Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, July 2005, p. 8361-8373, Vol. 79, No. 13
0022-538X/05/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.79.13.8361-8373.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Milano,1 Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, San Paolo Hospital, via A. di Rudinì 8, 20142 Milan,2 Istituto di Genetica Molecolare, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, via Abbiategrasso 207, 27100 Pavia, Italy3
Received 2 September 2004/ Accepted 14 March 2005
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All HCMV clinical isolates are initially able to replicate in both EC and fibroblasts. However, passaging in fibroblasts consistently results in a loss of EC tropism. Studies of HCMV strains that have retained/lost their original EC-tropic phenotype support the conclusion that EC tropism relies on multiple viral genes (3, 40) and that non-EC-tropic strains are impaired in their ability to translocate the viral DNA to the nucleus (3, 4, 39, 41). Thus, the loss of EC tropism is typically due to a cytoplasmic blockade rather than to a failure to either bind to or penetrate into EC. Reports suggesting that the vascular bed of origin may also influence HCMV-EC interactions have provided conflicting findings. While lytic infections of cultured venous and microvascular EC are well established, a report about a noncytopathic persistence of HCMV in human arterial EC has raised the possibility that the continuous clearance of intracellular virions makes possible a long-term productive infection in that EC type (9). However, work by others (22, 23) supported the opposite view, that interstrain differences in the cytopathic potential, rather than the EC source, account for different outcomes of infections. This again indicated that virus-encoded products may fine-tune EC infection mechanisms as well as the potential to cause direct endothelial injury.
The search for the genetic determinants of HCMV EC tropism commenced with the advent of bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) cloning and bacterial manipulation of cytomegalovirus genomes. A first insight was gained with the related murine cytomegalovirus (MCMV) model. A random transposon mutagenesis screen of the BAC-cloned MCMV genome identified an MCMV gene (M45) that enabled MCMV replication in EC by preventing apoptosis of the infected cell; M45 was also required for replication in macrophages, but not other cell types (6). M45 has an orthologous counterpart in HCMV, the UL45 gene. However, BAC cloning and mutagenesis of a reference EC-tropic HCMV genome (15) have shown UL45 to be dispensable for growth in both fibroblasts and EC. Furthermore, UL45 does not exhibit the properties of an antiapoptotic protein (30).
A genome-wide screening for HCMV genes affecting virus growth in various cell types identified the UL24 gene, a member of the US22 gene family coding for tegument proteins, as necessary for efficient HCMV replication in microvascular EC (8); interestingly, MCMV homologues of the US22 family, M140 and M141, had previously been identified as tropism genes required for MCMV replication in macrophages (18). In a distinct, knowledge-driven approach, three genes of the UL131A-128 locus (1, 16), which are frequently inactivated during clinical strain adaptation in fibroblasts (7, 16), were recently shown to be required for efficient HCMV infections of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) as well as for virus transfer to neutrophils and monocytes from an infected HUVEC monolayer (16). The data on tropism-specifying genes suggest that in cytomegalovirus genomes, determinants of EC and leukocyte tropism overlap, which may reflect the descent of these cells from a common progenitor. However, the identities of these determinants appear to differ in HCMV and MCMV.
UL131A-128 transcripts are synthesized with late kinetics (1, 16), and the encoded proteins (pUL131A, pUL130, and pUL128) are produced when HCMV replication is at the stage of virion assembly and release. Computer-assisted analysis has indicated that these products are all secretory proteins. The UL130 and UL128 proteins share a domain architecture, including an N-terminal signal peptide, C-terminal regions with no sequence similarity to any known class of proteins, and a central chemokine-like domain. Specifically, the 46-120 tract of pUL130 can be modeled on CXC chemokines (29), although it lacks two of the four cysteines that are strictly conserved in chemokines of this type (Fig. 1A and B). The UL128 protein, in turn, includes a domain that can be aligned with CC-type chemokines (1, 16).
