Previous Article | Next Article 
J Virol, March 1998, p. 1744-1753, Vol. 72, No. 3
0022-538X/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Mapping Viral DNA Specificity to the Central Region
of Integrase by Using Functional Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type
1/Visna Virus Chimeric Proteins
Michael
Katzman1,2,* and
Malgorzata
Sudol1
Department of
Medicine1 and
Department of Microbiology
and Immunology,2 Pennsylvania State
University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania 17033
Received 15 August 1997/Accepted 3 December 1997
 |
ABSTRACT |
We previously described the construction and analysis of the first
set of functional chimeric lentivirus integrases, involving exchange of
the N-terminal, central, and C-terminal regions of the human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and visna virus integrase (IN)
proteins. Based on those results, additional HIV-1/visna virus chimeric
integrases were designed and purified. Each of the chimeric enzymes was
functional in at least one oligonucleotide-based IN assay. Of a total
of 12 chimeric IN proteins, 3 exhibit specific viral DNA processing, 9 catalyze insertion of viral DNA ends, 12 can reverse that reaction, and
11 are active for nonspecific alcoholysis. Functional data obtained
with the processing assay indicate that the central region of the
protein is responsible for viral DNA specificity. Target site selection
for nonspecific alcoholysis again mapped to the central domain of IN,
confirming our previous data indicating that this region can position
nonviral DNA for nucleophilic attack. However, the chimeric proteins
created patterns of viral DNA insertion distinct from that of either
wild-type IN, suggesting that interactions between regions of IN
influence target site selection for viral DNA integration. The results
support a new model for the functional organization of IN in which
viral DNA initially binds nonspecifically to the C-terminal portion of
IN but the catalytic central region of the enzyme has a prominent role
both in specific recognition of viral DNA ends and in positioning the
host DNA for viral DNA integration.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Following reverse transcription,
retroviral integrase (IN) catalyzes two endonuclease events that are
necessary for insertion of each end of the newly synthesized viral DNA
into an infected cell's chromosomal DNA. Initially, IN places a nick
after invariant CA bases typically found two nucleotides from the 3'
ends of blunt-ended linear viral DNA (33, 56); this
sequence-specific reaction is referred to as processing (11,
34). Subsequently, IN inserts the nucleophilic 3'-OH group at
each recessed end of the processed viral DNA into staggered sites on
host DNA; this cleavage reaction, which is independent of the host DNA
sequence, is referred to as DNA joining, strand transfer, or
integration (11, 21, 32). Both processing and DNA joining
can be mimicked in vitro, using short oligonucleotide substrates
designed to resemble the U3 or U5 ends of viral DNA (11, 32,
33). Data from these and related assays have mapped the active
site of the enzyme to the central region of IN (8, 13, 18, 43, 45,
47, 64, 68), which contains three highly conserved acidic amino
acids that form a D,D-35-E motif (41). However, despite
extensive deletion and mutagenesis studies, the portions of the protein
that interact with viral DNA and host DNA have not been determined. It
had been suggested that the N-terminal region, which has a conserved
H-H-C-C motif that binds zinc (6, 8, 41), is responsible for
specific interactions with viral DNA (8, 31, 43, 45, 52,
67). In contrast, the C-terminal region, which binds DNA
nonspecifically (19, 49, 57, 68, 71, 72), has been an
attractive location for sequence-independent interactions with host
DNA. In this report, we present further evidence that both of these
predictions are wrong.
The ability to form functional chimeras between appropriate wild-type
proteins is a powerful and complementary approach to define functional
domains. The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and visna
virus integrases are particularly well suited for domain swapping
experiments because they exhibit approximately 30% amino acid identity
in each region, show optimal activity under identical in vitro reaction
conditions, and yield distinguishable results in reliable assays
(36). We previously described the first set of chimeric
lentivirus integrases, constructed by exchange of the N-terminal,
central, and C-terminal regions of the HIV-1 and visna virus proteins
(36). The regions chosen for making the initial chimeras
were defined by HIV-1 amino acid residues 1 to 49, 50 to 186, and 187 to 288 (with the caveat discussed below), based on the ability of these
regions to functionally complement each other (17) and the
ability of an isolated protein fragment representing residues 50 to 186 to catalyze some polynucleotidyl transfer reactions (8).
Results obtained with these six chimeric integrases (summarized in Fig.
1, sets b to d) permitted three important
observations to be made (36). First, the N-terminal region
of IN does not contribute to viral DNA specificity, since a protein
with the N-terminal region of HIV-1 IN and the central and C-terminal
regions of visna virus IN exhibited the viral DNA specificity of visna
virus IN. Second, target site selection with a viral DNA terminus as
the nucleophile did not map to regions of IN defined by these
boundaries, since chimeric proteins gave novel patterns of strand
transfer products. Third, an additional endonuclease activity of IN was
discovered. We termed this activity nonspecific alcoholysis because IN
was shown to use small nucleophiles such as glycerol to attack any DNA
sequence at multiple sites (38). Significantly, target site
preferences for nonspecific alcoholysis, which is the most robust
activity exhibited by several integrases, clearly mapped to the central
region of IN (36, 38).

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
HIV-1/visna virus chimeric IN proteins. A linear
representation of the IN protein is shown at the top, with the relative
positions of the conserved H-H-C-C and D,D-35-E motifs indicated. The
numbers above and below the linear map denote positions in the HIV-1 IN
and visna virus IN proteins, respectively, that define domains utilized
to form the chimeric proteins; note that amino acids 186 to 190 of
HIV-1 IN are identical to residues 188 to 192 of visna virus IN.
Proteins are presented schematically, with solid bars denoting
fragments derived from HIV-1 and stippled bars indicating visna virus
sequences. Wild-type and chimeric proteins are grouped in pairs a to g,
as indicated under "Description." Sets b to d are our original six
chimeras, named with three uppercase letters. Sets e to f are new
chimeras, named with two uppercase letters and two lowercase letters;
the second and third letters in this series can be considered an
extended core region. The results of various oligonucleotide-based IN
assays are summarized at the right, where "Preferred Viral U3
Substrate" refers to processing. , inactive in that assay; +,
active for strand transfer but at too low a level to display a
reproducibly discernible pattern.
|
|
Since target site selection for nonspecific alcoholysis maps to the
central portion of IN, this region must participate in positioning
nonviral DNA for nucleophilic attack (the limits for this domain are
best defined by residues 50 and 190 because five consecutive amino
acids, starting with HIV-1 IN residue 186, are identical in the two
wild-type proteins). However, the ability to map target site selection
to residues 50 to 190 only when IN utilizes small nucleophiles such as
glycerol to attack DNA, but not when the larger viral DNA end is used
as the nucleophile, suggests that residues outside numbers 50 to 190 are involved in recognizing or positioning the viral DNA end. For these
and other reasons, we expanded the set of HIV-1/visna virus chimeric integrases by producing six new proteins in which the central region
would now be defined by amino acid residues 50 to 212. The results map
specificity during viral DNA processing, for the first time, to the
central region of IN.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cloning of IN sequences.
The HIV-1HXB2 IN and
visna virus IN coding regions were cloned into plasmid pQE-30 and
expressed in Escherichia coli M15[pREP4] (Qiagen, Inc.,
Chatsworth, Calif.), as described previously (35, 36).
