Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, May 2002, p. 4260-4266, Vol. 76, No. 9
0022-538X/02/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.76.9.4260-4266.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Received 26 November 2001/ Accepted 4 February 2002
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
3 kb), enveloped, circular double-stranded DNA viruses that replicate through an RNA intermediate via reverse transcription (27). Reverse transcription takes place within the viral nucleocapsid in the cytoplasm of the initially infected cell (27). The coencapsidation of pregenomic RNA (pgRNA) and the viral reverse transcriptase (P protein) into a nascent nucleocapsid (1, 2, 10) and the initiation of DNA synthesis (28, 29) are the first two steps in DNA replication and are likely to occur simultaneously. Both steps use the same trans factor, P protein, and cis element, epsilon (21, 29). After polymerization of 4 nucleotides (nt), the nascent minus-strand DNA switches templates to a position near the 3' end of the pgRNA (20, 28, 29). Minus-strand DNA synthesis resumes with RNase H activity of the P protein (4, 22) degrading the pgRNA that has been copied into DNA (27). Minus-strand synthesis proceeds to the 5' end of pgRNA template, resulting in a full-length minus strand (Fig. 1A) (13, 23, 30). The final RNase H cleavage leaves a short segment of RNA (18 or 19 nt) that will be the primer for the initiation of plus-strand synthesis (Fig. 1A) (12, 14). The 3' end of the primer contains a 12-nt sequence called direct repeat 1, or DR1. A second copy of these 12 nt, called DR2, is found near the 5' end of the minus strand. After completion of the minus strand, the replication pathway divides into two pathways that lead toward two different double-stranded DNA species (26). The dominant pathway leads to the synthesis of relaxed circular (RC) DNA (Fig. 1A through E). In this pathway the plus-strand primer translocates to DR2, where it will prime plus-strand DNA synthesis (Fig. 1B) (12). DR2 is within 50 nt of the 5' end of the minus strand, and synthesis proceeds to the 5' end of the template (Fig. 1C). To allow elongation past the 5' end of the minus strand, the final template switch, called circularization, occurs (Fig. 1D) (12). The minus strand is terminally redundant for 7 or 8 nt (13). This redundancy, called r, is the donor and acceptor site for circularization. Once the 3' end of the nascent plus strand anneals to 3'r, plus-strand synthesis resumes. Elongation will ultimately yield RC DNA (Fig. 1E). The second form of double-stranded DNA arises when the plus-strand synthesis initiates from DR1 (Fig. 1F). This type of synthesis, called in situ priming, yields a duplex linear (DL) form of the genome (26).
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Synthesis of plus-strand DNA for DHBV. HHBV is likely to employ an identical strategy, except that the sequence of r is 5'-GTAATCT-3'. (A) Completion of synthesis of minus-strand DNA and generation of the RNA primer for the synthesis of plus-strand DNA. Black lines represent minus-strand DNA. White ovals labeled P represent the P protein, which is covalently attached to the 5' terminus of the minus strand. The rectangles that contain nucleotide sequences represent the direct repeats, DR1 and DR2. The final RNase H cleavage during the synthesis of minus-strand DNA generates the RNA primer used for the initiation of plus-strand DNA synthesis. The primer is 18 or 19 nt and contains the DR1 at its 3' end. (B) Primer translocation. For a majority of minus-strand DNA templates the plus-strand primer is translocated from DR1 to DR2. (C) Initiation of plus-strand DNA synthesis from DR2. DNA synthesis initiates from DR2 and proceeds to the 5' end of template copying 5'r. Thin parallel lines represent plus-strand DNA. (D) Circularization. To permit elongation past the 5' end of minus-strand DNA, the 3' end of the nascent plus strand anneals to 3'r at the 3' end of minus-strand DNA. (E) Resumption and elongation of plus-strand DNA synthesis yields RC DNA. (F) A small subset of minus-strand DNA templates have plus-strand DNA synthesis initiated from DR1. This is called in situ priming and generates a DL form of the genome.
|
![]() View larger version (55K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. When HHBV contains an M region from DHBV, less RC DNA is synthesized. Southern blotting was performed on viral DNA extracted from cytoplasmic capsids from transfected LMH cells. Lane 1, wild-type HHBV; lane 2, M chimera; lane 3, wild-type DHBV; lane 4, a variant of DHBV that is deficient in M function because nt 724 to 832 have been deleted. The viral DNA in lanes 1 and 2 was detected with a probe derived from nt 1165 to 2057 of HHBV that was specific for minus-strand DNA. Lanes 3 and 4 were hybridized with a genome-length DHBV probe that was specific for minus-strand DNA. Positions of RC, DL, and SS DNA are indicated.
