Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, January 2006, p. 451-459, Vol. 80, No. 1
0022-538X/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.80.1.451-459.2006
HIV Drug Resistance Program, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, Frederick, Maryland 21702-1201
Received 9 May 2005/ Accepted 9 October 2005
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
The ends of the unintegrated viral DNA are defined by the sites where RNase H removes the plus-strand and minus-strand primers. More specifically, the left (U3) long terminal repeat (LTR) terminus of the linear dsDNA molecule is defined by the removal of PPT primer. In the case of HIV-1, the PPT sequence is an important determinant for the proper generation and removal of the PPT primer by HIV-1 RNase H (7, 17, 18, 23, 26). The right (U5) LTR terminus of the linear dsDNA molecule is defined by the removal of the tRNA used to initiate minus-strand DNA synthesis. For most retroviruses, cleavage occurs at the junction between the RNA primer and the first DNA nucleotide added by RT. However, the tRNALys primer is cleaved by HIV-1 RNase H between the terminal rA and the adjacent rC of the tRNA primer, one nucleotide from the RNA-DNA junction (10, 24, 32).
Following reverse transcription, the linear dsDNA molecule is transported to the nucleus, where it is the precursor to the integrated provirus. A virally encoded integrase (IN) recognizes sequences at the ends of the linear molecule and catalyzes integration in a two-step reaction. In the first step, integrase removes a specific number of nucleotides, usually two, from each of the 3' ends of the linear viral DNA (6, 9, 16, 27). The processed ends are then joined to host chromosomal DNA by integrase, creating a duplication of a short sequence from the target site, which flanks the integrated provirus as a direct repeat of 4 to 6 bp (8, 14, 15, 27). However, the sequence of HIV-2 proviruses suggest that retroviral integrases do not always remove two nucleotides from the end of linear viral DNA; there are three nucleotides between the PBS and the conserved CA found at the U5 boundary of the HIV-2 provirus. Integration of HIV-2 DNA is accompanied by the asymmetric loss of two and three nucleotides, respectively, from the U3 and U5 ends of the linear dsDNA prior to integration (33).
We were interested in asking how sequence differences between the PBS and the CA dinucleotide would affect the ability of the RNase H of RSV to create the U5 LTR terminus of a linear DNA and integrase to insert the resulting linear DNA into the host genome. We changed the sequence (TT) that is normally present between the PBS and the CA dinucleotide of the RSV-derived vector, RSVP(A)Z (21), to match the HIV-1 sequence (G) and the HIV-2 sequence (GGT). We also changed the CA dinucleotide of RSVP(A)Z to TC to ask how this mutation affects integration. In all three of the mutants, RNase H removes the entire tRNA. We recovered the full length of proviruses flanked by cellular genomic DNA and analyzed the integration of viral DNAs with aberrant U5 LTR termini. Sequence analysis of RSVP(HIV2) suggests that RSV integrase can remove three nucleotides from the U5 LTR terminus of the linear viral DNA during integration, like the IN of HIV-2, although this mutation significantly reduced virus titer, which suggests that RSV IN removes three nucleotides inefficiently. Sequence analysis of RSVP(HIV1) and RSVP(CATC) proviruses shows that RSV integrase can process and integrate the normal U3 LTR terminus of a linear DNA even if the other end of the linear DNA is aberrant. The aberrant U5 LTR terminus can be joined to the host DNA by unusual processes that do not involve the conserved CA dinucleotide. Furthermore, these unusual events generate either large duplications or, less frequently, deletions, instead of the normal 5- to 6-base duplications in the host genomic DNA.
|
|
|---|
To make it easy to measure virus titer, the gfp gene was placed under the control of the cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter from the pLEGFP-N1 plasmid (Clontech, Palo Alto, CA) and was introduced immediately upstream of the plasmid-recovery cassette, giving rise to RSVP/CMV-GFP. However, the genome of RSVP/CMV-GFP was too large to be efficiently packaged into viral particles. To make RSVP/CMV-GFP smaller, part of the env gene was removed by cleaving with PciI (which removed
1.26 kb), generating RSVP/GFP(
env). Finally, the PciI-MluI fragment of RSVP/GFP(
env) was used to replace the corresponding PciI-MluI fragments in RSVP(CATC), RSVP(HIV1), and RSVP(HIV2), generating RSVP/GFP(CATC), RSVP/GFP(HIV1), and RSVP/GFP(HIV2), respectively.