|
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Viruses and infections. The HCMV VR1814 clinical isolate (35) and the Towne laboratory strain were used. All infections were performed in 2% FBS-containing medium by incubating confluent HELF or HUVEC monolayers at 37°C for 1 h with the indicated HCMV strain and then replacing the incubation mixture with fresh medium. Virus stocks were produced by infecting confluent monolayers at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.1; 3 days after the cytopathic effect extended to >90% of the cells, viruses were harvested by sonication of the cells (cell-free virus) or by collecting the culture medium and clarifying it by centrifugation at 3,000 x g for 1 h at 4°C (released virus). In some cases, released viral particles were sedimented by centrifugation at 23,500 x g for 55 min at 4°C and then further purified on a sorbitol gradient as previously described (10), except that a 40-55-70% step gradient was used. For analyses of the virion composition, the virions were further centrifuged at 110,000 x g for 2 h through a 10 to 50% Nycodenz (Sigma) gradient prepared in 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA. The virion purity was confirmed by controlling in an immunoblot the absence of markers of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) (GRP78-BiP) and the Golgi apparatus (p58-Golgi). Unless stated otherwise, VR1814 was cultured in HUVEC. In transcomplementation experiments, retrovirus-transduced HELF (see below) were infected with HCMV strains, and the viruses were harvested and purified as described above. Virus stocks were stored at 70°C in 10% sorbitol. After the stocks were thawed, viral titers were measured in each aliquot as infectious units/ml in HELF (HELF IU) or HUVEC (HUVEC IU) by infecting HELF/HUVEC seeded in 96-well plates with serial dilutions of virus and counting the pp72/86-positive cells at 24 h postinfection (hpi). For single-cycle output and plaque assays, confluent monolayers were infected as described above, and infection mixtures were replaced with fresh medium containing 160 µg/ml of human gamma globulin (Sigma).
To inhibit N-linked glycosylation, we added 5 µg/ml tunicamycin (Sigma) to the medium of infected cells at 4 days postinfection (dpi). After another day of infection, the cells were harvested for analysis. In deglycosylation experiments, infected cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and lysed in N-glycosidase F (endo F) buffer (20 mM phosphate, pH 7.2, 10 mM EDTA, 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate [SDS]). Alternatively, the cells were washed with 150 mM NaCl and lysed in endoglycosidase H (endo H) buffer (50 mM citrate buffer, pH 5.5, 0.1% SDS). Cell lysates were heated for 3 min at 96°C and incubated for 3 h at 37°C after the addition of 0.2 U/µl endo F or 0.2 mU/µl endo H (Roche). Deglycosylation reaction mixtures were mixed with 2 volumes of 2x Laemmli sample buffer and analyzed by Western blotting (WB).
Plasmids.
PCR products were generated with Pfu polymerase (Promega) and sequenced after cloning to rule out unwanted mutations. The UL130fs and UL130rev genes were amplified from Towne and Towne revertant DNAs, respectively, with primers 1 and 3 (the sequences of the oligonucleotides cited in this section are shown in Table S1 of the supplemental material). All other amplification reactions used VR1814 as a template. The wild-type UL130 gene was amplified by using primers 1 and 2, and the deletion mutant UL130
2-25 was amplified by using primers 4 and 2.
The UL130 mutants N85A and N201A were obtained by PCR-directed mutagenesis. Each mutant was created by amplifying contiguous tracts of the gene by using the primer sets 1-6 and 5-2 (N85A) and 1-10 and 9-2 (N201A). Each couple of amplimers was then combined into a single, full-length UL130 variant by a second PCR round using the external primers 1 and 2 and exploiting the central overlap created by the internal primers (5-6 and 9-10, respectively) in the former round. An N118A mutant was similarly produced by the separate amplification of two UL130 tracts (primer sets 1-8 and 7-2); in this case, the fusion of the amplimers into a single gene was obtained by direct ligation of a PstI site introduced close to the mutation by silent mutagenesis with the internal primers 7 and 8 (see Table S1 in the supplemental material).
All PCR products were cloned into the pCDNA3.1(+) expression vector (Invitrogen), which allows for both expression in transfected eukaryotic cells and T7 bacteriophage RNA polymerase-driven transcription in vitro. The UL130 amplimer was also cloned into the pLNCX2 retroviral vector (Clontech) to create the pLNUL130 plasmid.
In vitro expression, cell transfection, and retrovirus-mediated transduction.
Coupled in vitro transcription and translation of the pCDNA3.1(+)-UL130 and pCDNA3.1(+)-UL130
2-25 plasmids in rabbit reticulocyte lysates were carried out in the presence or absence of canine pancreatic microsomal membranes (Promega), according to the manufacturer's instructions. For the separation of microsome-associated proteins from cytosolic proteins, 35 µl of the translation mixture was centrifuged at 10,000x g for 15 min at 4°C through a 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, 250 mM sucrose cushion (0.5 ml). For enzymatic deglycosylation, the pellet was dissolved in 40 µl of endo F buffer and the mixture was treated with endo F as described above. Balanced amounts of crude or fractionated translation reactions were resolved by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, and radioactive protein bands were visualized by phosphorimaging.
