Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Virology, August 2001, p. 7489-7493, Vol. 75, No. 16
0022-538X/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.75.16.7489-7493.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Efficient Hepatitis Delta Virus RNA Replication in
Avian Cells Requires a Permissive Factor(s) from Mammalian
Cells
Yu-Tsueng
Liu,
Rob
Brazas, and
Don
Ganem*
Howard Hughes Medical Institute and
Departments of Microbiology & Immunology and Medicine,
University of California Medical Center, San Francisco,
California 94143-0414
Received 27 December 2000/Accepted 7 May 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) is a highly pathogenic human RNA virus
whose genome is structurally related to those of plant viroids.
Although its spread from cell to cell requires helper functions
supplied by hepatitis B virus (HBV), intracellular HDV RNA replication
can proceed in the absence of HBV proteins. As HDV encodes no
RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, the identity of the (presumably cellular)
enzyme responsible for this reaction remains unknown. Here we show
that, in contrast to mammalian cells, avian cells do not support
efficient HDV RNA replication and that this defect cannot be rescued by
provision of HDV gene products in trans. Contrary to
earlier assertions, this defect is not due to enhanced apoptosis
triggered in avian cells by HDV. Fusion of avian cells to mammalian
cells rescues HDV replication in avian nuclei, indicating that the
nonpermissive phenotype of avian cells is not due to the presence of
dominantly acting inhibitors of replication. Rather, avian cells lack
one or more essential permissive factors present in mammalian cells.
These results set the stage for the identification of such factors and
also explain the failure of earlier efforts to transmit HDV infection
to avian hosts harboring indigenous hepadnaviruses.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) is a
small RNA virus that is transmitted from human to human only in
conjunction with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (23).
HDV is a clinically important pathogen, since dual infection with HBV
and HDV is often associated with liver injury that is more severe than
that due to HBV alone (13, 24, 25). The HDV genome is a
1.7-kb covalently closed, single-stranded, circular RNA that displays
70% self-complementarity, allowing it to base pair into a highly
compact, rod-like structure (reviewed in references 16 and
18). These genomic features are found in no other animal
virus but recall those of plant viroids. But unlike viroid RNAs, which
are noncoding, HDV RNA harbors a single open reading frame that encodes
a key RNA-binding protein known as hepatitis delta antigen (HDAg). HDAg
specifically binds HDV RNA (7) and these HDAg-RNA
complexes form the core of the HDV virion. As a result of an RNA
editing event that occurs during replication (4, 19), HDAg
occurs in two isoforms differing at their C termini. The small (S)
isoform is absolutely required for RNA replication (14),
while the larger (L) isoform inhibits RNA replication but promotes the
envelopment of HDV RNPs by the envelope proteins of HBV (5,
8). This envelopment is the basis of the requirement for HBV
coinfection, since only HDV genomes enveloped by HBV glycoproteins can
exit the cell and propagate the infection.
No HBV functions are required for HDV RNA replication, which proceeds
via RNA-based rolling circular intermediates (9). Unlike
all other RNA viruses, HDV does not appear to encode its own
RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. HDAg, its sole gene product, has no
homology to known polymerases and no detectable polymerase activity.
The responsible polymerase is presumed to be of cellular origin, but
its identity is unknown and little is known of host factors that affect
viral replication.
Several years ago, we discovered that HDV RNA replication, which occurs
efficiently in most cultured mammalian cells, proceeds poorly or not at
all in certain avian cell lines (cited in reference 6),
findings which have since been confirmed by others (6). Here we have further explored this observation, with the aim of assessing the generality of the block to replication in avian cells and
whether it is due to the presence of inhibitory factors or to the
absence of permissive ones. Our results strongly favor the latter
hypothesis and provide a viable strategy for the identification of such factors.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell culture.
QT6 (20), QT35 (a gift from M. Linial, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center) (20), LMH,
and chicken embryonic fibroblast cells were maintained in Dulbecco's
modified Eagle's medium with 10% tryptose phosphate broth, 5% fetal
bovine serum, and 1% chick serum. QM7 was obtained from the American
Type Culture Collection (ATCC) (1). QCL-3 and 8C93 cells
were kindly provided by B. Cullen (Howard Hughes Medical Institute and
Duke University) (11) and H. Yin (University of Texas
Southwestern Medical Center), respectively. All of the adherent
mammalian cells were cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
with 10% fetal bovine serum, except for CHO-K1 cells, for which the
medium also contained 40 µg of proline per ml. These cells were
transfected with either Superfect (Qiagen) or Fugene-6 (Roche). DT40
and BJAB cells were maintained and transfected as described previously
(10, 15). Interspecific cell fusion between avian and
mammalian cells was induced by PEG-1500 (Roche) for 1 min.