The env gene expression plasmid, CMV-env(A), was constructed as follows. The 2-kb KpnI-to-ClaI fragment containing the env region of RSVP(A)Z was introduced into the KpnI/NotI site of pDsRed2-N1 plasmid (Clontech) by three-piece ligation with duplex oligonucleotides containing the ClaI and NotI restriction sites. The CMV promoter was introduced into the plasmid immediately upstream of the cloned env gene.
The D64K mutant was generated by subcloning the 862-bp PmlI-to-KpnI DNA fragment from RSVP(A)Z into a pBluescript II SK+ derivative that had a PmlI polylinker inserted into the multicloning site. The D64K mutation was introduced into the subcloned fragment by a QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene) using the primers D64For (5'-ACAGATATGGCAGACAAAGTTTACGCTTGAGCCTA) and D64Rev (5'-TAGGCTCAAGCGTAAACTTTGTCTGCCATATCTGT). The mutation was confirmed by sequencing and introduced into RSVP(A)Z using the PmlI and KpnI restriction enzyme sites.
Cells, transfection, and infection. DF-1, a continuous line of chicken fibroblasts, was derived from EV-O embryos (12, 29). 293 cells expressing the tva receptor (293-tva) were kindly provided by John A. Young. The cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium (GIBCO, Carlsbad, Calif.) supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum, 5% newborn calf serum, 100 U of penicillin per ml, and 100 µg of streptomycin (Quality Biological, Inc., Gaithersburg, Md.) per ml. DF-1 cells were incubated at 39°C with 5% CO2, and 293-tva cells were incubated at 37°C with 5% CO2. Cells were passaged 1:5 at confluence with trypsin DeLarco (pH 6.8). Plasmid DNA encoding RSVP(HIV1), RSVP(HIV2), and RSVP(CATC) was introduced into DF-1 cells by using the calcium phosphate transfection kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, Calif.) following the manufacturer's recommendations. DF-1 cells were incubated with medium containing 15% glycerol for 5 min at 39°C 16 h after transfection. The cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline and incubated in fresh medium for 48 h. The 48-h supernatants were harvested and subjected to low-speed centrifugation to remove cellular debris. A portion of the infectious virions was used to infect fresh DF-1 cells or 293-tva cells. Selection for zeocin resistance was initiated 48 h postinfection with 300 µg/ml of zeocin (Invitrogen). The zeocin titers were similar to the green fluorescent protein (GFP) titers (see the next section).
Measurement of virus titer.
Viral stocks generated by cotransfection with the various RSVP/GFP(
env) vectors and CMV-env(A) were titered on 293-tva cells, and the percentage of GFP-positive cells was quantitated by flow cytometry 48 h after infection. The values were normalized to the amount of p27 antigen present in the viral stocks, as measured by p27 antigen capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The relative titer was determined by normalizing the resulting values to wild-type RSVP/GFP(
env).
Recovery of 2-LTR circle junctions.
Genomic DNA was isolated from the infected cells ca. 48 h after infection by using a DNeasy tissue kit (QIAGEN). A portion of the recovered DNA was used to transform ElectroMax DH10B or DH5
(Invitrogen) by electroporation. Electroporation was performed as described previously (21).
Lac repressor-mediated recovery of integrated retroviral DNA. Genomic DNA was isolated from infected cells that survived zeocin selection using a QIAamp DNA blood maxi kit (QIAGEN). To recover full-length proviruses, 100 to 200 µg of genomic DNA was digested with DraI. Lac repressor-mediated viral DNA recovery was carried out essentially as described previously (21). Briefly, the digested DNA was incubated with purified Lac repressor protein, and the DNA-Lac repressor protein mixture was filtered through a nitrocellulose membrane. The enriched DNA was eluted with 10 mM isopropyl-ß-D-thiogalactopyranoside and precipitated with ethanol. The precipitated DNA was ligated with T4 DNA ligase (30 U/200 µl; Roche, Indianapolis, Ind.) for 18 h at 16°C. The ligated DNA was then used to transform Escherichia coli as described above. After a 3- to 4-h recovery period in SOC medium at 37°C, the transformed bacteria were plated onto low-salt Luria-Bertani plates containing 50 µg of zeocin per ml.