HeLa cells were transfected with UL130 variants cloned into pCDNA3.1(+) by use of the Lipofectamine Plus reagent (Invitrogen) and were harvested at 48 h posttransfection. HUVEC were transfected by using Amaxa nucleofector and HUVEC-specific nucleofection medium according to the manufacturer's instructions. For proteolysis inhibition experiments, cells were treated/mock treated for 24 h with 10 µM lactacystin (Calbiochem) or 100 µM pepstatin plus 50 µM leupeptin (Sigma). For time-decay experiments, 50 µg/ml cycloheximide (Sigma) was added to the medium of the transfectants, and the cultures were incubated for 0.5 to 5 h. Cells were lysed in 2x Laemmli sample buffer (4,000 cells/µl) for immunoblot analysis.
Pseudotyped retroviral particles were produced by calcium phosphate transfection of the HEK-293gagpol cell line with the plasmid pLNUL130 (or a pLNCX2 void vector) along with pVSV-G, which encodes vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein G (42). At 48 h posttransfection, the culture medium was harvested and used to transduce subconfluent HELF or HUVEC monolayers. Cells expressing the integrated provirus were selected with 400 µg/ml G418 (Sigma) in the appropriate culture medium.
Antibodies, immunoblots, and immunocytochemistry. Anti-pUL130 antisera were obtained by DNA immunization of 6-week-old female BALB/c mice. In preparation for intramuscular injection, the DNA was purified with a Midi extraction kit (Promega) and dissolved in endotoxin-free PBS (Sigma) at 1 mg/ml. Mouse tibialis anterior muscles were pretreated bilaterally with 100 µl of Naja nigricollis snake venom cardiotoxin (10 µM in PBS; Latoxan, France). Five days later, 50 µl of pCDNA3.1(+)-UL130 DNA was injected into the regenerating muscle. Sera were collected and tested at 4 weeks postimmunization. Other primary antibodies for immunostaining were the anti-HCMV pp72/86 monoclonal antibody (MAb) clone 5D2, the anti-HCMV pp65 MAb clone 4C1 (33), the anti-major capsid protein (MCP) MAb clone 28.4 (24), and the anti-cyclin B1 MAb clone GNS1 (Santa Cruz).
Immunoblot analysis was performed according to standard procedures. Balanced amounts of protein samples were separated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, blotted onto Protran-83 nitrocellulose membranes (Schleicher & Schuell), and incubated with the indicated primary antibodies. Chemiluminescent signals were developed with horseradish peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-mouse secondary antibodies (Bio-Rad) and the Super Signal West Dura substrate (Pierce).
For immunocytochemistry, cells in 24-well plates were fixed with methanol at 20°C for 10 min, incubated with 0.5 µg/ml MAb 5D2 in PBS, and stained by use of a Vectastain ABC kit (Vector Laboratories) and 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole (Sigma). Representative fields of cytological images were acquired with an Olympus IX71 phase-contrast inverted microscope equipped with a charge-coupled device camera (Roper Scientific Photometrics) and operated with the Metamorph imaging application (Universal Imaging Corporation).
Purification of secreted pUL130. HeLa cells (2.7 x 107) were transfected with pCDNA3.1(+)-UL130 and cultured for 48 h. The culture medium (30 ml) was clarified and dialyzed overnight at 4°C against 50 mM Na+-HEPES, pH 7.5, 0.1 mM EDTA, and complete EDTA-free protease inhibitor mix (Roche) (buffer A). Secreted pUL130 was captured from the dialyzed supernatant on a 0.4-ml P11 phosphocellulose column (Whatman) which was previously equilibrated in buffer A. After washing of the column with 120 ml of buffer A, 30 µl of column resin was boiled in 40 µl of 2x Laemmli buffer and analyzed by WB. Alternatively, the same volume of resin was resuspended in 30 µl of endo H or endo F buffer and deglycosylated with the corresponding enzyme, as described above, before immunoblot analysis.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The expression of UL130 in a rabbit reticulocyte system, with or without added canine pancreatic microsomes to mimic endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-associated translation, translocation, and glycosylation, was utilized to verify these predictions (Fig. 2). The translation of UL130 in microsome-free lysates produced a single polypeptide of the expected mass (25 kDa). In the presence of microsomes, this band was scattered into three bands, all of which had apparent masses above that of the unprocessed protein. These were easily interpreted as mono-, di-, and triglycosylated forms of an ER-translocated pUL130 protein. Treatment with N-glycosidase F (endo F) produced a single band that migrated faster than the unprocessed UL130 protein and comigrated with a pUL130 mutant (
2-25) devoid of the signal sequence. These results indicated that in vitro, pUL130 is translocated into the ER lumen by use of a cleaved signal sequence and is modified at all of the predicted N-linked glycosylation sites. The glycosylation of the distal site is unusual, since potential glycosylation sites located in the last 60 residues of a protein are rarely used.