|
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (25K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Structure and names of single, double, and triple chimeric viruses. Each rectangle is a linear representation of minus-strand DNA. The top rectangle represents wild-type (WT) HHBV with its 5' and 3' ends, with DR1, DR2, and r indicated. In each chimera the region replaced by DHBV sequence is indicated by diagonal shading. The name of each chimera is indicated on the right side.
|
Southern blotting. DNA electrophoresis (1.25% agarose in Tris-borate-EDTA buffer) and transfer to Hybond-N (Amersham) were carried out by using standard methods (18). Typically, 1/10 to 1/5 of a single transfection was analyzed. Hybridizations were carried out by the methods of Church and Gilbert (6). The radiolabeled probe was minus-strand specific and was derived from HHBV nt 1165 to 2057. All chimeras contained HHBV sequence over these nucleotides. Autoradiography was performed with a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager 445SI. The data in Tables 1 and 3 were derived by measuring the levels of RC, DL, and SS DNA for a virus and expressing each of the three DNA forms as a percentage of the total. A deficiency in primer translocation or circularization will lead to altered proportions of the three DNA forms.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Proportions of replicative intermediates measured by Southern blotting
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Proportions of replicative intermediates measured by Southern blotting of chimeras replicated with DHBV P and C
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Efficiency of plus-strand DNA synthesis as determined by primer extension of chimeric viruses replicated with HHBV P and C proteinsa
|
|
|
|---|
HHBV containing DHBV sequence from nt 718 to 823 is defective for the synthesis of RC DNA. A previous analysis indicated that a derivative of HHBV containing DHBV sequence from nt 403 to 1364 had a cis-acting defect for the synthesis of RC DNA (19). This analysis indicated that cis-acting sequences for RC DNA synthesis were within the altered region and that the DHBV version of these sequences could not function in the context of the remainder of HHBV template when acted on by HHBV C and P proteins. An independent study of DHBV indicated that removal of nt 724 to 832 resulted in a cis-acting defect for the synthesis of RC DNA (9). No other cis-acting sequences for RC DNA synthesis were found between nt 403 to 1364 in the analysis of DHBV, although the region between nt 455 to 723 could not be analyzed due to the presence of the second encapsidation signal. On the basis of both of these analyses the existence of cis-acting element M was proposed. We wanted to know if HHBV that only contained a DHBV M region was defective for RC DNA synthesis. To this end we constructed and analyzed an HHBV variant that contained DHBV sequence from nt 718 to 823, named M chimera (Fig. 3). Southern blotting of viral DNA isolated from cytoplasmic capsids indicated that M chimera supported the synthesis of substantially less RC DNA than did HHBV (Fig. 2, lanes 1 and 2, and Table 1). As a comparison, Southern blotting of DHBV and the variant of DHBV with a deletion of nt 724 to 832 can be seen in lanes 3 and 4 of Fig. 2. This analysis indicated that HHBV and DHBV have the same cis-acting sequence, called M, located at similar positions within their genomes. The M chimera pregenome did not support the synthesis of normal levels of RC DNA when it was replicated with DHBV C and P protein (Table 3). With this result in hand we asked whether region M needed to be compatible with region 3E and/or 5E for the synthesis of normal levels of RC DNA. To answer this question we analyzed a series of variants of HHBV that were substituted by DHBV either singly, doubly, or triply with M, 3E, and 5E (Fig. 3).