Sequencing of 2-LTR circle junctions and integration sites. Recovered plasmids were directly sequenced using the PBS primer for the 2-LTR circle junction and the U3 integration sites (5'-ACTATCACGTCGGGGTCACCA) and the PPT primer for the U5 integration sites (5'-AGGAGTCCCCTTAGGATATAG). A gag-up primer was used to confirm that the mutations we introduced were present in the recovered plasmids (5'-CCGACGGTACTCAGCTTCTGC). In those cases in which the provirus was flanked by substantial duplications, we sequenced through the ends of the duplications to demonstrate that the duplicated regions were present on both ends of the provirus. We also did additional sequencing to determine the structure of the complex proviruses. Human and chicken genomic sequences were analyzed by BLAT searches (http://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgBlat).
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (24K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Schematic drawing showing the structure of the RSVP vectors. (A) Schematic representation of the recovery cassette and the mutants. Mutations are indicated in boldface. EM-Zeo, EM-7 promoter-zeocin resistance gene; lacO, lac operator. (B) RSVP/GFP( env). The gfp gene, under the control of the CMV promoter, was introduced immediately upstream of the recovery cassette. The portion that was deleted from env is indicated. (C) Schematic numbering of the nucleotide positions in the ends of the provirus. The last nucleotide on each end of the provirus is number 1.
|
10.25 kb). To make the viral genome smaller, a part of the env gene (
1.26 kb) was removed (Fig. 1B). To provide an envelop glycoprotein in trans, the plasmid CMV-env was constructed in which the envA gene is expressed under the control of the CMV promoter. Viruses with genomes containing the U5-end mutation were generated by cotransfecting DF-1 cells with plasmids that contain viral genomes with the U5-end mutations and the CMV-env plasmid. The virions were used to infect 293-tva cells, and GFP expression was measured using fluorescence-activated cell sorting; the titers were normalized relative to the amount of p27 in the infecting viral stock. RSVP(HIV1) and RSVP(CATC) decreased virus titer to about 46% and 36% of the wild-type level, respectively. RSVP(HIV2) decreased virus titer to about 3.5% of the wild-type level. Similar results were obtained with zeocin selection, which suggests that the measured titer depends on the integration of the viral DNA (data not shown). Recovery and analysis of 2-LTR circle junctions. To recover 2-LTR circle junctions, the RSVP vectors containing the U5-end mutations were transfected into DF-1 cells. The virions were harvested and used to infect fresh DF-1 cells. DNA was prepared from the infected cells and used to transform E. coli; zeocin-resistant cells were selected.
Analysis of the 2-LTR circle junctions from the mutants is shown in Fig. 2. Although the 2-LTR circle junctions obtained from the mutants included both insertions and deletions, the frequency of the aberrant 2-LTR circle junctions was not significantly different from that seen in infections with viruses with a wild-type sequence adjacent to the PBS. Moreover, the proportion of consensus sequence junctions that contained the entire sequence from both ends of the linear viral DNA was the same for the mutants and wild type. This result suggests that, for these mutants, the RNase H of RSV RT usually removes the entire tRNA during plus-strand synthesis.
![]() View larger version (16K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. 2-LTR circle junctions isolated from infected cells. A consensus circle junction is shown at the top. Different types of aberrant 2-LTR circle junctions are shown. The PBS is indicated by a white box with black vertical bars; the PPT is a white box with black horizontal bars; the deletions are indicated by black jagged boxes. W/T, wild type.
|
![]() View larger version (10K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Recovery of the 3' end of integrated viral DNA. Deletions in U5 are indicated by a black jagged end. Insertions of tRNA are shown by a box with cross bars; viral DNA insertions are shown by a box with dots; deletions are shown by a jagged end.
