Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
J Virol, August 1998, p. 6929-6931, Vol. 72, No. 8
Department of Pathology and Infectious Diseases,
Received 26 January 1998/Accepted 4 May 1998
A porcine rotavirus (prv) monoreassortant, S-F4, which
carries RNA segment 4 of the pig-pathogenic variant prv 4F in the
genetic background of the pig-apathogenic variant prv 4S (G. I. Tauscher and U. Desselberger, J. Virol. 71:853-857, 1997), was
found to be pathogenic in gnotobiotic piglets. This indicates that RNA segment 4 of the pig-pathogenic variant prv 4F is a major determinant of pathogenicity in its homologous host.
Rotaviruses are the main cause of
viral gastroenteritis in infants and young children worldwide and
are responsible for approximately 20% of diarrhea-associated deaths in
children under five in developing countries (8, 14).
Rotaviruses are also a major pathogen of farm animals (2)
and were identified as the most common enteropathogen associated with
outbreaks of diarrhea in calves (17, 18).
Rotavirus structure, classification, gene composition, and replication
have been well clarified (reviewed in reference 9); however, other aspects of rotavirus behavior, for example, the true
correlates of protection or factors determining pathogenicity, remain
less clear despite extensive research (reviewed in references 6 and 15).
The present study investigated the influence of RNA segment 4 of
rotavirus on pathogenicity in the piglet model. This model was chosen
because a pair of porcine rotavirus (prv) variants, termed prv 4F and
4S, and reassortants thereof were available. Moreover, piglets are the
only animal host in which infection with human rotaviruses causes
diarrhea (20, 21).
The two prv variants possess identical electrophoretic migration
profiles of the 11 segments of genomic double-stranded RNA on
polyacrylamide gels with the exception of RNA segment 4 (RNA 4). RNA 4 of variant prv 4F (fast-migrating gene 4) migrated ahead of that of the
variant prv 4S (slow-migrating gene 4) (11). The
two variants differ significantly in their in vitro growth parameters: variant 4S grows to high titers in MA104 cells and produces
large plaques, whereas variant 4F grows to significantly lower titers
and forms only microscopic plaques after prolonged incubation. Variant
prv 4F is pathogenic in gnotobiotic piglets, causing severe diarrhea
and weight loss, whereas variant prv 4S remains apathogenic while
replicating to comparable titers (4).
Sequence analysis of the two RNAs 4 revealed a nucleotide identity in
corresponding positions of only 68% and a predicted amino acid
identity of only 71% (7). By contrast, RNA segments 5, 6, and 8 of the two variants (coding for NS53, VP6, and VP7, respectively)
were found to be virtually identical (7). These results
suggested that the two viruses are genetically related by a
reassortment event. However, without sequencing of all the genes of
both variants, evidence for the involvement of RNA 4 in pathogenesis
remained circumstantial. Hence, we produced a monoreassortant, termed
prv S-F4, which carries RNA 4 of the pathogenic prv 4F variant in the
genetic background of the other 10 segments of the pig-apathogenic prv
variant 4S, as described in detail previously (19). Here we
report the outcome of inoculation of gnotobiotic piglets with the
monoreassortant S-F4 and both parental viruses in terms of virus
replication and pathogenicity.
The origin and biological characteristics of the parent prv variants 4F
and 4S and of the monoreassortant S-F4 were described previously
(4, 11, 19). Infectivity titers of inocula were determined
by titration in 10-fold serial dilutions in MA104 cells grown in
microtiter trays. After overnight incubation, rotavirus was detected by
immunoperoxidase staining with a bovine antiserum to the UK bovine
rotavirus. The numbers of foci of infected cells were counted at
suitable dilutions, and titers were expressed as focus-forming units
(FFU) per milliliter. Infectivity titers in fecal samples were
determined by titration in 10-fold serial dilutions, using five roller
tube cultures of MA104 cells per dilution. Cytopathic effect was
evaluated after 4 days, and titers were expressed as log10
50% tissue culture infective doses (TCID50) per
milliliter of feces. Rotavirus RNA was extracted from feces and
detected after separation by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE)
and silver staining as described previously (19).