Single and double chimeras are partially defective for RC DNA accumulation. Although previous studies of DHBV indicated the presence of the 3E and 5E cis-acting sequences, the extent and boundaries of these elements were not precisely determined (9). Because of this uncertainty we substituted relatively large sections of sequence when constructing the 3E and the 5E chimeras (Fig. 3). The minus-strand DNA expressed by the 3E chimera was replaced with 253 nt of DHBV sequence, from nt 2787 to the 3' end (nt 2535). Minus-strand DNA has a terminal redundancy, named r, that participates in the template switch to circularize the genome (Fig. 1D and E). DHBV and HHBV r sequences differ: 5'-GTAATTCT-3' versus 5'-GTAATCT-3', respectively. Therefore, a chimera such as 3E would have a DHBV 3'r and a HHBV 5'r. To eliminate the potential that nonidentical r sequences would negatively affect circularization and therefore the synthesis of RC DNA, the DHBV r sequence in the 3E chimera was changed to match that of its HHBV counterpart by deleting a single nucleotide. The 5E chimera expressed a HHBV minus-strand DNA that was replaced by 338 nt of DHBV sequence from nt 2206 to the 5' end (nt 2542). The DHBV little r sequence was changed to the HHBV sequence. Southern blotting of DNA extracted from cytoplasmic capsids of the 5E chimera indicated a reduction in the proportion of RC DNA (Fig. 4 and Table 1) and an increase in the proportion of SS DNA (56%, versus 26% for wild type). The 3E chimera synthesized slightly less RC DNA than unchanged HHBV (Fig. 4 and Table 1). Although the magnitude of the defect for both the 3E and 5E chimeras was not as great as that observed for the M chimera, these results indicated that analysis of the double and triple chimeras could be informative. Southern blot analysis of DNA extracted from cytoplasmic capsids of the doubly substituted viruses, 3E5E, 3EM, and M5E (Fig. 3), indicated that each made less RC DNA than the unchanged virus (Fig. 4 and Table 1). The proportion of RC DNA synthesized by 3EM and M5E was 41 and 31%, respectively (versus 59% for wild type). More strikingly, the proportion of RC DNA made by the 3E5E virus was only 9%. The magnitude of the defect for the 3E5E double chimera was substantially greater than that of each of the two constituent single substitutions, 3E and 5E. In general in the Southern blot analyses, when a chimera synthesized less RC DNA a concomitant increase in the proportion of SS DNA was seen (Fig. 4 and Table 1). Overall, the two viruses with the greatest defect in the synthesis of RC DNA were the M and 3E5E chimeras. This observation suggested that both ends of the minus-strand template need to be compatible with its middle for normal RC DNA synthesis.
![]() View larger version (91K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Southern blotting of chimeras. The triple chimera, 3EM5E, is restored in its ability to synthesize RC DNA. Southern blotting was performed on viral DNA extracted from cytoplasmic capsids from transfected LMH cells. The blot was hybridized with a probe derived from nt 1165 to 2057 of HHBV that was specific for minus-strand DNA. WT, wild type.
|
M region contributes to both template switches during plus-strand DNA synthesis. Although the M chimera virus was defective for RC DNA formation, Southern blot analyses did not indicate which step(s) in plus-strand DNA synthesis was inhibited. The accumulation of SS DNA in the Southern blot analysis suggested two likely possibilities. Plus-strand primers normally destined for DR2 were not utilized, resulting in the accumulation of full-length minus-strand DNA. Another possible reason for the accumulation of SS DNA would be failure to circularize plus strands that had primed from DR2. An analysis based on primer extension has been used to measure the extent to which a variant virus has primed plus-strand DNA from DR2 and then the extent to which those plus strands have circularized (9, 15, 16). This analysis relies on making three measurements with three different primer extension reactions and is illustrated in Fig. 5. The primer extension analysis was performed on unchanged HHBV and the M chimera variant and is summarized in Table 2. The level of plus-strand DNA initiating from DR2 normalized to the level of minus strand for the region M mutant was about 60% of that of the unchanged HHBV (Table 2, priming from DR2 value, 40% versus 67%). In addition, the M chimera had a defect in circularization (Table 2, circularization value). Only 15% of the plus strands that had initiated from DR2 and elongated to the 5' end of minus-strand DNA had circularized. This result is in contrast to that for unchanged HHBV, which had circularized 45% of its plus-strand DNA primed from DR2. The cumulative effect of the two deficiencies was an 80% reduction, relative to values for wild-type HHBV, in the fraction of minus-strand DNA templates that were primed from DR2 and subsequently circularized. The M chimera virus did not support a measurable increase in plus-strand priming from DR1 as judged by Southern blotting (Table 1). Thus, the primer extension analysis of M chimera virus indicated that the reduction in the level of RC DNA was the result of two defects during plus-strand DNA synthesis. First, there was a reduction in the level of plus-strand DNA initiating from DR2, suggesting an inhibition of primer translocation/utilization without increased priming in situ. Second, for the plus strands that had translocated and initiated from DR2 a partial reduction in the level of circularization was measured. These results indicated that region M contributes to the processes of primer utilization/translocation and circularization, suggesting that the mechanisms of these two template switches share a common feature. Primer extension analysis of the 3E5E chimera revealed similar trends. 3E5E supported initiation of plus-strand DNA synthesis at 55% of the level of unchanged HHBV (Table 2). In addition, for 3E5E only 14% of the plus strands of DNA that initiated from DR2 circularized, in contrast to 45% for the wild type (Table 2). The net effect was an 83% reduction relative to values for unchanged HHBV in the percentage of minus-strand DNA templates that had plus-strand priming from DR2 and subsequently circularizing. In summary, the primer extension analysis indicated that for the M and 3E5E chimera viruses, both template switches during the synthesis of plus-strand DNA were affected.