Chimeric DNA was produced by the overlap extension PCR method
(25), with all overlap primers beginning 3' to a T to minimize the introduction of errors by any nontemplated addition of a
3' A (62). Target sequences for amplification were the wild-type HIV-1 IN and visna virus IN cloned into pQE-30. Cassettes encoding HIV-1 IN amino acids 1 to 49 and 1 to 186 were amplified as
previously described (36), and cassettes encoding residues 1 to 212, 50 to 212, 187 to 212, and 213 to 288 (Fig. 1) were amplified
by the following pairs of primers, respectively: H1 and V3H2*, V1H2 and
V3H2*, V2H3 and V3H2*, and V2H3* and H3. Analogous cassettes encoding
visna virus IN amino acids 1 to 51 and 1 to 188 were produced as
previously described (36), and cassettes encoding residues 1 to 214, 52 to 214, 189 to 214, and 215 to 281 (Fig. 1) were amplified
by primer pairs V1 and H3V2*, H1V2 and H3V2*, H2V3 and H3V2*, and H2V3*
and V3, respectively. Note that these crossovers correspond to DNA
sequences; the resulting protein regions can be described slightly
differently because amino acids 186 to 190 of HIV-1 IN are identical to
residues 188 to 192 of visna virus IN (36). Sequences for
H1, H3, V1, and V3, the outermost primer pairs for HIV-1 IN and visna
virus IN sequences, respectively, and for overlap primers that are not named with an asterisk have been published previously (36). Sequences of the new overlap primers were as follows (HIV-1 sequences are in uppercase and visna virus sequences are in lowercase letters): V3H2*, 5'gttttgatttTTCTTTAGTTTGTATGTCTG3'; V2H3*,
5'acagcaacaaagtTTACAAAAACAAATTACAAAAATTC3'; H3V2*,
5'GTTTTTGTAAactttgttgctgtattctttg3'; and H2V3*,
5'ACAAACTAAAGAAaaatcaaaacaagaaaaaattcg3'. Products
of the expected length were purified and appropriately mixed in a
second round of PCR using the necessary outermost primers to yield
full-length chimeras. These products were digested with BglII and SstI and ligated into the
BamHI and SstI sites of pQE-30. M15[pREP4] was
transformed with the ligation reaction mixtures, and colonies resistant
to ampicillin and kanamycin were screened for the presence of insert
DNA by restriction endonuclease digestion of plasmid DNA and for
induction of IN by isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG), as described previously (35). The entire IN coding
sequence of each construct was determined by dideoxy sequencing to
ensure that expressed proteins had the correct amino acid sequence. A total of 31 clones were sequenced to obtain the complete set of 14 proteins shown in Fig. 1.
Expression and purification of integrases.
Proteins were
expressed by using the QIAexpress System Type IV construct (Qiagen) and
carried 16 extra N-terminal amino acids: Met-Arg-Gly-Ser-(His)6-Gly-Ser-Ile-Glu-Gly-Arg. Culturing,
induction by IPTG, and purification of polyhistidine-tagged proteins
from the pellets of 250-ml cultures were performed as described
previously (36). Because initial purification of the VVhv
protein (the nomenclature will be described later) yielded a relatively
dilute product, a slightly more concentrated preparation that was
purified in the presence of 10 mM
3[(3-cholamidopropyl)-dimethylammonio]-1-propanesulfonate (CHAPS), a
zwitterionic detergent, was utilized for all experiments described
herein. Purifications were monitored by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), using 12.5% separation gels and 3% stacking gels (acrylamide to
methylenebisacrylamide ratio, 37.5:1). Protein concentrations were
measured by comparison to Coomassie blue-stained standards, with
quantitation by laser densitometry, as described previously
(36).
Oligonucleotides.
Sequences of terminal viral DNA 18-mer
oligonucleotides and substrates used for the disintegration and
alcoholysis assays have been published previously (36, 38).
All oligodeoxynucleotides used as assay substrates were gel purified
following synthesis and again after being 5'-end labeled with
[
-32P]ATP by T4 polynucleotide kinase, as described
previously (36). Sequence-specific markers for gel analysis
were produced by the 3'-to-5' exonuclease activity of snake venom
phosphodiesterase (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.) on 5'-radiolabeled
oligonucleotides, as described previously (33).
Processing, strand transfer, alcoholysis, and disintegration
assays.
Double-stranded DNA substrates were prepared by annealing
the labeled strand with a fourfold excess of unlabeled complementary oligonucleotide, and the disintegration assay substrate was prepared and then purified on a native 15% polyacrylamide gel, both as described previously (35). Standard 10-µl reaction
mixtures contained 0.5 to 1.0 pmol of double-stranded DNA or 0.06 pmol of the disintegration assay substrate, 25 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 10 mM
dithiothreitol, 10 mM MnCl2, and 0.5 to 1.5 µl of IN or protein storage buffer. Alcoholysis assays were conducted in the presence of 40% 1,2-ethanediol (ethylene glycol), which is less viscous than glycerol but yields the same pattern of cleavage products
(38). Reaction mixtures were incubated for 90 to 180 min at
37°C, and then reactions were stopped by adding 10 µl of loading
buffer (95% formamide, 20 mM EDTA, 0.05% bromophenol blue, 0.05%
xylene cyanol) and heating at 95°C for 5 min. Aliquots were loaded
onto 20% polyacrylamide (acrylamide to methylenebisacrylamide ratio,
19:1)-7 M urea denaturing gels; this was followed by electrophoresis at 75 W until the bromophenol blue dye had migrated 14 to 22 cm. Wet
gels were autoradiographed at
80°C. The radioactivity of bands in
wet gels was quantified with a Betascope (Betagen, Waltham, Mass.).
 |
RESULTS |
Expansion of the set of purified chimeras between HIV-1 and visna
virus integrases.
Our initial set of chimeric HIV-1/visna virus
integrases had crossovers after HIV-1 IN positions 49 and 190 (the
alternative designation of the second crossover was discussed earlier),
corresponding to visna virus IN positions 51 and 192, respectively
(Fig. 1, sets b to d). We referred to the wild-type proteins as HHH and VVV and to the six chimeras as VHH, HVV, HVH, VHV, HHV, and VVH, where
the three letters represent (from left to right) the N-terminal, central, and C-terminal regions, respectively, and H (for HIV-1) or V
(for visna virus) indicates the source of that region. As mentioned
above, analysis of the activities of these proteins in various
oligonucleotide-based assays suggested that residues outside numbers 50 to 190 are involved in recognizing or positioning the viral DNA ends.
Since the study of the crystallization of the core region of HIV-1 IN
utilized residues 50 to 212 to define this region (15), and
because this extended core region shows greater activity in some in
vitro assays (8), we decided to create additional chimeric
integrases utilizing similar boundaries. In particular, six new
chimeric integrases were produced (Fig. 1, sets e to g). The new
chimeras all have a crossover after HIV-1 IN position 212, corresponding to visna virus IN position 214 (henceforth, only HIV-1 IN
position numbers will be used in this report). To be consistent with
our prior nomenclature, the new chimeras are named with uppercase
letters for the regions defined by residues 1 to 49 and 50 to 190. In
place of the third uppercase letter, two lowercase letters are now used
for regions 191 to 212 and 213 to 288, although conceptually residues
191 to 212 should be considered part of an extended central region.
Chimeric DNA was constructed by the method of overlap extension PCR and
cloned into a bacterial expression system. Polyhistidine-extended
proteins were purified by metal affinity chromatography with a
nickel-chelating resin. Each native purification yielded a prominent
band on SDS-PAGE gels that migrated to positions appropriate for
proteins of approximately 300 amino acids (Fig.
2), although the
migration of the
different proteins depended on the particular
amino acid sequence, as
seen with our prior set of chimeric integrases
(
36). The
doublet nature of some of the products is likely due
to premature
termination or breakdown rather than to contaminating
proteins, since
similar results were obtained when purifications
were performed under
denaturing conditions. Densitometric scanning
of a gel that included a
series of protein standards for calibration
indicated that the final
concentrations of the purified proteins
ranged from 116 ng/µl for
VVhv IN (Fig.
2, lane 9) to 591 ng/µl
for HVvh IN (lane 4). Thus,
each of the proteins was purified
to a final concentration of

1
pmol/µl, comparable to or exceeding
that of other functional
integrases (
33,
63). For comparison,
the wild-type HIV-1 and
visna virus integrases had concentrations
of 426 and 512 ng/µl,
respectively (Fig.
2, lanes 2 and 3).

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
SDS-PAGE demonstrating purification of new chimeric
integrases. Three microliters of each purified IN (indicated above the
lanes; nomenclature as in Results) were heated in sample buffer and
separated by SDS-PAGE, and the gel was stained with Coomassie blue.
Proteins are paired (a, e, f, and g) as in Fig. 1. Molecular mass
markers are in lane 1 (sizes are shown in kilodaltons at the left) and
represent 200 ng per band.
|
|
Demonstration that each new chimeric IN has enzymatic
activity.