Plasmids.
The expression plasmids for 1.1-mer HDV genomic
(pSVL-D1.1 wild type [WT] and mutant) or antigenomic [pSVL-D1.1
(AG)] cDNA and SHDAg (pcDNA3-SHDAg) have been described (2, 3,
17, 26).
Immunofluorescence and in situ hybridization.
To detect HDV
replication at the single-cell level, short oligonucleotide DNA probes
were used for in situ hybridization (12). A
genome-specific 45-mer oligoprobe (2) 5' labeled with
fluorescein isothiocyanate was synthesized by Life Technology. Cells
were first fixed and permeabilized with methanol at
20°C for 15 min. Immunolocalization of
-galactosidase was performed with a mouse monoclonal antibody (Promega) and tetramethyl rhodamine isothiocyanate (TRITC)-labeled goat anti-rabbit secondary antibody.
Subsequently, cells were postfixed with in situ fixation buffer
(Ambion), stored in 70% alcohol overnight at 4°C, and rehydrated
with 50% formamide in 4× SSC (1× SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M
sodium citrate) for 5 min at room temperature. Cells were denatured at
65°C with Zip-Hyb buffer (Ambion) for 10 min, hybridized with probes
overnight at 37°C, washed twice with 50% formamide in 2× SSC and in
0.1× SSC at 37°C, and finally mounted with Vectashield containing
4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) (Vector Laboratories).
Annexin V staining was applied to examine the effect of HDAg on
apoptosis. Cells were incubated with Cy3-conjugated annexin V
(Biosource International) for 20 min before fixation in order to label
apoptotic cells. Some QT6 cells were treated with 0.5 µg of
staurosporine per ml overnight to induce apoptosis as a positive control.
Northern blotting and flow cytometry.
These analyses were
performed as previously described (3, 26).
 |
RESULTS |
Block to HDV replication in avian cells.
To assay for HDV RNA
replication, cells were transfected with 1.1-mer clones of HDV cDNA,
the expression of whose genomic RNA strand was driven by a simian virus
40 (SV40) late promoter (pSVL-D1.1) or cytomegalovirus (CMV)
immediate-early promoter (pCMV-D1.1). Expression of this RNA by
conventional pol II transcription results in production of overlength
genomic RNAs which undergo self-cleavage to unit-length linears by the
intrinsic ribozyme activity of the RNA. Ligation of these RNAs yields
monomer circles of genomic polarity; in the presence of S-HDAg, these
structures are replicated to antigenomic RNA. Thus, the presence of
antigenomic RNA in Northern blots of RNA from such cells provides proof
of authentic HDV RNA replication. Table 1
shows a summary of the lines in which we have detected HDV replication
following transfection of HDV cDNA. Not only can cells of many
mammalian species support replication, but virtually all cell types
tested appear competent for this activity. In fact, no mammalian cell
line we have ever tested has failed to support HDV RNA synthesis
(3, 26, 27; Y.-T. Liu, R. Brazas, and D. Ganem,
unpublished observation).
By contrast, we observed little or no replication of HDV in avian
cells. As shown in Fig.
1 for the quail
fibrosarcoma cell
line QT6, transfection of QT6 with WT pSVL-D1.1 HDV
genomes gave
rise to only extremely low levels of antigenomic RNA
(lanes 6
to 9), even with high efficiency transfection (routinely more
than 20% [see Fig.
3]), deliberate overloading of the gel, and
overexposure of the autoradiogram. This defect is also not due
solely
to inefficient expression of the SV40 late promoter in
avian cells.
Although the CMV promoter directed expression of
reporter genes in QT6
at 5 to 10 times the level supported by
the SV40 late promoter (not
shown), transfection of QT6 by pCMV-D1.1
still resulted in extremely
poor replication in avian cells, though
a higher basal level was
observable (Fig.
1A, lane 10).

View larger version (86K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Northern and Western analysis for HDV replication in
mammalian and avian cells. Monkey CV1 and quail QT6 cells were
transfected with pSVL-D1.1 (lanes 1 and 6), mutant pSVL-D1.1 (lanes 2 and 7), pSVL-D1.1 + pcDNA3-SHDAg (lanes 3 and 8), mutant pSVL-D1.1 + pcDNA3-SHDAg (lanes 4 and 9) and pCMV-D1.1 (lanes 5 and 10) and were
analyzed by Northern blotting for HDV antigenomic RNA synthesis (top
panel). The total RNA of each sample is shown in the middle panel.