|
|
The expression and posttranslational modifications of UL130 were next investigated in human embryonic lung fibroblasts (HELF) and HUVEC infected with the reference endotheliotropic virus VR1814 and harvested at late infection times. For cells harvested at 5 days postinfection (dpi), WB revealed a pUL130 ladder similar to the one observed for transfected cells (Fig. 3C and D). However, for cells harvested at 10 dpi, when a 100% cytopathic effect was visible, the appearance of heavier forms that migrated slower than the fully glycosylated pUL130 protein detected in both transfectants and cells infected for shorter times was noticed (shown for HUVEC in Fig. 3D). This finding suggested that there were additional modifications of pUL130 oligosaccharides. To further investigate this point, we treated proteins in cell lysates with deglycosylating enzymes as described above. While the UL130 signal for 5-dpi lysates was shifted to the fast-migrating form by endo H, the most slowly migrating forms of pUL130 at 10 dpi were selectively resistant to endo H (Fig. 3C and D) and represented >10% of the pUL130 (Fig. 3D).
An important remaining question was whether pUL130 is secreted. The calculated isoelectric point for pUL130 is basic (9.3 to 9.9, depending on the algorithm). We verified that intracellular pUL130 can be quantitatively retained on a weak anion-exchange resin (see Materials and Methods) and used this procedure to concentrate soluble pUL130 in culture supernatants. We failed to detect free pUL130 in infected cell supernatants (data not shown). Minute amounts of bona fide secreted pUL130 (containing endo H-resistant glycoforms) could be detected in the medium from UL130-transfected HeLa cells (see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). However, the quantification of signals present on the immunoblot indicated that extracellular pUL130 makes up <1% of the total pUL130 and may represent a small fraction that escapes retention under overexpression conditions.
Taken together, these results indicate that the UL130 product is a luminal protein of the secretory pathway which is largely retained intracellularly both in transfected cells, in which it is expressed in the absence of other viral proteins, and in infected cells. Our experiments did not establish the site of pUL130 retention, but it is presumably a pre-Golgi compartment, as most intracellular pUL130 does not undergo carbohydrate rearrangements typical of the Golgi. However, a proportion of pUL130 did mature to a Golgi-type, endo H-resistant form that was coincident with prolonged infections of both HELF and HUVEC.
Towne pUL130 is a labile protein. The HCMV vaccine strain Towne bears an inactivating point mutation (a double T-nucleotide insertion) at the 3' end of the UL130 open reading frame (7, 16), whose reversion or transcomplementation is absolutely required for a rescue of strain spread in endothelial cells (12, 16). The mutation generates a frameshift, replacing the 12 carboxy-terminal amino acids of wild-type pUL130 with a 26-amino-acid stretch translated from the 1 phase (Fig. 1A and B). Since Towne was adopted as a nonendotheliotropic strain for our experiments (see below), the expression of the mutant gene was characterized initially. Lysates of HELF infected with the Towne strain were analyzed by WB as described above. A pattern reminiscent of that produced by wild-type pUL130, but much weaker, was detected (Fig. 4A). A similar result was observed when the Towne UL130fs gene was expressed in HeLa cells: transfectants accumulated pUL130fs to much lower levels (approximately 1/50) than that of the wild-type form, and highly resolved gels confirmed that the gene exhibited the predicted modest increment in mass (Fig. 4B). An analysis of protein decay in the presence of a translation inhibitor (cycloheximide [CHX]) showed that in infected HELF, pUL130fs disappeared very quickly, in contrast with wild-type pUL130, which was stable inside the cell for many hours (Fig. 4C). In CHX-treated HeLa transfectants, pUL130fs also underwent an accelerated decay, with a half-life of approximately 1.5 h (Fig. 4D); in these cells, the degradation of pUL130fs was not due to the ER-associated protein degradation pathway (26) (the protein was not stabilized by a proteasome inhibitor that stabilized cyclin B in the same cells) but depended at least in part on routing to lysosomes (the protein was attenuated by inhibitors of lysosomal proteases) (Fig. 4E). Finally, a similar accelerated decay was observed when pUL130fs was compared to wild-type pUL130 in transiently nucleofected HUVEC (Fig. 4G).