|
Based on sequence analysis, the proviruses from the three mutant viruses can be sorted into three types of integration events, as shown in Fig. 4. The first is a normal integration event in which one, two, or three nucleotides are removed from each end of the linear viral DNA (described below) and the provirus is inserted into the host genome, creating a 5- or 6-base duplication at the target site (Fig. 4A). However, we also found two types of aberrant integration events. In the first type, the U3 LTR terminus appears to be the result of a normal integration event; the U3 LTR terminus of the viral DNA was always joined to the host genome at the normal CA dinucleotide. However, on the U5 LTR terminus of the integrated viral DNA, the junction did not involve the canonical CA. When the integration of the U5 LTR terminus did not involve the canonical CA, instead of a 5- or 6-nucleotide duplication of host sequences there were usually large duplications, and more rarely deletions, of the host sequences (Fig. 4B). The second type of aberrant integration event was complex. In some cases there were additional viral sequences; in one case the insertion involved sequences from more than one host chromosome (Fig. 4C).
![]() View larger version (14K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Three types of proviruses. (A) Normal provirus; (B) provirus with an aberrant integration at the U5 LTR terminus. Deletions in U5 are indicated by a black jagged end. Target duplications (a long black arrow) or deletions (no arrow) are indicated (see the legend to Fig. 5 for details). (C) Proviruses with complex structures. Deletions or insertions in U5 are indicated by a white box with black horizontal bars. Additional insertions of other viral sequences or host genome are shown with a white arrow. The direction of the arrowhead indicates the orientation of the extra viral sequences relative to the viral genome. Large duplications of host DNA are indicated by a long black arrow. The direction of the arrow corresponds to the numbering of the host genomic DNA. Ch., chromosome.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Recovery of full-length integrated viral DNA
|
1.27 kb), which was then joined to human chromosome 2. Because there is a DraI site in the host sequence, we cannot unambiguously show that the host sequence was duplicated, nor can we be sure that this DNA was derived from a provirus. One viral DNA that was isolated from DF-1 cells showed that the U3 LTR CA was joined to chicken chromosome 4 (Fig. 5R). However, at the U5 LTR terminus, there was a 104-bp deletion followed by part of the pol sequence (147 bp) that was then joined to chicken chromosome 4. We are not sure that the host sequences are duplicated due to the placement of the DraI site. Another viral DNA isolated from DF-1 cells had the U3 LTR CA sequence appropriately joined to chicken chromosome 8 (Fig. 5S). However, there was a 43-bp deletion at the end of U5 immediately followed by a short segment from part of the gag sequence (265 bp), which was then joined to chicken chromosome 8. The placement of the DraI site means that we cannot be sure the host sequences are duplicated or that the DNA was from an integrated provirus. In all of these cases, the extra piece of viral DNA was inserted in the opposite orientation relative to the proviral DNA (see Discussion).
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() View larger version (105K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Structure of aberrant proviruses. U3 is shown by a box with horizontal bars. R is indicated by a black box. U5 is shown by a box with vertical bars. Deletions in U5 are indicated by a black jagged end. Additional insertions are shown as a white arrow. Large duplications of host sequences are indicated by long black arrows (not to scale). The direction of the arrow corresponds to the numbering of the host genomic DNA. When there are additional viral sequences, they are indicated by an open arrow; the direction of the arrow indicates the orientation of the viral DNA. In some cases in which the nature of the viral DNA is ambiguous (see the text), the positions of DraI sites and the virus-host DNA junctions are indicated by nucleotide position numbers from a BLAT search. Ch., chromosome.
|
5.23 kb), which was then joined to human chromosome 1. The placement of the DraI site means that we cannot be sure the host sequences are duplicated or that the viral DNA was from a provirus (Fig. 5T). Another viral DNA isolated from DF-1 cells showed that two nucleotides of U5 were retained beyond the mutated TC sequence. The viral sequence, which corresponds to a complete copy of the end of the linear viral DNA, was joined to chicken chromosome 5 (154 bp), which was then joined to chromosome 2. Because there is a DraI site in the host DNA, we cannot be sure this viral DNA is from a proviral insertion that generated a duplication of the host genome (Fig. 5U). These results confirm previous data showing that the CA sequence at the end of viral DNA is critical for proper integration. In addition, these results suggest that when RSV integrase is given a linear DNA with one normal end and one aberrant end, it can process and integrate the normal end independent of the aberrant end. |
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Microhomology at the host and viral DNA junctions in aberrant provirusesa
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Frequency of microhomology at the normal integration junctions
|
![]() View larger version (13K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Integrated viral DNA from a virus mutated at the active site of integrase (D64K). Deletions are indicated by a black jagged end. Positions of the deletions are indicated by number, as in Fig. 1C. Four nucleotides at the virus-host DNA junctions are shown, and a microhomology with the host DNA is underlined. The orientation of the viral sequences is indicated by black arrows. DR, direct repeat.