Expression of S-HDAg was detected by Western blotting (bottom panel).
|
|
This replication defect could not be ascribed to inefficient S-HDAg
expression, since provision of abundant S-HDAg by cotransfecting
an
expression vector for this protein did not rescue the defect
(Fig.
1,
lane 8, top and bottom panels). (That the expression
vector provides
functionally competent S-HDAg in
trans is shown
by its
ability to complement an HDAg frameshift mutation in mammalian
[CV1]
cells [Fig.
1, lanes 2 and 4]; as expected, this complementation
does
not occur in QT6 cells [Fig.
1, lanes 7 and 9].) We note
that the
block to HDV RNA accumulation is not absolute

low levels
of HDV
antigenomic RNA can occasionally be detected following
WT HDV
transfection (Fig.
1, lane 10). Typically, however, levels
of HDV
antigenomic RNA are <1 to 2% of those achieved in mammalian
cells
transfected in parallel (Fig.
1, lanes 1 to
5).
To determine if the inability to support efficient HDV replication is
unique to QT6 or is a general phenomenon of avian cells,
we further
tested other available avian cell lines by transfecting
them with
pSVL-D1.1 or pCMV-D1.1 and assaying for the accumulation
of antigenomic
RNA. Lines tested included several other quail
cell lines as well as
chicken cell lines of fibroblastic, epithelial,
and lymphoid origin
(Table
1). All of these lines gave results
identical to those observed
in QT6, leading us to conclude that
most or all avian cells are
nonpermissive for HDV
replication.
The defect in avian cells is recessive.
The above data (and
those of reference 6) indicate that species-specific
factors affect the replication of HDV RNA. Two general models can be
considered for how such factors may operate: avian cells may lack
permissive factor(s) that mammalian cells possess, or avian cells may
harbor an inhibitor(s) of HDV replication missing from mammalian hosts.
To distinguish between these models, we employed a somatic cell genetic
approach involving interspecific cell fusion. First, pSVL-D1.1 was
transfected into QM7 quail cells. One day later, CHO-K1 (hamster) cells
were added to these cultures. Once the hamster cells were stably
attached, half of the cocultures were fused with 50% polyethylene
glycol (PEG), while the remainder were simply cocultured in the absence
of fusogen. All cultures were incubated in 10 µM
1-
-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine to prevent overgrowth of
unfused cells, and 3 days later RNA from the cocultures was examined by
Northern blotting for antigenomic RNA. As shown in Fig.
2A, products of HDV replication were
readily detected when the cocultures were fused with PEG, but no HDV
replication was observed in the absence of fusion. Similar results are
observed in QT6 cells transfected with pCMV-D1.1 (Fig. 2C), although as expected, the basal level of HDV replication driven by this construct is higher (Fig. 1, lane 10). These results indicate that avian cells do
not contain dominant inhibitors of replication. Rather, they suggest
that avian cells lack permissive factors. Also, the fact that fusion is
required for complementation to be observed indicates that the missing
permissive factors are cell autonomous
they cannot be supplied in a
paracrine fashion from nearby cells but must be directly introduced
into the nonpermissive cell.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
HDV Replication in heterokaryons of mammalian and avian
cells. (A) Quail cells (QM7) were transfected with HDV cDNA of genomic
polarity in pSVL vector and cocultured with mammalian cells (CHO-K1).
Cell fusion was induced by PEG. HDV antigenomic RNA synthesis was
analyzed by Northern blotting for cocultures with (left lane) or
without (right lane) fusogen. (B) Quail cells (QT6) were transfected
with HDV cDNA of antigenomic polarity and cocultured with a C2C12
derived mouse cell line, which had been stably transfected with
-Gal plasmid. The -Gal protein was labeled with TRITC (red, upper
panel) by indirect immunofluorescence. HDV genomic RNA was detected by
fluorescein isothiocyanate-labeled (green, upper panel) oligonucleotide
probes. The nuclei of cells were shown by DAPI staining (blue, lower
panel). (C) QT6 cells were transfected with pCMV-D1.1. Transfected QT6
cells were cultured either alone (lane 3) or with CHO-K1 cells (lanes 1 and 2); cells of lanes 1 and 3 were induced to fuse with PEG, and then
RNA was extracted and analyzed as described in the legend to Fig. 2A.
|
|
To examine this complementation at the single-cell level, we conducted
the experiment whose results are shown in Fig.