Gnotobiotic piglets were derived by hysterotomy and then housed in
pairs in positive-pressure isolators. They were reared on a milk-based
diet and allocated randomly to the different treatment groups. They
were inoculated at 5 or 6 days of age with the monoreassortant rotavirus S-F4 or the parent prv 4F or prv 4S, or they were sham inoculated at the doses shown in Table 1. Three serial pig passages were conducted in three litters, with bacterium-free fecal suspensions, because serial pig passage was required previously to reveal the pathogenicity of prv 4F after cell culture passage (4). The first pig passage was conducted with viruses which had been passaged seven times (4S), eight times (4F), or seven times (S-F4) in cell culture. The infectivity titers of the doses administered were rechecked by transfer of aliquots from the isolator after piglet inoculation. Piglets were monitored for clinical signs of infection (diarrhea, reduced food intake, dehydration, weight loss, and depression) from 2 days before to 10 days after inoculation. Fecal samples were collected daily, and cord blood was sampled to determine preinfection antibody status. Diarrhea was defined as production of
light-colored (cream to light yellow) feces often with a curdled or
floccular appearance.
The ability to cause disease was transferred with RNA 4 of the
pathogenic variant prv 4F to the monoreassortant S-F4. Five of the six
piglets inoculated with S-F4 during the three serial pig-to-pig
passages developed diarrhea which commenced between days 1 and 3 after inoculation at the second and third pig passages. All four
piglets at the second and third pig passages failed to gain weight from
day 1 or 2 after inoculation to day 3 or 5 after inoculation (Fig.
1). They lost, on average, 11% of their
body weight. One of the two piglets at the first pig passage failed to
develop clinical signs, but the second developed diarrhea between days
4 and 5 postinoculation. Five of the six piglets became visibly depressed, and four piglets, at passages 1, 2, and 3, required rehydration therapy. By contrast, diarrhea was not observed in the four
piglets which had received prv 4S (Table
1). The differences between S-F4- and prv
4S-inoculated piglets were statistically significant in the numbers
of days with diarrhea and with failure to gain weight; the numbers of
days with depression and that treatment was required
were greater in animals inoculated with S-F4, but not
significantly so. The severity of infection with the reassortant S-F4
was similar to that with the parent prv 4F (Table 1); the numbers of
days that pigs had diarrhea, failed to gain weight, had depression, and
required treatment were not statistically different.
The findings of an earlier study (4), which showed a clear
difference in pathogenicity between the parent prv 4F and prv 4S, were
confirmed with additional piglets in the present study. As before,
there were significant differences in the numbers of days with diarrhea
(P < 0.01) and with failure to gain weight (P < 0.05) (Table 1; results of chi-square testing not
shown). There was no progression to more severe clinical signs during the three serial pig-to-pig passages of prv 4F or S-F4 (data not shown). There was no statistical difference in the number of days with
failure to gain weight between animals infected with prv 4S and
sham-inoculated piglets.
RNA profile analysis by PAGE showed that viral replication took place
in all virus-infected piglets starting between days 1 and 3 after
inoculation. All piglets excreted rotaviruses with the expected
RNA profiles. There was a clear relationship between subjective
readings of the intensities of RNA patterns on gels and infectivity
titers which were determined for selected samples (Table
2). There were no statistically
significant differences in the mean peak infectivity titers among the
three virus-infected groups (Table 1).
0022-538X/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Viral Determinants of Rotavirus Pathogenicity in Pigs: Evidence
that the Fourth Gene of a Porcine Rotavirus Confers Diarrhea in
the Homologous Host
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
Daily weights (in kilograms) of representative piglets
inoculated with S-F4 (
), prv 4F
(
),
and prv 4S (
), and of a sham-inoculated piglet (
), at the third
serial passage of the viruses.
TABLE 1.
Clinical signs and virus excretion during three serial
pig passages of the reassortant S-F4, prv 4F, and prv 4S
TABLE 2.
Infectivity titers of fecal samples differing in
intensity of rotavirus RNA profile determined
by PAGEa
Thus, the data presented here demonstrated clearly that the monoreassortant, S-F4, carrying the RNA 4 of the pathogenic variant prv 4F in the genetic background of 10 segments of the apathogenic variant prv 4S, was pathogenic. The data also confirmed the differences in pathogenicity between prv 4F and prv 4S reported previously (4).