To assess whether the active site in the central region
of the protein was maintained in a functional conformation, each
chimera was tested for "disintegration" activity (shown
schematically in Fig. 3), an in vitro
phenomenon that reflects the ability of IN to reverse the strand
transfer reaction (10). Of the processing, strand transfer,
and disintegration activities of IN, disintegration has the
least-stringent requirements for reaction conditions (30) and substrate DNA sequence (10, 59) and is detected even
when the N-terminal and C-terminal regions of IN have been deleted (8, 68). The substrate used for this assay is a Y-shaped complex that represents the predicted immediate product of integration of a viral DNA terminus into host DNA. Reversal of the integration reaction yields the processed viral DNA end and a target strand in
which the nick has been sealed. Incorporation of a radioactive phosphate at the 5' end of the nonviral 16-mer in the substrate permits
monitoring of this result by detection of a radioactive 31-mer product.
This product presumably forms by IN-catalyzed nucleophilic attack of
the juxtaposed 3'-OH of the 16-mer at a site just 3' to the invariant
CA of the viral sequence. Each of the six new chimeric integrases was
active in this assay, as demonstrated by the appearance of a 31-mer
product, whether the viral sequences were derived from HIV-1 (Fig. 3,
lanes 4 to 9) or visna virus (data not shown). The doublet nature of
the 31-mer product on this gel is likely due to residual secondary
structure (10), and bands migrating between the 16- and
31-mer positions may represent breakdown products or reintegration
events (67, 68). Although this assay is not able to
distinguish between the sources of IN (36), it does
demonstrate the integrity of the active site in the catalytic central
region of each new chimeric protein.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Disintegration activity of new chimeric integrases.
(Left) The substrate is a four-oligonucleotide complex representing the
predicted immediate adduct of the HIV-1 U5 DNA end (thick lines)
integrated into host DNA (thin lines). IN-mediated cleavage after the
CA releases the viral DNA end, with concomitant joining of the
juxtaposed 5'-radiolabeled 16-mer to the 15 nucleotides beyond the CA
to yield a radiolabeled 31-mer product (asterisks denote
32P labels). The substrate was incubated with protein
buffer or purified integrases under standard conditions for 90 min and
analyzed as described in Materials and Methods. (Right) An
autoradiogram from a denaturing polyacrylamide gel is shown. The sizes
of the labeled component of the substrate and the product are indicated
(in nucleotides) at the right, aligned with the complexes at the left
from which they were derived. Proteins are paired (a, e, f, and g) as
in Fig. 1. The two wild-type integrases and all six new chimeric
integrases were active in this assay.
|
|
Specific processing activity of new chimeras on terminal viral DNA
sequences.
IN specifically removes two nucleotides from the 3' end
of oligonucleotide substrates designed to resemble the termini of viral
DNA (shown schematically in Fig. 4)
(33). Of the two ends of HIV-1 or visna virus DNA, the HIV-1
U5 terminus provides the most susceptible in vitro substrate for
processing by either wild-type IN (36). Our preparations of
HIV-1 IN and visna virus IN process approximately 40 and 50% of this
substrate, respectively (Fig. 4A, lanes 3 and 4), as determined using a
highly reproducible and conservative method to quantify the extent of
specific cleavage (37). Thus, assays with the HIV-1 U5
substrate can indicate whether a chimeric protein has any processing
activity. In contrast, comparison of processing activities on the two
U3 substrates best distinguishes between the HIV-1 and visna virus
enzymes (36, 37). In particular, each wild-type IN
preferentially cleaves oligonucleotide substrates derived from its own
U3 substrate (Fig. 4B and C, lanes 3 and 4).

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Processing activity of new chimeric integrases. (Top) A
schematic of the site-specific 3'-end processing reaction is shown.
Cleavage of blunt-ended viral DNA after the invariant CA (shown in
boldface) converts a radiolabeled 18-mer to a labeled 16-mer (asterisks
denote 32P labels). Duplex oligonucleotide 18-mer
substrates derived from the U5 or U3 termini of HIV-1 DNA or the U3
terminus of visna virus DNA and 5' labeled on the plus or minus strand,
as indicated in panels A to C, were incubated with protein buffer or
purified integrases under standard conditions for 90 min and analyzed
as described in Materials and Methods. The region of the autoradiogram
extending down to 12-mers is shown to demonstrate the specificity of
the reactions. Proteins are paired (a, e, f, and g) as in Fig. 1.
Biologically relevant specific cleavage products two nucleotides
shorter than the substrate are indicated by arrows. Sequence-specific
markers are included in lanes 1, and their sizes (in nucleotides) are
indicated at the left.
|
|
Two of the six new chimeras exhibited selective cleavage following the
CA two nucleotides from the 3' end of the HIV U5 plus
strand: HVvh
(Fig.
4A, lane 5) and VVvh (lane 8). These proteins
appeared to be more
active on visna virus U3 DNA than on HIV-1
U3 DNA (Fig.
4B and C, lanes
5 and 8). To provide confirmation
of this observation, we performed
duplicate reactions with the
two U3 substrates (Fig.
5), using the wild-type HHH and VVV
proteins,
the HVV protein that was previously shown to exhibit specific
processing activity (
36), and these two new chimeras (HVvh
and
VVvh). The autoradiogram shown in Fig.
5 indicates the
reproducibility
of these results, illustrates the ability of the U3
substrates
to distinguish between the wild-type integrases, and
demonstrates
that each of these three chimeras was more active with the
visna
virus U3 substrate. Quantification of the results of six
replicate
reactions (performed on multiple dates) showed that the viral
DNA sequence preference of each of these chimeras closely matched
that
of the wild-type VVV IN and was very different from that
of the
wild-type HHH IN, as indicated by the ratio of specific
cleavage of
visna U3 DNA to that of HIV-1 U3 DNA (Table
1).

View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Duplicate processing reactions for informative proteins.
Duplex oligonucleotide 18-mer substrates derived from the U3 termini of
HIV-1 (A) or visna virus (B) DNA, which best distinguish between the
wild-type enzymes, were 5' radiolabeled on the minus strand and
incubated with protein buffer or selected integrases. Details are
described in the legend to Fig. 4.
|
|
Each of the three chimeras with processing activity provides important
information. As in our prior report (
36), the similar
preferences of the HVV and VVV proteins indicate that the N-terminal
region of IN (equivalent to HIV-1 residues 1 to 49) does not contribute
to viral DNA specificity. In addition, since the HVvh chimera
has the
same substrate preference as the wild-type VVV IN, residues
between
positions 50 and 212 must be important for viral DNA specificity.
Finally, the similar preferences of the VVvh and VVV proteins
indicate
that the C-terminal region of IN (residues 213 to 288)
does not
contribute to viral DNA specificity. Taken together,
the three
informative chimeras provide mutually consistent results:
the region of
IN responsible for viral DNA specificity is located
between residues 50 and 212.
Target site selection using viral DNA termini as the nucleophile to
nick DNA.
IN catalyzes insertion of the recessed 3'-OH of
processed viral DNA ends into various sites along other
oligonucleotides that act as surrogates for host DNA to yield a set of
labeled integration products that are longer than the substrate (shown
schematically in Fig. 6) (11,
32). The patterns of insertion site preferences in this assay, as
demonstrated by the autoradiographic locations and intensities of the
longer products, distinguish between HIV-1 IN and visna virus IN
(36). Thus, purified proteins were tested for strand
transfer activity on a preprocessed duplex oligonucleotide substrate
derived from the visna virus U3 end, which has been shown to be readily
susceptible to both enzymes (36). To facilitate comparisons
of the strand transfer patterns, the two wild-type enzymes and the
complete set of 12 chimeric proteins were assayed in parallel. The
distinctive patterns produced by the wild-type integrases are evident
(Fig. 6, lanes 2 and 3). Of the 12 chimeras, 9 had activity in this
assay, but only the HVV IN (lane 5) and the HVvh IN (lane 10) had
levels of activity comparable to that of wild-type. To display the
patterns produced by the other chimeras, severalfold more counts per
minute were loaded in the other gel lanes.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Strand transfer activity of chimeric integrases. A
duplex oligonucleotide derived from the visna virus U3 end, but
preprocessed by omission of the final two nucleotides from the minus
strand, was used as the substrate for the complete set of 14 purified
integrases during 3-h incubations, and reactions were analyzed as
described in Materials and Methods. An autoradiogram from the upper
region of a denaturing polyacrylamide gel is shown. Insertion of the
recessed 3' terminus into various sites along other oligonucleotides
(shown as thinner lines in the scheme on the left) yield longer
radiolabeled products (asterisks denote 32P labels). The
positions of the labeled 16-mer component of the substrate and the
labeled strands of longer products are indicated to the left of the
gel. Proteins are paired (a to g) as in Fig. 1. The different patterns
produced by HHH IN and VVV IN are demonstrated in lanes 2 and 3. Nine
of the 12 chimeras had activity in this assay, but ~5- to 20-fold
more counts per minute were loaded in lanes 4, 6 to 9, and 11 to 15 to
display the patterns produced by less-active chimeras.
|
|
As in our prior study (
36), three of the initial six
chimeras had activity in this assay: the HVV IN (Fig.
