathic effect" that has been the hallmark of virus infection in tissue culture for many years. Recent studies are beginning to redefine these signs of viral infection in terms of specific effects of viruses on cellular processes. In this chapter, these concepts have been illustrated by describing the replication sites produced by many different viruses. In many cases, the cellular rearrangements caused during virus infection lead to the construction of sophisticated platforms in the cell that concentrate replicase proteins, virus genomes, and host proteins required for replication, and thereby increase the efficiency of replication. Interestingly, these same structures, called virus factories, virus inclusions, or virosomes, can recruit host components that are associated with cellular defences against infection and cell stress. It is possible that cellular defence pathways can be subverted by viruses to generate sites of replication. The recruitment of cellular membranes and cytoskeleton to generate virus replication sites can also benefit viruses in other ways. Disruption of cellular membranes can, for example, slow the transport of immunomodulatory proteins to the surface of infected cells and protect against innate and acquired immune responses, and rearrangements to cytoskeleton can facilitate virus release.
- SourceAvailable from: Peter D Nagy[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Positive-stranded RNA viruses induce new membranous structures and promote membrane proliferation in infected cells to facilitate viral replication. In this paper, the authors show that a plant-infecting tombusvirus upregulates transcription of phospholipid biosynthesis genes, such as INO1, OPI3 and CHO1, and increases phospholipid levels in yeast model host. This is accomplished by the viral p33 replication protein, which interacts with Opi1p FFAT domain protein and Scs2p VAP protein. Opi1p and Scs2p are phospholipid sensor proteins and they repress the expression of phospholipid genes. Accordingly, deletion of OPI1 transcription repressor in yeast has a stimulatory effect on TBSV RNA accumulation and enhanced tombusvirus replicase activity in an in vitro assay. Altogether, the presented data convincingly demonstrate that de novo lipid biosynthesis is required for optimal TBSV replication. Overall, this work reveals that a (+)RNA virus reprograms the phospholipid biosynthesis pathway in a unique way to facilitate its replication in yeast cells.Virology 12/2014; 471:72-80. DOI:10.1016/j.virol.2014.10.005 · 3.28 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The Potato virus X (PVX) triple gene block protein 3 (TGBp3), an 8-kDa membrane binding protein, aids virus movement and induces the unfolded protein response (UPR) during PVX infection. TGBp3 was expressed from the Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) genome (TMV-p3), and we noted the up-regulation of SKP1 and several endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-resident chaperones, including the ER luminal binding protein (BiP), protein disulphide isomerase (PDI), calreticulin (CRT) and calmodulin (CAM). Local lesions were seen on leaves inoculated with TMV-p3, but not TMV or PVX. Such lesions were the result of TGBp3-elicited programmed cell death (PCD), as shown by an increase in reactive oxygen species, DNA fragmentation and induction of SKP1 expression. UPR-related gene expression occurred within 8 h of TMV-p3 inoculation and declined before the onset of PCD. TGBp3-mediated cell death was suppressed in plants that overexpressed BiP, indicating that UPR induction by TGBp3 is a pro-survival mechanism. Anti-apoptotic genes Bcl-xl, CED-9 and Op-IAP were expressed in transgenic plants and suppressed N gene-mediated resistance to TMV, but failed to alleviate TGBp3-induced PCD. However, TGBp3-mediated cell death was reduced in SKP1-silenced Nicotiana benthamiana plants. The combined data suggest that TGBp3 triggers the UPR and elicits PCD in plants.Molecular Plant Pathology 04/2013; 14(3):241-55. DOI:10.1111/mpp.12000 · 4.49 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Cellular chaperones and folding enzymes play central roles in the formation of positive-strand and negative-strand RNA virus infection. This article examines the key cellular chaperones and discusses evidence that these factors are diverted from their cellular functions to play alternative roles in virus infection. For most chaperones discussed, their primary role in the cell is to ensure protein quality control. They are system components that drive substrate protein folding, complex assembly or disaggregation. Their activities often depend upon co-chaperones and ATP hydrolysis. During plant virus infection, Hsp70 and Hsp90 proteins play central roles in the formation of membrane-bound replication complexes for certain members of the tombusvirus, tobamovirus, potyvirus, dianthovirus, potexvirus, and carmovirus genus. There are several co-chaperones, including Yjd1, RME-8, and Hsp40 that associate with the bromovirus replication complex, pomovirus TGB2, and tospovirus Nsm movement proteins. There are also examples of plant viruses that rely on chaperone systems in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) to support cell-to-cell movement. TMV relies on calreticulin to promote virus intercellular transport. Calreticulin also resides in the plasmodesmata and plays a role in calcium sequestration as well as glycoprotein folding. The pomovirus TGB2 interacts with RME-8 in the endosome. The potexvirus TGB3 protein stimulates expression of ER resident chaperones via the bZIP60 transcription factor. Up-regulating factors involved in protein folding may be essential to handling the load of viral proteins translated along the ER. In addition, TGB3 stimulates SKP1 which is a co-factor in proteasomal degradation of cellular proteins. Such chaperones and co-factors are potential targets for antiviral defense.Frontiers in Plant Science 12/2012; 3:275. DOI:10.3389/fpls.2012.00275 · 3.64 Impact Factor