|
|
|
|---|
Colicelli and Goff (4, 5) showed, by making mutations in the 3' end of U5 of a murine leukemia virus (MLV), that MLV integrase could, with reduced efficiency, remove a single nucleotide beyond the conserved CA and could process viral DNAs with two extra nucleotides (removing a total of four). However, they found that removing both nucleotides between the PBS and the conserved CA blocked viral replication. Based primarily on analysis of autointegrations, they reported, for the viruses that were able to replicate with too few or too many nucleotides between the PBS and the CA, that most of the autointegration events were normal in the sense that there was a small duplication at the target sequence and that most (but not all) of the insertions occurred at the canonical CA. They did not report that these mutants gave rise to insertions equivalent to the aberrant integrations we found with the RSVP mutants; however, it is possible, if such events occurred among the MLV autointegrants, that it was difficult to recognize them as integration events.
It should be pointed out that the proviral DNAs we recovered and analyzed came from integration events in which the proviral DNA was inserted into the host genome in a way that allowed the cell to survive and the provirus to be expressed. Because the cultured cells are pseudodiploid, it is likely that we can recover proviruses in which there is significant damage to the target chromosome. However, it is also possible that there are aberrant insertions that give rise to inserted viral DNAs that cannot be expressed and/or rescued using the techniques we employ.
How is the linear viral DNA integrated when one end of the linear DNA cannot be properly processed or inserted by integrase? It would appear for RSVP(HIV1) and RSVP(CATC) that the normal end of the linear viral DNA is appropriately processed and inserted by integrase and the aberrant end is inserted separately, probably by host factors. However, in a number of cases, the insertion of the aberrant end does not involve the canonical CA that integrase requires, which argues against the involvement of integrase for those insertion events. The aberrant insertions often involve microhomology which normal integrations catalyzed by IN do not. Although we recovered only a few viral insertions made in the absence of enzymatically active integrase, the virus-host DNA junctions made in the absence of active integrase resemble aberrant U5-host DNA junctions in that there are deletions of the ends of the viral DNA and the junctions that appear to involve microhomologies. Moreover, for the aberrant ends not inserted at the canonical CA, the insertion event does not generate the 5- to 6-bp duplication in the host genome that is characteristic of the normal concerted insertions that involve integrase. Taken together, the data support, but do not prove, a model in which the normal end is inserted by integrase in a reaction similar to the single-end insertions seen in in vitro integrase assays (13, 19) and the aberrant end is inserted into the host genome by host enzymes. However, in an RSV-based in vitro integration assay that led to efficient concerted integration events with a substrate with a wild-type sequence at the ends, mutating the concerted CA reduced the concerted integrations and did not appear to produce single-end insertions (1). This in vitro result is similar to the result reported by Chen and Engleman, who used an HIV-1-based in vitro assay (3). They reported that, with linear DNA substrates in which there was one normal end and one end that had the canonical CA mutated, IN appropriately removed two nucleotides from the normal end but not the mutant end and was then unable to carry out a single-end insertion reaction. Our results show that, in vivo, RSV IN can, in some cases, process and insert a wild-type end normally in a reaction that does not appear to be concerted. In a simple version of a one-end IN insertion model, one might expect that the secondary event creating the second (aberrant) junction would be equally likely to occur on either side of the initial integrase-mediated single-end insertion. This would mean that these aberrant insertions cause approximately an equal number of duplications and deletions (Fig. 7). However, we found duplications much more frequently than we found deletions. This suggests that there is directionality in the insertion of the aberrant end. One way for this to happen would be if the initial complex between virus and host DNA involves integrase bound to both ends of the virus DNA in a complex that resembles the complex that carries out the normal concerted integration reaction. If this complex then inserts the normal end but cannot insert the aberrant end, it is possible that the integrase complex can dissociate into two pieces without releasing either the virus or the host DNA. This could allow the integrase bound to the aberrant end to diffuse along the host chromosome in the direction that would generate duplications (Fig. 7). In this model, the actual joining of virus DNA and host DNA at the aberrant end would still involve host enzymes. Because we also find deletions, it is likely that the aberrant end can occasionally be released from the chromosome into which the normal end was inserted. If the aberrant end of the linear DNA is released from the chromosome into which the normal end is inserted, it would then presumably be free and could insert either right or left of the original insertion or, more rarely, into another chromosome.