6, lane 5) was
very active and had a pattern that did not match that of either
wild-type IN, the HVH protein (lane 6) created a faint but novel
pattern, and the HHV protein (lane 8) produced a slowly migrating
novel
band visible near the top of the lane. All of the six new
chimeras
exhibited strand transfer activity in this assay (lanes
10 to 15). As
with the first set of chimeras, none of the new
proteins created a
pattern that matched that of either wild-type
IN. However, inspection
of the entire set of strand transfer patterns
revealed that the HVV,
HVvh, and VVvh proteins (lanes 5, 10, and
13, respectively) created
patterns that have in common a major
band in the top half of the lane
and several less-prominent, faster-migrating
bands. These three
proteins share the extended core region from
visna virus IN (equivalent
to HIV-1 IN residues 50 to 212). In
addition, the HHhv protein (lane
12) created a novel, slower-migrating
band near the top of the lane,
similar to that produced by HHV
IN (lane 8), which has the same
N-terminal 190 amino acids. In
some experiments, a similar band also
was created by the VHhv
and HHvh proteins (seen faintly in lanes 11 and
14).
Similar results were obtained when a longer substrate derived from the
HIV-1 U5 terminus was used, as well as with an assay
(
24,
46) that monitors insertion of unlabeled viral DNA ends
into
3'-labeled nonviral DNA (data not shown). In particular,
the HVV and
HVvh chimeras were very active and created strand
transfer patterns
that matched neither wild-type IN, although
they were similar to each
other. In summary, all six of the new
chimeras exhibited some strand
transfer activity, bringing to
nine the number of HIV-1/visna virus
chimeras active in this assay.
However, each chimera that displayed
multiple bands created novel
patterns distinct from that of either
wild-type IN. The results
for all 14 proteins are summarized in Fig.
1.
Target site selection using a small alcohol as the nucleophile to
nick DNA.
We recently described a fourth enzymatic activity of
several retroviral integrases, which we named nonspecific alcoholysis (36, 38). IN was shown to use small nucleophiles, such as glycerol, ethylene glycol, and propylene glycol, to attack nonviral DNA
sequences at multiple sites, with concomitant joining of alcohol groups
from these nucleophiles to newly exposed 5' phosphate groups at sites
of DNA nicking (shown schematically at the top of Fig. 7). Although every site in DNA substrates
except those close to the ends can be nicked by IN in this assay,
different integrases exhibit different target site preferences for
nonspecific alcoholysis. In particular, HIV-1 IN prefers to nick at
sites 17, 15, 11, and 8 nucleotides from the 5' end of this particular
substrate, whereas visna virus IN preferentially cleaves to produce
19-, 15-, and 5-mer products (Fig. 7, lanes 3 and 4). Using our first
set of six chimeras, we had previously mapped the outer limits of the region that determines target site selection for this activity to
residues 50 and 190 (36).

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Nonspecific alcoholysis activity of the new chimeric
integrases. A schematic of the reaction is shown at the top. IN
catalyzes attack by nucleophilic OH groups of various alcohols (ROH)
that nick and join to newly exposed 5' phosphate groups at sites of DNA
cleavage (asterisks denote 32P labels). Nicks occur at
every site except those close to DNA ends, with a reproducible pattern
of preferential sites that is a function of the target DNA sequence and
source of IN. A 5'-labeled 23-mer of nonviral sequence was annealed to
a complementary oligonucleotide, incubated for 90 min with the
wild-type proteins or the new chimeras in the presence of 40% ethylene
glycol, and analyzed as described in Materials and Methods. A
sequence-specific oligonucleotide ladder (as markers) is in lane 1, and
sizes (in nucleotides) are indicated at the left. Proteins are paired
(a, e, f, and g) as in Fig. 1. Equal volumes of reaction mixtures were
loaded so that relative intensities reflect efficiencies of the
different proteins. Five of the six chimeras created patterns that
segregated clearly to the HHH pattern (chimeras VHhv, HHhv, and HHvh,
in lanes 6, 7, and 9, respectively) or to the VVV pattern (chimeras
HVvh and VVvh, in lanes 5 and 8, respectively). Chimera VVhv (lane 10)
was repeatedly inactive in this assay.
|
|
Of the six new chimeras, five were active in this assay, and they
created alcoholysis cleavage patterns that precisely matched
that of
one or the other wild-type IN. The patterns created by
chimeras VHhv,
HHhv, and HHvh (Fig.
7, lanes 6, 7, and 9, respectively)
precisely
matched that of wild-type HHH IN (lane 3); since residues
50 to 190 of
these proteins are identical, the source of the central
region must
determine the alcoholysis pattern. Similarly, the
cleavage patterns
produced by chimeras HVvh and VVvh (Fig.
7,
lanes 5 and 8, respectively) were identical to that of wild-type
VVV IN (lane 4);
residues 50 to 212 (HIV-1 numbering), which are
identical in these
proteins, encompass the smaller core region
of residues 50 to 190 to
which this function had already been
mapped. Interestingly, the VVhv
chimera did not exhibit this activity
(Fig.
7, lane 10), despite being
very active in the disintegration
assay (Fig.
3). This protein is the
first to exhibit a discrepancy
between nonspecific alcoholysis and
disintegration activities,
two activities that have been shown to
require only the central
domain of IN (
8,
38,
44,
50).
Nonetheless, from the five
new chimeras that were active in this assay,
we can conclude that
target site selection for the nonspecific
alcoholysis activity
of IN again mapped to the central region of IN,
confirming our
prior results.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Integrase catalyzes insertion of a double-stranded DNA copy of the
retroviral genome into host cell chromosomal DNA, contributes to the
pathogenesis of AIDS, and is an attractive target for specific antiretroviral therapy. Identification of the regions of IN responsible for viral DNA specificity and for binding target DNA during viral DNA
insertion is critical for understanding the organization of the
protein, modeling its mechanism of action, and designing inhibitors of
its activity. The results described in this report, obtained with an
expanded set of functional chimeric lentivirus integrases, have further
refined our understanding of the organization of the IN protein.
The region of IN responsible for viral DNA specificity.
Despite early predictions, several lines of evidence indicate that the
N-terminal region of IN does not contribute to viral DNA specificity.
We previously reported that a chimeric protein with the N-terminal
region of HIV-1 IN but the central and C-terminal regions of visna
virus preferred the visna virus U3 substrate rather than the HIV-1 U3
substrate in processing assays (36); these two substrates
unequivocally distinguish between the wild-type enzymes (36,
37). Similarly, a protein with the N-terminal region of HIV-1 IN
but the central and C-terminal regions of human foamy virus IN was
reported to process a human foamy virus DNA terminus but not an HIV-1
DNA end (53). Moreover, Rous sarcoma virus, HIV-1, and
feline immunodeficiency virus IN proteins with various peptide
replacements of the N-terminal region exhibit residual viral DNA
processing and strand transfer activity (8, 9, 17, 41, 61).
Further localization of the region of IN responsible for viral DNA
specificity has now been accomplished with our expanded
set of
chimeras, which brings to three the number of chimeric
HIV-1/visna
virus integrases that have processing activity (Fig.