Several rotavirus genes have been implicated in rotavirus pathogenicity, but the genes responsible appear to differ in different animal models (1, 5, 6, 10, 13, 16). RNA segments 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 have been shown to be involved. The data acquired by Hoshino et al. (13) in the piglet model are particularly relevant to the present study. These authors showed that monoreassortants constructed with a pig-pathogenic prv and a pig-apathogenic human rotavirus were apathogenic and failed to replicate productively when RNA segments 3, 4, 8 (which codes for VP7), and 10 of the pathogenic virus had been replaced individually by the corresponding segment of the apathogenic virus. Conversely, reassortants of the apathogenic human virus carrying one to three of the above-cited genes of the pathogenic virus did not replicate productively and were not pathogenic. However, a tetrareassortant in which all four RNA segments (segments 3, 4, 9 [which codes for VP7], and 10) of the apathogenic virus were replaced by those of the pathogenic virus possessed the ability to replicate in piglets, and pathogenicity was restored. These data differ from ours in that the monoreassortant, S-F4, carrying RNA 4 from a pig-pathogenic rotavirus was pathogenic. The difference may be due to the fact that in the experiments of Hoshino et al. (13) the apathogenic virus was a human virus which failed to replicate in piglets, whereas the apathogenic pig virus used in our studies replicates well in piglets but does not cause disease (4). In our study no attempt was made to identify the gene(s) which allows full replication in piglets without causing diarrhea.
RNA segment 10 has been shown to act as a viral enterotoxin in mice (1). The question of a possible involvement of RNA segment 10 in the pig model remains to be answered. RNA segments 10 of prv 4F and prv 4S have not been sequenced, but experiments reported in the present paper suggest that this segment may be less important than RNA 4 in this virus-host relationship. In reassortment experiments some of us reported previously (19), a monoreassortant, B-F10, which possesses RNA segment 10 of prv 4F in the background of the genome of the bovine rotavirus, which is apathogenic in piglets (3), was obtained. It would be relevant to test this reassortant for pathogenicity in piglets in parallel with other available reassortants of different genetic compositions (e.g., B-F4, B-F4,5, and B-F4,5,8 [19]) to establish the influence of coassortment of different genes of a pathogenic virus into an apathogenic virus on the ability to replicate in pigs and the ability to cause disease. The mechanism by which RNA 4 influences virulence is not known, but a tendency toward earlier virus excretion after inoculation has been noticed with the virulent variant prv 4F (4). The mechanism of rotavirus virulence has been studied in more detail in calves; like the rotaviruses investigated in the present study, bovine rotaviruses which differed in their abilities to cause diarrhea were excreted at similar levels when assayed in cell culture, although the onset of virus excretion occurred sooner in clinically affected calves (2a, 3a). Differences in the site of replication in the small intestine, the area of small intestinal epithelium infected, and the ability to damage enterocytes were found between a virulent and an avirulent bovine rotavirus in a study of the pathology of rotavirus virulence (12). It remains to be established if these parameters account for the differences in virulence between prv 4F and prv 4S, but the results presented here greatly strengthen the argument for RNA 4 as a major determinant for rotavirus pathogenicity in the piglet model.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Lynn Dorsett, Ian Bailey, and Dennis Harris for care of the animals and collection of data and samples. J.C.B. acknowledges the encouragement of Colin R. Howard.
The study was supported by a grant from the Wellcome Trust to J.C.B., by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Germany (grant TA100-80-1-1), to G.I.T., and by a grant from the Isaac Newton Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology & Infectious Diseases, The Royal Veterinary College, University of London, London NW1 0TU, United Kingdom. Phone: 44-171-468 5221. Fax: 44-171-468 5306. E-mail: jbridger{at}rvc.ac.uk.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Ball, J. M., P. Tian, C. Q. Y. Zeng, A. P. Morris, and M. K. Estes. 1996. Age dependent diarrhea induced by a rotavirus nonstructural glycoprotein. Science 272:101-104[Abstract]. |
| 2. | Bridger, J. C. 1980. Rotaviruses: the present situation in farm animals. Vet. Annu. 20:172-179. |
| 2a. |
Bridger, J. C.
1994.
A definition of bovine rotavirus virulence.
J. Gen. Virol.
75:2807-2812 |
| 3. |
Bridger, J. C., and J. F. Brown.
1984.
Antigenic and pathogenic relationship of three bovine rotaviruses and a porcine rotavirus.
J. Gen. Virol.
65:1151-1158 |
| 3a. | Bridger, J. C., and D. H. Pocock. 1986. Variation in virulence of bovine rotaviruses. J. Hyg. 96:257-264. |
| 4. |
Bridger, J. C.,
B. Burke,
G. M. Beards, and U. Desselberger.
1992.
The pathogenicity of two porcine rotaviruses differing in their in vitro growth characteristics and gene 4.
J. Gen. Virol.
73:3011-3015 |
| 5. |
Broome, R. L.,
P. T. Vo,
R. L. Ward,
H. F. Clark, and H. B. Greenberg.
1993.