2B.
QT6 cells were
transfected with pSVL-D1.1(AG), which expresses
the antigenomic
RNA of HDV from the plasmid DNA via an SV40 late
promoter. One day
later, C2C12 mouse myoblast clone 8C93, which
is stably transfected
with

-galactosidase (

-Gal), was added
to the QT6 culture and the
two populations were fused with PEG.
Three days later, the cells were
assayed for the accumulation
of genomic RNA by in situ hybridization.
(We chose to detect genomic
rather than antigenomic RNA in this assay
because of its greater
abundance in infected cells.) In addition,

-Gal was detected
by immunofluorescence using a specific monoclonal
antibody. As
shown in Fig.
2B, HDV RNA was detected only in
multinucleate cells
positive for

-Gal; we did not see any HDV RNA in
any single cells
negative for

-Gal (unfused QT6 cells) or in any
single cells
positive for this enzyme (unfused C2C12
cells).
Impaired HDV replication in avian cells is not due to cell toxicity
or cell death.
Recently, Chang et al. (6) have
suggested that the inability of chicken LMH cells to support HDV
replication is due to toxicity resulting from HDAg expression within
these cells. This was based upon the observation that when HDAg
expression vectors were cotransfected with green fluorescent protein
(GFP) reporter plasmids, GFP expression was impaired in a
dose-dependent fashion. These authors also claimed that the replication
defect of HDV in LMH cells could be partially suppressed by the
broad-spectrum caspase inhibitor ZVAD-fmk, and they suggested on this
basis that induced host cell apoptosis was an important component of
the nonpermissive phenotype. Here we show that neither of these
assertions is generally true of avian cells. QT6 cells were
cotransfected with an enhanced GFP (EGFP) expression vector and
a fivefold excess of either pcDNA3, pcDNA3-SHDAg, pcDNA3-lacZ, or
pSVL-D1.1; 3 days later, cells were examined by flow cytometry for GFP
expression. As shown in Fig. 3, the
percentages of transfected cells expressing GFP and the mean levels of
GFP expression per cell were not significantly different in any of the
groups. In particular, expression of HDAg (panel A) had no adverse
impact on GFP expression.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Flow cytometry analysis of the effect of S-HDAg on GFP
coexpression. pEGFP was cotransfected with pcDNA3-SHDAg (A), pSVL-D1.1
(B), pcDNA3 vector (C), and pcDNA3-LacZ (D) into QT6 cells. A negative
control without pEGFP transfection is shown (E). The GFP expression was
analyzed 3 days after transfection by flow cytometry using a Becton
Dickinson FACSCalibur.
|
|
To examine the effects of HDAg expression on apoptosis, we conducted
the experiment whose results are shown in Fig.
4. QT6
cells were transfected with pEGFP
either alone (panels A and G)
or together with pcDNA3-HDAg (panel B),
pSVL-D1.1 (panel C), mutant
pSVL-D1.1 (panel D), pcDNA3 (panel E), or
pcDNA3-lacZ (panel F).
Three days later, the cells were examined for
GFP expression and,
by staining with Cy3-labeled annexin V, for
apoptosis. As a control
for annexin V staining, we also treated
QT6 cells with staurosporine,
a potent inducer of apoptosis. Panel A
shows that staurosporine
indeed induced apoptosis, as judged by both
enhanced annexin V
staining and by the presence of apoptotic bodies
seen by DAPI
staining. However, neither HDAg expression nor
transfection with
WT HDV genomes either impaired GFP expression or
enhanced apoptosis
over the background level. Similar results have been
obtained
in DT40 chicken B cells (data not shown), indicating that
these
effects are not quail specific.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Annexin V staining to analyze the effect of S-HDAg on
cell death. QT6 cells were transfected with pEGFP either alone (A and
G) or together with pcDNA3-SHDAg (B), pSVL-D1.1 (C), mutant pSVL-D1.1
(D), pcDNA3 vector (E), and pcDNA3-LacZ (F). Cells were stained with
annexin V before fixation at day 3 after transfection. Some cells were
treated with 0.5 µg of staurosporine per ml (A) to induce apoptosis
as a positive control for annexin V-Cy3 staining (middle panel). GFP
expression is shown in the left panel and DAPI staining is shown in the
right panel.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
These experiments show that there is a profound (though not
absolute) block to HDV RNA replication in cells of avian origin and
define this block as being due to the absence of one or more permissive
factors that are present in mammalian cells of many species and cell
types. This block does not appear to be the trivial consequence of
cytotoxicity of HDV products in avian cells, nor is it due to enhanced
susceptibility to apoptosis. Although it is possible that some avian
cell lines may be more sensitive to putative toxicities of this type,
our results clearly show that such idiosyncratic toxicities, if they
exist at all, cannot explain the general nonpermissiveness of avian
cells. This interpretation is also consistent with the fact that, in
recent experiments conducted by others (see Fig. 5 in reference
6), ZVAD-fmk treatment of HDV-transfected LMH cells did
not appreciably restore viral antigenomic RNA levels, despite improved
expression of cotransfected GFP reporters. Thus, even in that cell
line, apoptosis was not the reason for impaired HDV replication.