1 and
5). These
proteins provide mutually consistent results:
the activity of the HVV
protein maps viral DNA specificity to
HIV-1 IN residues 50 to 288, the
HVvh protein maps this function
to residues 50 to 212, and the VVvh
protein maps this function
to residues 1 to 212 (Table
1). Thus, the
region of IN responsible
for viral DNA specificity must reside between
residues 50 and
212 (HIV-1 numbering). This conclusion is supported by
a report
that the HIV-1 IN central domain, defined by residues 58 to
201,
acts preferentially on cleavage-ligation substrates that contain
a
CA dinucleotide in an assay designed to mimic the joining of
viral DNA
5' ends to host DNA (whether IN mediates this event
in vivo is
unknown). The authors concluded that the central domain
of IN must play
a role in recognition of the CA at the viral DNA
terminus
(
44). Our results extend that observation by mapping
viral
DNA recognition to the central region of IN by using the
established
and biologically relevant processing assay. Assignment
of viral DNA
specificity to the central region does not preclude
accessory roles for
other parts of IN, either in initial viral
DNA binding (see model in
Fig.
8) or in protein-protein interactions
that facilitate formation of
complexes with viral DNA (
16).
Identification of particular residues within the central region of IN
that are intimately involved in viral DNA recognition
awaits further
study. We had initially hypothesized that residues
191 to 212 participate in viral DNA recognition, but our data
are insufficient to
prove or disprove this possibility, since
the chimeric proteins that
exchanged only these 22 residues did
not have processing activity.
These poorly soluble proteins were
purified at low concentrations
relative to the other chimeras
(Fig.
2). Perhaps a single-amino-acid
substitution of Lys or His
for the hydrophobic Phe-185 of HIV-1 IN
(corresponding to Ile-187
in visna virus IN) will permit these proteins
to be more informative;
similar changes increase the solubility of the
wild-type HIV-1
IN substantially without disturbing enzymatic activity
(
20,
26,
28). Other residues in the core domain are also
likely
to play a role. For example, there is biochemical evidence that
Lys-136 and Lys-159 can interact with viral DNA (
27,
51).
Moreover, recent genetic studies showed that a mutation in simian
immunodeficiency virus IN at the position analogous to Lys-136
in HIV-1
IN can compensate for mutations near the viral DNA termini
(
14).
The region of IN that interacts with host DNA.
Although
retroviral integration sites do not exhibit any sequence consensus, in
vitro assays reveal preferential sites for viral DNA insertion (9,
55, 60, 63, 70). Nonspecific alcoholysis resembles viral DNA
insertion in several respects, including the use of multiple sites,
lack of a target site consensus, readily demonstrable cleavage site
preferences that are a function of the integrase used, and avoidance of
the ends of DNA targets (38). Thus, this activity offers a
way to examine interactions between portions of IN and target DNA
(36, 38). Our prior set of chimeric integrases mapped the
selection of preferred alcoholysis sites to HIV-1 IN residues 50 to 190 (36), and the new chimeras have confirmed that result (Fig.
7). We showed elsewhere that an isolated protein fragment representing
the central domain of HIV-1 IN (from residues 50 to 212) could catalyze
nonspecific alcoholysis with a pattern of cleavage site preferences
identical to that of the full-length protein (38). The same
is true for a fragment representing residues 50 to 190 (40).
Thus, the central region of IN is sufficient to position nonviral DNA
for nucleophilic attack. Given the mechanistic similarities between
nonspecific alcoholysis and insertion of viral DNA ends, these data
suggest that the central region of IN positions host DNA for retroviral integration. A role for the central region in interactions with host
DNA is supported by the finding that mutations of Asn-120 alter the
integration site preferences of HIV-2 IN (64).
Given the above-detailed findings, it was surprising that the strand
transfer patterns created by our prior set of chimeric
integrases did
not match that of either wild-type enzyme (
36).
These
observations can be reconciled if the region bounded by
residues 50 to
190 is sufficient to position target DNA and small
nucleophilic
alcohols, such as glycerol, but residues outside
of this region are
required to position the larger viral DNA terminus
when it provides the
nucleophilic OH group. To explore this possibility,
the new chimeras
were designed to have a slightly larger central
region, in expectation
that the extra amino acids might accommodate
the viral DNA terminus.
However, the patterns produced by the
new chimeras in the
oligonucleotide joining assay also failed
to match that of either
wild-type enzyme (Fig.
1 and
6). Nonetheless,
analysis of the full set
of 12 chimeric proteins suggests that
the extended core domains are
major determinants of the strand
transfer patterns. In particular, the
HVV, HVvh, and VVvh proteins,
in which residues 50 to 212 (HIV-1
numbering) are identical, created
similar patterns. Why these patterns
were not identical and differed
from that of the wild-type visna virus
IN is unclear. Although
the polyhistidine protein extension might
influence strand transfer
patterns (
61), the dichotomy of
the nonspecific alcoholysis
patterns indicates that any influence of
the His tag did not differ
for the different proteins. A more likely
explanation is that
additional residues outside the central domain are
involved in
protein-protein or protein-DNA interactions that are
important
for viral DNA insertion but not for DNA cleavage using
smaller
nucleophiles (
1,
3,
26,
48). However, such residues
are unlikely to be directly involved in specific viral DNA recognition,
based on our mapping of this function with the processing assay.
It should be noted that the oligonucleotide assay may not be optimal
for mapping viral DNA insertion, since this assay is
significantly less
efficient than processing or nonspecific alcoholysis
and often provides
few bands for analysis. PCR-based assays that
detect insertion of viral
DNA ends into a plasmid DNA target (
42,
55) can reveal a
larger set of preferential integration sites
and enhance the ability to
detect integration activity (
22,
60). One group has used
such an assay to map target site preferences
to an extensive region of
HIV-1 IN defined by residues 50 to 234,
which contains the central
region as well as part of the C-terminal
region of IN (
22,
60). Our preliminary results with this assay
also indicate that a
region larger than that defined by residues
50 to 212 may be required
to map the patterns of viral DNA insertion
(
39). However,
additional parts of IN are unnecessary for host
DNA binding, given the
results obtained with the nonspecific alcoholysis
assay.
A new working model for the functional organization of IN.
We
propose an organization of functional domains on the IN protein that is
different from prior models (Fig. 8). The
key features are as follows. (i) Newly synthesized viral DNA initially
binds in a nonspecific manner to the C-terminal region of IN. This
suggestion is based on the nonspecific DNA binding properties of the
C-terminal region, the fact that viral DNA is the only DNA present
within the preintegration complex, and the ability to map target site selection for small alcohols but not for viral DNA ends to the central
region of IN. (ii) Amino acids within the central region of IN (defined
by residues 50 to 212) provide specificity by recognizing the viral DNA
termini for the two endonuclease events that occur during integration
(when viral DNA acts as the specific target for processing and then as
the specific nucleophile during insertion). This new assignment is a
direct result of the processing data presented here. Whether residues
191 to 212 are responsible for this function, as we initially
hypothesized, awaits further evidence. Although Fig. 8 highlights only
the final four viral DNA base pairs, we have shown that nucleotides in
the fifth and sixth positions play dominant roles in viral DNA
recognition (37) and likely interact directly with the part
of IN that provides specificity for viral DNA. (iii) Host DNA binds in
the central region of IN, as suggested by nonspecific alcoholysis
assays. The limits of this site are defined by residues 50 and 190, based on the mapping analysis using chimeras as well as the activity of
an isolated protein fragment of IN (40). (iv) Amino acids in
the carboxyl half of the active site participate in positioning the
nucleophile for catalysis, since residues near Asp-116 and Glu-152
influence the selection of different nucleophiles during processing
(65).

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Model for the functional organization of the IN protein.