|
Transient complementation of viral infection by UL130 expression in producer cells. We have shown previously that HUVEC expressing UL130 (via a retroviral vector) support the growth of genetically UL130-negative strains, specifically the Towne strain (16). This format of complementation assay did not distinguish between the possible mechanisms of action of pUL130. These may be categorized a priori on the basis of (i) which cell is targeted by pUL130 (the cell producing the virion or the endothelial cell target of infection) and (ii) how pUL130 reaches the target cell (is it an intracellular factor, a diffusible extracellular ligand, an autocrine ligand, or a virion protein?).
To determine the mechanism of action of pUL130, we changed the conditions of the transcomplementation assay in order to separate the complementing cell host from the one to be infected. We aimed at determining the effect of the provision of pUL130 within producer cells on virion infectivity for EC and on viral output during the subsequent cycle of replication in EC. Because the UL130-complemented, genetically UL130-negative virus thus generated had to be compared with a noncomplemented counterpart, HELF were chosen as the complementing host in order to enable similar viral growth in the presence or absence of complementation (HUVEC without complementation are nonpermissive for a UL130-negative strain). HELF were transduced with either a retroviral vector to express UL130 or the empty vector as a control. UL130-complementing HELF, in contrast to the controls, expressed detectable amounts of pUL130 (data not shown).
These cell lines were used for replication of the Towne strain. The viral progeny was harvested, with separate collection of the intracellular virions (cell-free virus) and the infectious medium at 7 dpi, and the virion infectivity on HUVEC monolayers was measured by determining the number of HUVEC infectious units (number of nuclei positive for IE1-IE2 gene expression at 24 h), normalized to the titer in HELF (which fell in all cases in the 106 to 107 range). As Fig. 5A shows, while the virus grown in control cells produced the expected low background level of HUVEC positive for IE1-IE2 (just above the 104 HUVEC/HELF infection ratio), both cell-free and released viruses from the UL130-complementing HELF generated much higher rates of infection in HUVEC (above the 102 HUVEC/HELF infection ratio), equaling that of the reference endotheliotropic strain VR1814 passaged once in mock-transduced HELF (Fig. 5A).
|
Initial viral output from infected HUVEC is independent of the strain. To compare the single-cycle viral outputs from HUVEC infected with UL130-complemented Towne and mock-complemented VR1814, we measured de novo virus production by HUVEC infected with purified virions by determining (i) the output of infectious virus from HELF at 3 dpi and (ii) the amount of sedimentable viral antigen (pp65) released per infected cell. Strikingly, cells infected with the different viruses released similar quantities of HELF IUs (Fig. 6A) and pp65 (Fig. 6B).
|
UL130-conditioned medium does not complement viral infectivity in producer cells. Our data required further clarification: did effective complementation require UL130 expression in the same cell that assembled the virion or could pUL130 be supplied from without to the producer cell? The UL130 protein has the potential to function as a secreted, diffusible factor and could be effective even at subdetectable concentrations in the medium. To explore this possibility, we exposed HELF infected with the Towne strain to one of the following diffusible pUL130 sources: (i) conditioned culture supernatants from VR1814-infected HELF, UL130-transduced HELF, or UL130-transfected HeLa cells or (ii) the cells mentioned above, cultured in the upper chamber of a 0.02-µm-pore-size Transwell to allow the free diffusion of secreted proteins to the Towne-infected HELF kept in the lower chamber, while preventing virus circulation between the two chambers. The infectivities of the released virions were tested on HUVEC, and none of the conditions was found to rescue Towne endotheliotropism (data not shown).