We do not yet know the nature of the permissive factor(s) absent from
avian cells. The fact that expression of HDAg in trans does
not reverse the block suggests that the defect is likely to be
downstream of HDAg expression. For example, if HDAg must interact with
one or more host components to implement its replicative function, such
components would be candidates for the missing factor(s), as would
subunit(s) of the host-encoded polymerase required for HDV RNA
synthesis. Other possibilities include (but are not limited to) host
factors that might be involved in facilitating ribozyme-mediated RNA
cleavage, the ligation of the RNA cleavage products, or the
stabilization of newly replicated genomes.
Our results have two important implications for the study of HDV
replication and pathogenesis. First, they suffice to explain earlier
failures to transmit HDV to ducks bearing the duck hepatitis B virus
(DHBV). Although HDV was readily transmitted by experimental inoculation of sera from HBV- and HDV-infected subjects into
woodchucks bearing the woodchuck hepatitis virus (21),
similar attempts at transmission to DHBV-infected ducks have generally
been unsuccessful, despite early reports to the contrary
(22). Second, the results of the complementation tests
illustrated in Fig. 2 suggest that it may be possible to design gene
transfer strategies to identify and clone the responsible missing
factor(s). The identification of such factors should provide important
clues to the nature of the host machinery required for HDV infection.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Howard Hughes
Medical Institute and Departments of Microbiology & Immunology and
Medicine, University of California Medical Center, San Francisco, CA
94143-0414. Phone: (415) 476-2826. Fax: (415) 476-0939. E-mail:
ganem{at}cgl.ucsf.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Antin, P. B., and C. P. Ordahl.
1991.
Isolation and characterization of an avian myogenic cell line.
Dev. Biol.
143:111-121[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Bell, P.,
R. Brazas,
D. Ganem, and G. G. Maul.
2000.
Hepatitis delta virus replication generates complexes of large hepatitis delta antigen and antigenomic RNA that affiliate with and alter nuclear domain 10.
J. Virol.
74:5329-5336[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Brazas, R., and D. Ganem.
1996.
A cellular homolog of hepatitis delta antigen: implications for viral replication and evolution.
Science
274:90-94[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Casey, J. L.,
K. F. Bergmann,
T. L. Brown, and J. L. Gerin.
1992.
Structural requirements for RNA editing in hepatitis delta virus: evidence for a uridine-to-cytidine editing mechanism.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:7149-7153[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Chang, F. L.,
P. J. Chen,
S. J. Tu,
C. J. Wang, and D. S. Chen.
1991.
The large form of hepatitis delta antigen is crucial for assembly of hepatitis delta virus.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:8490-8494[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Chang, J.,
G. Moraleda, and J. Taylor.
2000.
Limitations to replication of hepatitis delta virus in avian cells.
J. Virol.
74:8861-8866[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Chang, M. F.,
S. C. Baker,
L. H. Soe,
T. Kamahora,
J. G. Keck,
S. Makino,
S. Govindarajan, and M. M. Lai.
1988.
Human hepatitis delta antigen is a nuclear phosphoprotein with RNA-binding activity.
J. Virol.
62:2403-2410[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Chao, M.,
S. Y. Hsieh, and J. Taylor.
1990.
Role of two forms of hepatitis delta virus antigen: evidence for a mechanism of self-limiting genome replication.
J. Virol.
64:5066-5069[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Chen, P. J.,
G. Kalpana,
J. Goldberg,
W. Mason,
B. Werner,
J. Gerin, and J. Taylor.
1986.
Structure and replication of the genome of the hepatitis delta virus.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
83:8774-8778[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Coscoy, L., and D. Ganem.
2000.
Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus encodes two proteins that block cell surface display of MHC class I chains by enhancing their endocytosis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97:8051-8056[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Cullen, B. R.,
A. M. Skalka, and G. Ju.
1983.
Endogenous avian retroviruses contain deficient promoter and leader sequences.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
80:2946-2950[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Femino, A. M.,
F. S. Fay,
K. Fogarty, and R. H. Singer.
1998.
Visualization of single RNA transcripts in situ.
Science
280:585-590[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Hadler, S. C.,
M. De Monzon,
A. Ponzetto,
E. Anzola,
D. Rivero,
A. Mondolfi,
A. Bracho,
D. P. Francis,
M. A. Gerber,
S. Thung, et al.
1984.
Delta virus infection and severe hepatitis. An epidemic in the Yucpa Indians of Venezuela.
Ann. Intern. Med.
100:339-344.
|
| 14.
|
Kuo, M. Y.,
M. Chao, and J. Taylor.
1989.
Initiation of replication of the human hepatitis delta virus genome from cloned DNA: role of delta antigen.
J. Virol.
63:1945-1950[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Lagunoff, M.,
R. Majeti,
A. Weiss, and D. Ganem.
1999.
Deregulated signal transduction by the K1 gene product of Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:5704-5709[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Lai, M. M.
1995.
The molecular biology of hepatitis delta virus.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
64:259-286[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Lazinski, D. W., and J. M. Taylor.
1994.
Expression of hepatitis delta virus RNA deletions: cis and trans requirements for self-cleavage, ligation, and RNA packaging.
J. Virol.
68:2879-2888[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Lazinski, D. W., and J. M. Taylor.
1994.
Recent developments in hepatitis delta virus research Adv.
Virus Res.
43:187-231.
|
| 19.
|
Luo, G. X.,
M. Chao,
S. Y. Hsieh,
C. Sureau,
K. Nishikura, and J. Taylor.
1990.
A specific base transition occurs on replicating hepatitis delta virus RNA.
J. Virol.
64:1021-1027[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Moscovici, C.,
M. G. Moscovici,
H. Jimenez,
M. M. Lai,
M. J. Hayman, and P. K. Vogt.
1977.
Continuous tissue culture cell lines derived from chemically induced tumors of Japanese quail.
Cell
11:95-103[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Ponzetto, A.,
P. J. Cote,
H. Popper,
B. H. Hoyer,
W. T. London,
E. C. Ford,
F. Bonino,
R. H. Purcell, and J. L. Gerin.
1984.
Transmission of the hepatitis B virus-associated delta agent to the eastern woodchuck.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:2208-2212[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Ponzetto, A.,
M. Rapicetta,
B. Forzani,
A. Smedile,
C. Hele,
G. Morace,
A. M. di Rienzo,
P. Palladino,
L. Avanzini,
J. L. Gerin, et al.
1987.
Hepatitis delta virus infection in Peking ducks chronically infected by the duck hepatitis B virus.
Prog. Clin. Biol. Res.
234:47-49[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Rizzetto, M.,
M. G. Canese,
J. L. Gerin,
W. T. London,
D. L. Sly, and R. H. Purcell.
1980.
Transmission of the hepatitis B virus-associated delta antigen to chimpanzees.
J. Infect. Dis.
141:590-602[Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Rizzetto, M.,
G. Verme,
S. Recchia,
F. Bonino,
P. Farci,
S. Arico,
R. Calzia,
A. Picciotto,
M. Colombo, and H. Popper.
1983.
Chronic hepatitis in carriers of hepatitis B surface antigen, with intrahepatic expression of the delta antigen. An active and progressive disease unresponsive to immunosuppressive treatment.
Ann. Intern. Med.
98:437-441.
|
| 25.
|
Saracco, G.,
S. Macagno,
F. Rosina, and M. Rizzetto.
1988.
Serologic markers with fulminant hepatitis in persons positive for hepatitis B surface antigen. A worldwide epidemiologic and clinical survey.
Ann. Intern. Med.
108:380-383.
|
| 26.
|
Wang, D.,
J. Pearlberg,
Y. T. Liu, and D. Ganem.
2001.
Deleterious effects of hepatitis delta virus replication on host cell proliferation.
J. Virol.
75:3600-3604[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Wei, Y., and D. Ganem.
1998.
Activation of heterologous gene expression by the large isoform of hepatitis delta antigen.
J. Virol.
72:2089-2096[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Journal of Virology, August 2001, p. 7489-7493, Vol. 75, No. 16
0022-538X/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.75.16.7489-7493.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.