Protein monomers A and B (shaded ovals) are shown as a dimer, in
parallel orientations, with a linear map of amino acid positions at the
extreme left, numbered from the N terminus to the C terminus. Initially
(left), viral DNA is bound nonspecifically by the C-terminal region of
IN. Amino acids in the central region (perhaps residues 191 to 212)
recognize the terminal six positions of the viral DNA sequence (only
the final four positions are shown) and position the CA bases for
attack by a water molecule that is positioned by the C-terminal portion
of the active site (defined by the three invariant acidic amino acids
in the central region). The terminal 3'-OH of the viral DNA itself can
be used instead of water to release cyclic (GT) dinucleotides
(21). In the nucleus (right), host DNA is bound by other
portions of the central region of IN. Following a conformational change
in the protein, each processed viral DNA end is positioned by the
C-terminal portion of the active site, with the aid of the residues
responsible for viral DNA recognition and perhaps the C-terminal
region, to attack the host DNA. During nonspecific alcoholysis, small
alcohols can be used by the active site without requiring residues
outside of numbers 50 to 190. The model would accommodate actions
occurring in trans or involving multimers larger than
dimers.
|
|
The proposed model provides a conceptual framework for viewing the
ordered mechanism of action of IN. Significantly, the region
that
imparts viral DNA specificity should be close to the proposed
initial
viral DNA binding site in the C-terminal domain and to
the active-site
residues in the central domain that are involved
in positioning the
nucleophile for catalysis. Thus, a small conformational
change in the
protein would allow the viral DNA end to act sequentially
as the target
for processing and then as the nucleophile for insertion,
a major issue
in modeling IN function. Viewed in this way, the
two catalytic events
can be considered a reversal of one mechanism
(Fig.
8, arrows).
Specificity of the two events would be determined
by whether the viral
DNA specificity locus or the less specific
host DNA binding site acts
as the functional target site for catalysis.
This spatial arrangement
would also explain how the 3' end of
viral DNA occasionally can act as
a nucleophile during processing
to release cyclic dinucleotide products
(
21); in this case,
the 3'-OH of the viral DNA end would
simply substitute for the
nucleophilic water molecule (Fig.
8, left
scheme).
This working model derives from functional data and must be correlated
with structural information. For simplicity of presentation,
the
protein monomers are shown in parallel orientations in Fig.
8;
crystallographic data support this orientation for a dimer
of the
central regions whose monomers are related by a dyad axis
(
5,
15). However, the native enzyme may have multiple and
complex
protein-protein interactions. For example, multidimensional
nuclear
magnetic resonance spectroscopy indicates that the C-terminal
regions
dimerize in an antiparallel orientation (
48), and
competition
studies using a panel of monoclonal antibodies against
various
parts of HIV-1 IN suggest that the C terminus is in close
proximity
to both the central domain and the N terminus (
4).
Furthermore,
although the model depicts IN as a dimer in which each
active
site catalyzes two reactions (
58,
67), IN might
function in
a higher-order complex (
1,
3,
12,
17,
23,
26,
28,
29,
54,
73) and each active site might act only once (
2,
69). Moreover, complementation between defective IN molecules
indicates that reactions can involve the active site on one IN
monomer
and terminal protein regions of another monomer (
17,
61,
66). Finally, we have suggested that residues 191 to 212
might
play an important role, yet this region of HIV-1 IN includes
an

-helix (positions 196 to 208) that has no clear homology in
the
oncovirus integrases (
2,
15). However, lack of homology
does
not preclude a similar function, and further testing of this
model is
under way. Nevertheless, a prominent role for the catalytic
central
region of IN in positioning host DNA and in specific recognition
of
viral DNA ends now seems likely.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
This work was supported by Public Health Service grant R29
AI30759 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and by W. W. Smith Charitable Trust Research grant A9601.
We thank Lynn M. Skinner and Leslie J. Parent for helpful discussions
and review of the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, P.O. Box
850, Mail Services H036, Hershey, PA 17033-0850. Phone: (717) 531-8881. Fax: (717) 531-4633. E-mail:
mkatzman{at}med.hmc.psu.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Andrake, M. D., and A. M. Skalka.
1995.
Multimerization determinants reside in both the catalytic core and C terminus of avian sarcoma virus integrase.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:29299-29306[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Andrake, M. D., and A. M. Skalka.
1996.
Retroviral integrase, putting the pieces together.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:19633-19636[Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Barsov, E. V.,
W. E. Huber,
J. Marcotrigiano,
P. K. Clark,
A. D. Clark,
E. Arnold, and S. H. Hughes.
1996.
Inhibition of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase by the Fab fragment of a specific monoclonal antibody suggests that different multimerization states are required for different enzymatic functions.
J. Virol.
70:4484-4494[Abstract].
|
| 4.
|
Bizub-Bender, D.,
J. Kulkosky, and A. M. Skalka.
1994.
Monoclonal antibodies against HIV type 1 integrase: clues to molecular structure.
AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses
10:1105-1115[Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Bujacz, G.,
M. Jaskolski,
J. Alexandratos,
A. Wlodawer,
G. Merkel,
R. A. Katz, and A. M. Skalka.
1995.
High-resolution structure of the catalytic domain of avian sarcoma virus integrase.
J. Mol. Biol.
253:333-346[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Burke, C. J.,
G. Sanyal,
M. W. Bruner,
J. A. Ryan,
R. L. LaFemina,
H. L. Robbins,
A. S. Zeft,
C. R. Middaugh, and M. G. Cordingley.
1992.
Structural implications of spectroscopic characterization of a putative zinc finger peptide from HIV-1 integrase.
J. Biol. Chem.
267:9639-9644[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Bushman, F. D., and R. Craigie.
1991.
Activities of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) integration protein in vitro: specific cleavage and integration of HIV DNA.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:1339-1343[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Bushman, F. D.,
A. Engelman,
I. Palmer,
P. Wingfield, and R. Craigie.
1993.
Domains of the integrase protein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 responsible for polynucleotidyl transfer and zinc binding.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
90:3428-3432[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Bushman, F. D., and B. Wang.
1994.
Rous sarcoma virus integrase protein: mapping functions for catalysis and substrate binding.
J. Virol.
68:2215-2223[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Chow, S. A.,
K. A. Vincent,
V. Ellison, and P. O. Brown.
1992.
Reversal of integration and DNA splicing mediated by integrase of human immunodeficiency virus.
Science
255:723-726[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Craigie, R.,
T. Fujiwara, and F. Bushman.
1990.
The IN protein of Moloney murine leukemia virus processes the viral DNA ends and accomplishes their integration in vitro.
Cell
62:829-837[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Drelich, M.,
M. Haenggi, and J. Mous.
1993.
Conserved residues Pro-109 and Asp-116 are required for interaction of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase protein with its viral DNA substrate.
J. Virol.
67:5041-5044[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Drelich, M.,
R. Wilhelm, and J. Mous.
1992.
Identification of amino acid residues critical for endonuclease and integration activities of HIV-1 IN protein in vitro.
Virology
188:459-468[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Du, Z.,
P. O. Ilyinskii,
K. Lally,
R. C. Desrosiers, and A. Engelman.
1997.
A mutation in integrase can compensate for mutations in the simian immunodeficiency virus att site.
J. Virol.
71:8124-8132[Abstract].
|
| 15.
|
Dyda, F.,
A. B. Hickman,
T. M. Jenkins,
A. Engelman,
R. Craigie, and D. R. Davies.
1994.
Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of HIV-1 integrase: similarity to other polynucleotidyl transferases.
Science
266:1981-1986[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Ellison, V.,
J. Gerton,
K. A. Vincent, and P. O. Brown.
1995.
An essential interaction between distinct domains of HIV-1 integrase mediates assembly of the active multimer.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:3320-3326[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Engelman, A.,
F. D. Bushman, and R. Craigie.
1993.
Identification of discrete functional domains of HIV-1 integrase and their organization within an active multimeric complex.
EMBO J.
12:3269-3275[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Engelman, A., and R. Craigie.
1992.
Identification of conserved amino acid residues critical for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase function in vitro.
J. Virol.
66:6361-6369[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Engelman, A.,
A. B. Hickman, and R. Craigie.
1994.
The core and carboxyl-terminal domains of the integrase protein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 each contribute to nonspecific DNA binding.
J. Virol.
68:5911-5917[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Engelman, A.,
Y. Liu,
H. Chen,
M. Farzan, and F. Dyda.
1997.
Structure-based mutagenesis of the catalytic domain of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase.
J. Virol.
71:3507-3514[Abstract].
|
| 21.
|
Engelman, A.,
K. Mizuuchi, and R. Craigie.
1991.
HIV-1 DNA integration: mechanism of viral DNA cleavage and DNA strand transfer.
Cell
67:1211-1221[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Goulaouic, H., and S. A. Chow.
1996.
Directed integration of viral DNA mediated by fusion proteins consisting of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase and Escherichia coli LexA protein.
J. Virol.
70:37-46[Abstract].
|
| 23.
|
Hazuda, D. J.,
A. L. Wolfe,
J. C. Hastings,
H. L. Robbins,
P. L. Graham,
R. L. LaFemina, and E. A. Emini.
1994.
Viral long terminal repeat substrate binding characteristics of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:3999-4004[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Hong, T.,
E. Murphy,
J. Groarke, and K. Drlica.
1993.
Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 DNA integration: fine structure target analysis using synthetic oligonucleotides.
J. Virol.
67:1127-1131[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Horton, R. M.,
S. N. Ho,
J. K. Pullen,
H. D. Hunt,
Z. Cai, and L. R. Pease.
1993.
Gene splicing by overlap extension.
Methods Enzymol.
217:270-279[Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Jenkins, T. M.,
A. Engelman,
R. Ghirlando, and R. Craigie.
1996.
A soluble active mutant of HIV-1 integrase: involvement of both the core and carboxyl-terminal domains in multimerization.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:7712-7718[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
| Jenkins, T. M., D. Esposito, A. Engelman, and R. Craigie. 1997. Personal communication.
|
| 28.
|
Jenkins, T. M.,
A. B. Hickman,
F. Dyda,
R. Ghirlando,
D. R. Davies, and R. Craigie.
1995.
Catalytic domain of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase: identification of a soluble mutant by systematic replacement of hydrophobic residues.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:6057-6061[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Jones, K. S.,
J. Coleman,
G. W. Merkel,
T. M. Laue, and A. M. Skalka.
1992.
Retroviral integrase functions as a multimer and can turn over catalytically.
J. Biol. Chem.
267:16037-16040[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Jonsson, C. B.,
G. A. Donzella, and M. J. Roth.
1993.
Characterization of the forward and reverse integration reactions of the Moloney murine leukemia virus integrase protein purified from Escherichia coli.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:1462-1469[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Jonsson, C. B., and M. J. Roth.
1993.
Role of the His-Cys finger of Moloney murine leukemia virus integrase protein in integration and disintegration.
J. Virol.
67:5562-5571[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Katz, R. A.,
G. Merkel,
J. Kulkosky,
J. Leis, and A. M. Skalka.
1990.
The avian retroviral IN protein is both necessary and sufficient for integrative recombination in vitro.
Cell
63:87-95[Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Katzman, M.,
R. A. Katz,
A. M. Skalka, and J. Leis.
1989.
The avian retroviral integration protein cleaves the terminal sequences of linear viral DNA at the in vivo sites of integration.
J. Virol.
63:5319-5327[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Katzman, M.,
J. P. G. Mack,
A. M. Skalka, and J. Leis.
1991.
A covalent complex between retroviral integrase and nicked substrate DNA.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:4695-4699[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Katzman, M., and M. Sudol.
1994.
In vitro activities of purified visna virus integrase.
J. Virol.
68:3558-3569[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Katzman, M., and M. Sudol.
1995.
Mapping domains of retroviral integrase responsible for viral DNA specificity and target site selection by analysis of chimeras between human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and visna virus integrases.
J. Virol.
69:5687-5696[Abstract].
|
| 37.
|
Katzman, M., and M. Sudol.
1996.
Influence of subterminal viral DNA nucleotides on differential susceptibility to cleavage by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and visna virus integrases.
J. Virol.
70:9069-9073[Abstract].
|
| 38.
|
Katzman, M., and M. Sudol.
1996.
Nonspecific alcoholysis, a novel endonuclease activity of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and other retroviral integrases.
J. Virol.
70:2598-2604[Abstract].
|
| 39.
| Katzman, M., M. Sudol, and J. S. Pufnock.
1997. Unpublished data.
|
| 40.
| Katzman, M., M. Sudol, L. M. Skinner, and A. L. Morgan. 1997. Unpublished data.
|
| 41.
|
Khan, E.,
J. P. G. Mack,
R. A. Katz,
J. Kulkosky, and A. M. Skalka.
1991.
Retroviral integrase domains: DNA binding and the recognition of LTR sequences.
Nucleic Acids Res.
19:851-860[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Kitamura, Y.,
Y. M. H. Lee, and J. M. Coffin.
1992.
Nonrandom integration of retroviral DNA in vitro: effect of CpG methylation.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:5532-5536[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Kulkosky, J.,
K. S. Jones,
R. A. Katz,
J. P. G. Mack, and A. M. Skalka.
1992.
Residues critical for retroviral integrative recombination in a region that is highly conserved among retroviral/retrotransposon integrases and bacterial insertion sequence transposases.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:2331-2338[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Kulkosky, J.,
R. A. Katz,
G. Merkel, and A. M. Skalka.
1995.
Activities and substrate specificity of the evolutionarily conserved central domain of retroviral integrase.
Virology
206:448-456[Medline].
|
| 45.
|
LaFemina, R. L.,
C. L. Schneider,
H. L. Robbins,
P. L. Callahan,
K. LeGrow,
E. Roth,
W. A. Schleif, and E. A. Emini.
1992.
Requirement of active human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase enzyme for productive infection of human T-lymphoid cells.
J. Virol.
66:7414-7419[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Leavitt, A. D.,
R. B. Rose, and H. E. Varmus.
1992.
Both substrate and target oligonucleotide sequences affect in vitro integration mediated by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase protein produced in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
J. Virol.
66:2359-2368[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 47.
|
Leavitt, A. D.,
L. Shiue, and H. E. Varmus.
1993.
Site-directed mutagenesis of HIV-1 integrase demonstrates differential effects on integrase functions in vitro.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:2113-2119[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 48.
|
Lodi, P. J.,
J. A. Ernst,
J. Kuszewski,
A. B. Hickman,
A. Engelman,
R. Craigie,
G. M. Clore, and A. M. Gronenborn.
1995.
Solution structure of the DNA binding domain of HIV-1 integrase.
Biochemistry
34:9826-9833[Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Lutzke, R. A.,
C. Vink, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1994.
Characterization of the minimal DNA-binding domain of the HIV integrase protein.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:4125-4131[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 50.
|
Mazumder, A.,
A. Engelman,
R. Craigie,
M. Fesen, and Y. Pommier.
1994.
Intermolecular disintegration and intramolecular strand transfer activities of wild-type and mutant HIV-1 integrase.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:1037-1043[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 51.
|
Mazumder, A.,
N. Neamati,
A. A. Pilon,
S. Sunder, and Y. Pommier.
1996.
Chemical trapping of ternary complexes of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase, divalent metal, and DNA substrates containing an abasic site: implications for the role of lysine 136 in DNA binding.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:27330-27338[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 52.
|
Mizuuchi, K.
1992.
Transpositional recombination: mechanistic insights from studies of Mu and other elements.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
61:1011-1051[Medline].
|
| 53.
|
Pahl, A., and R. M. Flugel.
1995.
Characterization of the human spuma retrovirus integrase by site-directed mutagenesis, by complementation analysis, and by swapping the zinc finger domain of HIV-1.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:2957-2966[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Pemberton, I. K.,
M. Buckle, and H. Buc.
1996.
The metal ion-induced cooperative binding of HIV-1 integrase to DNA exhibits a marked preference for Mn(II) rather than Mg(II).
J. Biol. Chem.
271:1498-1506[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 55.
|
Pryciak, P. M., and H. E. Varmus.
1992.
Nucleosomes, DNA-binding proteins, and DNA sequence modulate retroviral integration target site selection.
Cell
69:769-780[Medline].
|
| 56.
|
Roth, M. J.,
P. L. Schwartzberg, and S. P. Goff.
1989.
Structure of the termini of DNA intermediates in the integration of retroviral DNA: dependence on IN function and terminal DNA sequence.
Cell
58:47-54[Medline].
|
| 57.
|
Schauer, M., and A. Billich.
1992.
The N-terminal region of HIV-1 integrase is required for integration activity, but not for DNA binding.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
185:874-880[Medline].
|
| 58.
|
Scottoline, B. P.,
S. Chow,
V. Ellison, and P. O. Brown.
1997.