Complementation of infection spread by UL130 expression in recipient HUVEC. In our view, the above findings compellingly demonstrate the following: (i) a Towne UL130 mutation can be complemented in the cell that produces the virus; (ii) the producer cell needs not be an endothelial cell; (iii) complementation works through a virion modification; and (iv) HUVEC release comparable amounts of virus, regardless of whether wild-type or UL130-transcomplemented, genetically UL130-negative virions have initially infected them, that is, pUL130 is necessary for the initial infection of HUVEC but not for the assembly and egress of new virions from HUVEC.
These results are consistent with the interpretation that UL130 mediates a virion modification in producer cells, and they suggest several predictions. Expressing UL130 in recipient HUVEC should not raise the rate of primary infections produced by the Towne strain, as these are sustained by the same minority of cells that are, for unknown reasons, permissive in the absence of complementation; complementation, however, should allow the formation of plaques. Conversely, Towne virions produced by UL130-complementing HELF should not form plaques in noncomplementing HUVEC, since the complementation effective during the primary infection event does not act in the next replication cycle, preventing virus spread to bystander cells. This was confirmed experimentally (Fig. 6). HUVEC were transduced with the retroviral vector to synthesize pUL130 or were mock transduced with the empty vector, as previously described (16). The cells were infected with VR1814, Towne, or Towne complemented with UL130 in HELF. Regardless of whether UL130 was expressed or mock expressed in the recipient cells, Towne produced background levels of infection and UL130-complemented Towne had high infection rates at 24 hpi (Fig. 7); these results matched numerically those obtained with parental HUVEC (data not shown). Both Towne and UL130-complemented Towne could form plaques in UL130-complementing HUVEC only, with the number of plaques reflecting that for primary infections at 1 day, as expected (Fig. 7; see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material).
|
|
The presence and abundance of pUL130fs in purified Towne virions were similarly verified. When the peak of Towne particles recovered from a Nycodenz gradient was analyzed by WB, no pUL130fs signal was detected (Fig. 8E). We ignored whether Towne pUL130fs failed to be incorporated into viral particles or was included at levels reflecting its low intracellular concentration and falling below the WB detection limit.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In EC, on the other hand, the inhibition point precedes IE gene expression, as the manifestation of the non-EC-tropic phenotype strictly correlates with a failure in the nuclear deposition of viral DNA (3, 4, 39, 41). The central questions regarding the UL131A-128 locus are thus as follows: (i) what precisely is the cytoplasmic mechanism arresting the replication of UL131A-128-defective strains in EC and (ii) how do the products of the locus remove it?
In the present study, we have started to address the second issue, focusing on the role of pUL130. A biochemical characterization of the protein substantiated the main predictions regarding its intracellular processing: the UL130 product was found to be translocated into the ER lumen in vitro, and its signal sequence was removed by cleavage after amino acid 25. This also held true in HCMV-infected cells and in UL130-transfected human cell lines. Both in vitro and in cells, all three pUL130 N-linked glycosylation sites were quantitatively exploited, as confirmed by their elimination by site-directed mutagenesis.
This analysis, however, brought to light an unanticipated aspect of pUL130 transport, that is, its intracellular accumulation, both in the context of natural infection and when expressed alone in transfectants. Three frequent reasons for a secretory protein to be retained in the cell are as follows: (i) it is a misfolded mutant which is retained by ER quality control and most often degraded (43), (ii) it includes a specific retention signal, or (iii) it is part of a complex and must undergo an obliged oligomerization step with other subunits to progress in the secretory pathway (43). The first setting does not apply to pUL130, as retention affected the wild-type protein, which is stable. A well-defined ER retention signal is the consensus sequence KDEL (Lys-Asp-Glu-Leu) found at the C termini of luminal ER proteins, which are retrieved from the cis Golgi by interaction with a transmembrane KDEL receptor and retrograde transport to the ER (31). Because pUL130 lacks a C-terminal KDEL sequence (Fig. 1B), it might exploit a distinct, unknown signal. However, we propose that in accord with mechanism iii described above, pUL130 has to interact with the virion envelope and can be released from the cell as a peripheral virion component only after that association. Indeed, pUL130 was detected in association with purified HCMV particles in amounts roughly estimated as 50 to 200 molecules per particle. Virion-associated pUL130 has the hallmarks of an authentic envelope peplomer, i.e., it bears Golgi-matured (endo H-resistant) sugars, is sensitive to protease treatment, and is removed by detergents.