Murine rotavirus genes encoding outer capsid proteins VP4 and VP7 are not major determinants of host range restriction and virulence.
J. Virol.
67:2448-2455 |
| 6. | Burke, B., and U. Desselberger. 1996. Rotavirus pathogenicity. Virology 218:299-305[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Burke, B.,
M. A. McCrae, and U. Desselberger.
1994.
Sequence analysis of two porcine rotaviruses differing in growth in vitro and in pathogenicity: distinct VP4 sequences and conservation of NS53, VP6 and VP7 genes.
J. Gen. Virol.
75:2205-2212 |
| 8. | de Zoysa, I., and R. G. Feachem. 1985. Interventions for the control of diarrhoeal diseases among young children: rotavirus and cholera immunization. Bull. W. H. O. 63:569-583[Medline]. |
| 9. | Estes, M. K. 1996. Rotaviruses and their replication, p. 1625-1655. In B. N. Fields, D. N. Knipe, P. M. Howley, R. M. Chanock, J. L. Melnick, T. P. Monath, B. Roizman, and S. E. Straus (ed.), Fields virology, 3rd ed. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, Pa. |
| 10. |
Gorziglia, M.,
K. Green,
K. Nishikawa,
K. Taniguchi,
R. Jones,
A. Z. Kapikian, and R. M. Chanock.
1988.
Sequence of the fourth gene of human rotaviruses recovered from asymptomatic or symptomatic infections.
J. Virol.
62:2978-2984 |
| 11. | Haddow, J., B. Clark, Y. M. Ni, and U. Desselberger. 1989. Biological function of the rotavirus protein VP4: observations on porcine rotaviruses from China. Med. Microbiol. Immunol. 178:163-176[Medline]. |
| 12. | Hall, G. A., J. C. Bridger, K. R. Parsons, and R. Cook. 1993. Variation in rotavirus virulence: a comparison of pathogenesis in calves between two rotaviruses of different virulence. Vet. Pathol. 30:223-233[Abstract]. |
| 13. | Hoshino, Y., L. J. Saif, S. Y. Kang, M. M. Sereno, W. K. Chen, and A. Z. Kapikian. 1995. Identification of group A rotavirus genes associated with virulence of a porcine rotavirus and host range restriction of a human rotavirus in the gnotobiotic piglet model. Virology 209:274-280[Medline]. |
| 14. | Kapikian, A. Z., and R. M. Chanock. 1996. Rotaviruses, p. 1657-1708. In B. N. Fields, D. N. Knipe, P. M. Howley, R. M. Chanock, J. L. Melnick, T. P. Monath, B. Roizman, and S. E. Straus (ed.), Fields virology, 3rd ed. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, Pa. |
| 15. | Offit, P. A. 1994. Rotaviruses: immunological determinants of protection against infection and disease. Adv. Virus. Res. 44:161-202[Medline]. |
| 16. |
Offit, P. A.,
G. Blavat,
H. B. Greenberg, and H. F. Clark.
1986.
Molecular basis of rotavirus virulence: role of gene segment 4.
J. Virol.
57:46-49 |
| 17. | Reynolds, D. J., J. H. Morgan, N. Chanter, P. W. Jones, J. C. Bridger, T. G. Debney, and K. J. Bunch. 1986. Microbiology of calf diarrhoea in Southern Britain. Vet. Rec. 119:34-39[Abstract]. |
| 18. | Snodgrass, D. R., H. R. Terzolo, D. Sherwood, I. Campbell, J. D. Menzies, and B. A. Synge. 1986. Aetiology of diarrhoea in young calves. Vet. Rec. 119:31-34[Abstract]. |
| 19. | Tauscher, G. I., and U. Desselberger. 1997. Viral determinants of rotavirus pathogenicity in pigs: production of reassortants by asynchronous coinfection. J. Virol. 71:853-857[Abstract]. |
| 20. | Torres-Medina, A., R. G. Wyatt, C. A. Mebus, N. R. Underdahl, and A. Z. Kapikian. 1976. Diarrhea caused in gnotobiotic piglets by the reovirus-like agent of human infantile gastroenteritis. J. Infect. Dis. 133:22-27[Medline]. |
| 21. |
Ward, L. A.,
B. I. Rosen,
L. Yuan, and L. J. Saif.
1996.
Pathogenesis of an attenuated and a virulent strain of a group A human rotavirus in neonatal gnotobiotic pigs.
J. Gen. Virol.
77:1431-1441 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»