Disruption of the terminal base pairs of retroviral DNA during integration.
Genes Dev.
11:371-382[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 59.
|
Sherman, P. A.,
M. L. Dickson, and J. A. Fyfe.
1992.
Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integration protein: DNA sequence requirements for cleaving and joining reactions.
J. Virol.
66:3593-3601[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 60.
|
Shibagaki, Y., and S. A. Chow.
1997.
Central core domain of retroviral integrase is responsible for target site selection.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:8361-8369[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 61.
|
Shibagaki, Y.,
M. L. Holmes,
R. S. Appa, and S. A. Chow.
1997.
Characterization of feline immunodeficiency virus integrase and analysis of functional domains.
Virology
230:1-10[Medline].
|
| 62.
|
Smith, K. D.,
A. Valenzuela,
J. L. Vigna,
K. Aalbers, and C. T. Lutz.
1985.
Unwanted mutations in PCR mutagenesis: avoiding the predictable.
PCR Methods Applic.
2:253-257.
|
| 63.
|
van Gent, D. C.,
Y. Elgersma,
M. W. J. Bolk,
C. Vink, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1991.
DNA binding properties of the integrase proteins of human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2.
Nucleic Acids Res.
19:3821-3827[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 64.
|
van Gent, D. C.,
A. A. M. Oude Groeneger, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1992.
Mutational analysis of the integrase protein of human immunodeficiency virus type 2.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:9598-9602[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 65.
|
van Gent, D. C.,
A. A. M. Oude Groeneger, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1993.
Identification of amino acids in HIV-2 integrase involved in site-specific hydrolysis and alcoholysis of viral DNA termini.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:3373-3377[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 66.
|
van Gent, D. C.,
C. Vink,
A. A. M. Oude Groeneger, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1993.
Complementation between HIV integrase proteins mutated in different domains.
EMBO J.
12:3261-3267[Medline].
|
| 67.
|
Vincent, K. A.,
V. Ellison,
S. A. Chow, and P. O. Brown.
1993.
Characterization of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase expressed in Escherichia coli and analysis of variants with amino-terminal mutations.
J. Virol.
67:425-437[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 68.
|
Vink, C.,
A. A. M. Oude Groeneger, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1993.
Identification of the catalytic and DNA-binding region of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase protein.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:1419-1425[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 69.
|
Vink, C., and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1993.
The human immunodeficiency virus integrase protein.
Trends Genet.
9:433-437[Medline].
|
| 70.
|
Vink, C.,
K. H. van der Linden, and R. H. A. Plasterk.
1994.
Activities of the feline immunodeficiency virus integrase protein produced in Escherichia coli.
J. Virol.
68:1468-1474[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 71.
|
Woerner, A. M.,
M. Klutch,
J. G. Levin, and C. J. Marcus-Sekura.
1992.
Localization of DNA binding activity of HIV-1 integrase to the C-terminal half of the protein.
AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses
8:297-304[Medline].
|
| 72.
|
Woerner, A. M., and C. J. Marcus-Sekura.
1993.
Characterization of a DNA binding domain in the C-terminus of HIV-1 integrase by deletion mutagenesis.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:3507-3511[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 73.
|
Wolfe, A. L.,
P. J. Felock,
J. C. Hastings,
C. Uncapher Blau, and D. J. Hazuda.
1996.
The role of manganese in promoting multimerization and assembly of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrase as a catalytically active complex on immobilized long terminal repeat substrates.
J. Virol.
70:1424-1432[Abstract].
|
J Virol, March 1998, p. 1744-1753, Vol. 72, No. 3
0022-538X/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Malet, I., Delelis, O., Valantin, M.-A., Montes, B., Soulie, C., Wirden, M., Tchertanov, L., Peytavin, G., Reynes, J., Mouscadet, J.-F., Katlama, C., Calvez, V., Marcelin, A.-G.
(2008). Mutations Associated with Failure of Raltegravir Treatment Affect Integrase Sensitivity to the Inhibitor In Vitro. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
52: 1351-1358
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Baranova, S., Tuzikov, F. V., Zakharova, O. D., Tuzikova, N. A., Calmels, C., Litvak, S., Tarrago-Litvak, L., Parissi, V., Nevinsky, G. A.
(2007). Small-angle X-ray characterization of the nucleoprotein complexes resulting from DNA-induced oligomerization of HIV-1 integrase. Nucleic Acids Res
35: 975-987
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Desfarges, S., San Filippo, J., Fournier, M., Calmels, C., Caumont-Sarcos, A., Litvak, S., Sung, P., Parissi, V.
(2006). Chromosomal integration of LTR-flanked DNA in yeast expressing HIV-1 integrase: down regulation by RAD51. Nucleic Acids Res
34: 6215-6224
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Diamond, T. L., Bushman, F. D.
(2005). Division of Labor within Human Immunodeficiency Virus Integrase Complexes: Determinants of Catalysis and Target DNA Capture. J. Virol.
79: 15376-15387
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Grandgenett, D. P.
(2005). Symmetrical recognition of cellular DNA target sequences during retroviral integration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
102: 5903-5904
[Full Text]
-
Ikeda, T., Nishitsuji, H., Zhou, X., Nara, N., Ohashi, T., Kannagi, M., Masuda, T.
(2004). Evaluation of the Functional Involvement of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Integrase in Nuclear Import of Viral cDNA during Acute Infection. J. Virol.
78: 11563-11573
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Parveen, Z., Mukhtar, M., Goodrich, A., Acheampong, E., Dornburg, R., Pomerantz, R. J.
(2004). Cross-Packaging of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Vector RNA by Spleen Necrosis Virus Proteins: Construction of a New Generation of Spleen Necrosis Virus-Derived Retroviral Vectors. J. Virol.
78: 6480-6488
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Calmels, C., de Soultrait, V. R., Caumont, A., Desjobert, C., Faure, A., Fournier, M., Tarrago-Litvak, L., Parissi, V.
(2004). Biochemical and random mutagenesis analysis of the region carrying the catalytic E152 amino acid of HIV-1 integrase. Nucleic Acids Res
32: 1527-1538
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Harper, A. L., Sudol, M., Katzman, M.
(2003). An Amino Acid in the Central Catalytic Domain of Three Retroviral Integrases That Affects Target Site Selection in Nonviral DNA. J. Virol.
77: 3838-3845
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Appa, R. S., Shin, C.-G., Lee, P., Chow, S. A.
(2001). Role of the Nonspecific DNA-binding Region and alpha Helices within the Core Domain of Retroviral Integrase in Selecting Target DNA Sites for Integration. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 45848-45855
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yang, F., Roth, M. J.
(2001). Assembly and Catalysis of Concerted Two-End Integration Events by Moloney Murine Leukemia Virus Integrase. J. Virol.
75: 9561-9570
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Harper, A. L., Skinner, L. M., Sudol, M., Katzman, M.
(2001). Use of Patient-Derived Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Integrases To Identify a Protein Residue That Affects Target Site Selection. J. Virol.
75: 7756-7762
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Berger, N., Heller, A. E., Störmann, K. D., Pfaff, E.
(2001). Characterization of chimeric enzymes between caprine arthritis-encephalitis virus, maedi-visna virus and human immunodeficiency virus type 1 integrases expressed in Escherichia coli. J. Gen. Virol.
82: 139-148
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Morgan, A. L., Katzman, M.
(2000). Subterminal viral DNA nucleotides as specific recognition signals for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and visna virus integrases under magnesium-dependent conditions. J. Gen. Virol.
81: 839-849
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hindmarsh, P., Leis, J.
(1999). Retroviral DNA Integration. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
63: 836-843
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
van den Ent, F. M. I., Vos, A., Plasterk, R. H. A.
(1999). Dissecting the Role of the N-Terminal Domain of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Integrase by trans-Complementation Analysis. J. Virol.
73: 3176-3183
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Skinner, L. M., Sudol, M., Harper, A. L., Katzman, M.
(2001). Nucleophile Selection for the Endonuclease Activities of Human, Ovine, and Avian Retroviral Integrases. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 114-124
[Abstract]
[Full Text]