![]() View larger version (14K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. Models for the generation of duplications and deletions in host DNA flanking the aberrant proviruses. Viral DNA is indicated by thin black lines, and host DNA is shown by thick black lines. (A) Models to explain the duplication and capture of host sequence. Arrow 1 shows that only the 3' end is joined. This will cause the provirus to be inserted and host sequence "ABC" to be duplicated flanking provirus. Arrow 2 shows that only the 5' end is joined. Host sequence "ABC" is captured between the LTRs of a circular viral DNA. Both 5' and 3' ends (arrow 1 and arrow 2) are joined. Host sequence "ABC" is captured between the LTRs of a circular viral DNA, and the host chromosome is broken. (B) Models to explain the deletion of host sequences. In all cases (3' only, 5' only, and both 3' and 5' joined), a provirus is inserted with the loss of the host sequence "ABC."
|
As shown in Fig. 7B, for the events that give rise to deletions of the host sequence it does not matter whether the U5 joining event involves the 5' or the 3' strand (or both strands). The fact that all of the three types of the secondary joining reactions (3' strand only, 5' strand only, or both strands) that occur to the right side of the initial IN-mediated reaction (as shown in Fig. 7B) lead to the insertion of a provirus with a deletion of host sequences, where only one of the reactions (3' strand only) that happens to the left (shown in Fig. 7A) leads to the generation of a provirus flanked by a duplication of host DNA sequences, reinforces the idea that there is directionality in the reaction that generated the proviruses with aberrant ends.
Proviruses recovered from the RSVP(HIV2) mutant showed that RSV IN can remove three nucleotides beyond the CA and properly integrate the processed ends. However, this mutation significantly reduced virus titer to only 3.5% of the wild-type level, which is much lower than the titer of the other mutants. Why does this mutant show such a low titer, even though RSV IN can correctly process and integrate the aberrant end? We propose that ends of the RSVP(HIV2) viral DNA are processed inefficiently by RSV IN and that only a small portion of linear DNA is properly processed and used for integration. It has been reported for MLV that some mutations in one end of the linear viral DNA interfere with the processing of both ends by IN (20). With the RSVP(HIV2) mutant, we did not observe any proviruses that had deletions of the U5 LTR terminus with a large duplication of host sequences at the target site, even though such aberrant integrations were found with other mutant viruses that had a higher titer, which lends support to the idea that the processing of both ends of the RSVP(HIV2) linear DNA might be aberrant in this mutant despite the fact that the other mutants appear to be able to process and insert a normal DNA end independent of an aberrant end.
We suspect but cannot prove that the aberrant integrations involve host enzymes. The fact that aberrant integrations were similar in a mammalian cell (293-tva) and a chicken cell (DF-1) suggests that this phenomenon is not limited to a particular cell type, and if, as we suggest, cellular enzymes are involved, these cellular components are probably part of the general host cell DNA repair machinery. The fact that many of the insertion events we recovered appear to specifically join the 3' end of the viral DNA in a reaction that involves microhomology suggests that the reaction may involve host DNA polymerases. This model is also supported by the observation that most of the viral DNA sequences appended to the aberrant U5 ends are of opposite polarity to the proviral DNA. The junctions between the (inverted) viral DNAs and the normal proviruses also involve microhomology, making it likely that the extra (inverted) viral sequences were copied by a polymerase from a second copy of minus-strand viral DNA.
This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, and the National Institute for General Medical Sciences.
|
|
|---|
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»