![]() View larger version (19K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. The strategy to measure the extent to which a virus carries out primer translocation/utilization and circularization by primer extension. Three primers, named C, B, and A, are used. Primer C measures the level of minus-strand DNA. Primer B measures the level of plus-strand DNA initiated from DR2 and elongated to at least the 5' end of the minus strand. Primer A measures the level of plus-strand DNA initiating from DR2 that has successfully circularized. (A) RC DNA will be detected with all three primers. (B) A replicative intermediate inhibited for circularization. It will be detected with primers C and B but not with primer A. (C) A replicative intermediate inhibited for primer translocation/utilization. It will be detected with primer C but not with primers A and B.
|
![]() View larger version (38K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Results from Southern blotting and primer extension analysis corroborate. Comparison of the proportion of RC DNA as determined by Southern blotting or the level of priming from DR2 and circularization as determined by primer extension between HHBV and the chimeras. In this comparison, all values are relative to that of the wild type (WT), which has been normalized to 100.
|
Replication of the chimeric viruses with DHBV P and C proteins results in more severe defects in plus-strand synthesis. In the above analyses the chimeras were replicated with HHBV C and P proteins. We asked whether the magnitude of the defect in RC DNA synthesis for the chimeric viruses could be lessened if they were replicated with DHBV C and P protein. To answer this question we cotransfected expression plasmids for either HHBV, DHBV, or the various chimeric pgRNAs that were deficient for C and P protein production with a plasmid that expressed DHBV C and P protein. Replicative intermediates were isolated after 3 days, and Southern blotting was performed. A summary of this analysis is presented in Table 3. All of the chimeric viruses synthesized less RC DNA when replicated with DHBV replication proteins than when replicated with the HHBV counterparts. Consistent with this trend, when the HHBV pgRNA was reverse transcribed by the DHBV proteins a 50% decrease in the proportion of RC DNA was seen compared to that for replication with its endogenous proteins.
|
|
|---|
The use of chimeric HHBV/DHBV viruses as tools to study plus-strand DNA synthesis has been informative. In particular, the M, 3E5E, and 3EM5E viruses all display striking phenotypes that lend themselves to straightforward interpretations. But the chimeric approach is not without limitations. In general, a mutant phenotype indicates that an important mechanism has been affected and suggests that the substituted sequence contains an important cis-acting sequence. But lack of a mutant phenotype cannot be interpreted to indicate the absence of the cis-acting element. It could mean that a cis-acting sequence is present in the substituted region but no functional incompatibility exists. For example, the small defect measured for the 3E virus cannot be interpreted to indicate that HHBV does not have a 3E element. In light of all of our results a more likely interpretation is that DHBV 3E is functional within the context of an HHBV M and 5E.
The ability of the 3EM5E triple chimeric virus to synthesize RC DNA at wild-type levels when replicated with HHBV P and C proteins means that either the replication proteins, C and P, do not interact with 3E, M, or 5E in a sequence-specific manner or that they do interact in a sequence-specific manner and an incompatibility between the HHBV replication proteins and the DHBV cis-elements does not exist. In a different analysis, we found that when the HHBV pregenome was replicated with DHBV proteins a 50% decrease in the proportion of RC DNA was seen (Table 3). This was not the case with the reciprocal complementation. A DHBV pgRNA replicated with HHBV replication proteins displayed normal levels of RC DNA (data not shown). The reason underlying the incompatibility between the DHBV replication proteins and the HHBV pgRNA is not clear, but it does not appear to be operating through 3E, M, and 5E.
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants R29 GM50263, P01 CA22443, P30 CA07175, and T32 CA09135 and American Cancer Society grant JFRA-651.
|
|
|---|
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»