Previously, we had shown that the chief virologic phenotypes of UL131A-128 locus mutants (the inability to productively grow in HUVEC and the inability to pass from adherent cells to leukocytes) can be effectively trans complemented by the provision of the relevant gene in HUVEC or HELF (16). For this study, by manipulating the original complementation assay, we defined the pUL130 mode of action in EC infection. The UL130-negative virus exploited was the Towne strain, whose UL130 product was shown to be rapidly degraded. Our results compellingly demonstrate that the positive effect of pUL130 on HCMV EC tropism requires its expression in the producer cell, although that effect is manifested in the subsequent target cell of infection. In other words, pUL130 must be synthesized in the cell that assembles new virions to modify them in some way. In fact, (i) UL130-complementing HELF produced a genotypically UL130-negative, phenotypically EC-tropic Towne strain; (ii) EC tropism was maintained in purified UL130-complemented Towne virions, but not in the virus progeny released from EC infected by them; (iii) the provision of UL130 to HUVEC did not raise their primary infection rate by either Towne or UL130-complemented Towne; (iv) Towne or UL130-complemented Towne formed plaques only in complementing HUVEC; (v) once the complementation in the previous replicative round had permitted the infection of HUVEC, the cells released Towne virions as efficiently as the virions of a reference EC-tropic strain; (vi) a Towne virus grown in HELF that were exposed to external sources of diffusible pUL130 was not made phenotypically EC tropic.
What, then, is the virion modification induced by pUL130? The simplest hypothesis is that pUL130 is a virion protein. The data presented here indicate that pUL130 is indeed a virion protein. We hypothesize, therefore, that virion-associated pUL130 acts in the recipient EC to permit a successful infection. As mentioned previously, the impact of UL131-128 products in the recipient cell is manifested as viral DNA nuclear targeting following viral entry. Accordingly, pUL130 exposed on virions may facilitate the targeting of viral DNA in recipient cells. We further speculate that pUL130 has two ways to do so: (i) as (part of) a ligand for a signaling receptor, conveying signals into EC that make possible the intracellular transport mechanism or that disable an innate antiviral immunity mechanism inside the EC; and (ii) as a component of the attachment and/or entry machinery, permitting infection-proficient penetration through a pathway different from the one used in fibroblasts, e.g., through a specific EC membrane microdomain.
The above interpretation must be made cautiously, though, as a strict demonstration of pUL130's role as an envelope constituent will require blocking its function in the purified virion, for instance, by a neutralizing EC infection through virion incubation with anti-UL130 antibodies. (Antisera used for pUL130 detection in this study failed to inhibit EC infection when added to VR1814 virions, but this is inconclusive since they were also unable to immunoprecipitate native pUL130 [M. Patrone, M. Secchi, A. Gallina, and G. Milanesi, unpublished results].) Currently, therefore, an alternative scenario, wherein pUL130 would operate only indirectly in recipient EC infection by promoting a virion alteration in the producer cell, such as the inclusion, exclusion, or posttranslational modification of a virion protein(s), cannot be discounted; in this case, the presence of pUL130 in the virion would represent a by-product. Indirect producer-cell modifications of virions are well known for other virus groups. The HIV-1 Nef and Vif accessory proteins, for example, are believed to enhance infectivity in part by indirectly affecting the virion composition, even though both can be detected in HIV-1 particles (13, 36).
In the near future it will be important to disprove either model of pUL130 action, as well as to define how the companion products of the UL131A-128 locus can synergize with pUL130. Resolving these points would, in turn, provide clues to the permissivity mechanism regulated by UL131A-128 in EC.
| ADDENDUM |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We warmly thank William J. Britt (Department of Pediatrics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Ala.) for the generous gift of MAb 28.4 and for invaluable help with manuscript revision, Giuseppe Gerna and coworkers (Servizio di Virologia, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy) for providing the VR1814 strain and for helpful comments on the manuscript, and Lorenzo Magrassi (University of Pavia) for assistance with raising antisera.
This work was supported by grants from the Italian Ministero della Salute, Ricerca Finalizzata (ICS120.5/RF00.124, ICS030.4/RF99.104, and 08920401) (convenzione 126), the Programma Nazionale AIDS (grant 40B.66), and the Italian MURST Cofinanziamento 2001 and 2003.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://jvi.asm.org/. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles: