Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, February 2009, p. 1465-1473, Vol. 83, No. 3
0022-538X/09/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.01768-08
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Division of Basic Medical Sciences, St. George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, United Kingdom,1 Biomolecular Sciences Building, School of Biology, University of St. Andrews, North Haugh, St. Andrews KY16 9ST, United Kingdom2
Received 21 August 2008/ Accepted 13 November 2008
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
mda-5 and RIG-I share a common domain structure with two tandem CARD motifs at the N terminus which are responsible for downstream signaling, a central DECH RNA helicase domain with ATPase activity and a C-terminal domain (CTD). Recent structural studies have shown that the binding site for the 5' triphosphate motif is located on a basic cleft within the CTD of RIG-I (3, 29). Short dsRNAs (
25 bp) are also recognized through this site, whereas poly(I-C) binding requires both the CTD and the helicase domain (3, 29). A model has been proposed for RIG-I in which the helicase domain and CTD prevent the CARD domains from signaling in the inactive state. Binding of viral RNA stimulates the ATPase activity and triggers a major conformational change which allows dimerization and reveals the CARD domains to interact with the downstream adapter protein IPS-1/VISA/CARDIF/MAVS (hereafter referred to as IPS-1) (23). This leads to activation of the transcription factors IFN regulatory factor 3 (IRF-3) and NF-
B which are required for transcriptional induction of the IFN-β promoter. Consistent with this model, dimers of RIG-I have been detected in cells infected with Sendai virus (SeV) (23), and gel filtration analysis has demonstrated RIG-I dimers in the presence of 5'-triphosphate RNA (3). It would be expected that mda-5 is activated in a similar manner; however, dimerization of mda-5 has not been previously demonstrated.
The Paramyxoviridae are a family of single-stranded, negative-sense RNA viruses which are divided into two subfamilies: (i) the Paramyxovirinae comprising the respiroviruses (e.g., SeV), the rubulaviruses (e.g., parainfluenza virus 5 [PIV5; formerly known as SV5]), the morbilliviruses (e.g., measles virus [MeV]), and the more recently described henipaviruses (e.g., Hendra virus [HeV]) and (ii) the Pneumovirinae (reviewed in reference 14). Members of the Paramyxovirinae use a variety of methods to evade the IFN response, including limiting the amount of IFN produced by infected cells and blocking IFN signaling. These functions are encoded by the P/V/C gene, which makes several products due to the existence of specific RNA editing mechanisms and the use of alternate open reading frames (ORFs). In a mechanism that seems to be conserved among all family members, we found that the V protein is able to antagonize the induction of IFN-β (9, 20). We subsequently identified mda-5 as a cellular binding partner for the PIV5 V protein (PIV5-V) and demonstrated that the consequence of this interaction was inhibition of IFN induction by mda-5 (1). The V proteins from 13 different paramyxoviruses were tested, all were able to interact with mda-5 and inhibit its function, and this was dependent on the highly conserved C terminus of V (1, 2). In contrast, none of the V proteins was able to bind to or inhibit IFN induction by RIG-I (2). Here we investigate the molecular mechanism of inhibition of mda-5 by paramyxovirus V proteins. We show that in a manner similar to activation of RIG-I by 5'-triphosphate RNA, activation of mda-5 by dsRNA involves the formation of homo-oligomers. The V protein binds to the helicase domain of mda-5 and blocks its activation by inhibiting dsRNA binding and consequent self-association.
|
|
|---|
(–116)lucter (13), the constitutive β-galactosidase reporter plasmid pJatLacZ (18), pEF.plink2 (17), pEF.PIV5-V (4), pdl.HCV.NS3/4a (2), pEF.mda-5, and pEF.mda-5CARD (1) have been described previously. pEF.PKR(1-207) is a pEFplink2-derived mammalian expression vector containing an ORF for amino acids (aa) 1 to 207 of protein kinase R (PKR), and pEF.M2(1-207) contains the same region of PKR but lacks aa 58 to 69. pCMVSPORT6.IPS-1 was obtained from the I.M.A.G.E Consortium (clone identification no. 5751684) (15). For expression of epitope-tagged proteins in mammalian cells, cDNAs were cloned into pEF.myc.plink2 (2), pEF.V5.plink2, or pEF.Flag.plink2. pEF.V5.plink2 and pEF.Flag.plink2 were constructed by inserting the Pk epitope sequence from PIV5-V (26) or the Flag tag sequence upstream of the NcoI site in the multiple-cloning site of pEF.plink2 such that cDNAs cloned into the NcoI site are tagged at the N terminus. cDNAs or partial cDNA fragments encoding mda-5, mda-5 (aa 1 to 935), RIG-I, the mda-5 CARD (mda-5C) domain (aa 1 to 287), the mda-5 helicase (mda-5H) domain (aa 287 to 1025), the RIG-I CARD (RIG-IC) domain (aa 1 to 225), or the RIG-I helicase (RIG-IH) domain (aa 225 to 925) were cloned into these vectors by standard methods.
For yeast two-hybrid assays, cDNAs and fragments thereof were cloned into pGBKT7 or pGADT7 (Clontech) for expression of proteins as GAL4 DNA-binding domain (DBD) or GAL4 activation domain (AD) fusions, respectively. The amino acids encoded by mda-5C, mda-5H, RIG-IC, and RIG-IH fragments are the same as for the pEF.Tag equivalents. pGADT7 constructs expressing various paramyxovirus V proteins have been described previously (1, 2). pHON7, a vector designed to permit nuclear expression of a non-fusion protein in yeast (the "third" protein) was constructed by deleting the Asp718I/NcoI fragment of the GAL4 activation domain from pGADT7 and replacing the LEU2 gene of the resultant deletion with the URA3 gene from pHisI (Clontech). pHON7.PKR(1-207) and pHON7.PKR.M2(1-207) are pHON7 derivatives containing an ORF for aa 1 to 207 of PKR and an ORF for aa 1 to 207 of PKR lacking aa 58 to 69, respectively. cDNAs for PIV5-V, SeV-V, MeV-V, HeV-V, and PIV5-V
N104 were cloned into pHON7 from their pGADT7 equivalents (2).
Cells and transfections.
Vero (ATCC CCL-81), HEK-293 (ATCC CRL-1573), and HEp-2 (ATCC CCL-23) cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium plus 10% fetal bovine serum and penicillin-streptomycin. Transfections were carried out using linear polyethyleneimine (molecular weight,
25,000; Polysciences Inc., Warrington, PA) or Lipofectamine (InVitrogen) under standard conditions. Where indicated, cells were treated with recombinant human IFN-
(Roferon; Roche) at 1,000 IU/ml. Induction of cells with poly(I-C) (2) and measurements of luciferase and β-galactosidase activity were carried out as described elsewhere (13).
Co-IP assays, poly(I-C)-agarose binding assays, and immunoblotting. To make cell extracts, 6-cm dishes of transfected cells were washed twice in cold phosphate-buffered saline and then lysed in 500 µl coimmunoprecipitation (Co-IP) buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% NP-40). One hundred microliters of extract was used for Co-IP assays with a monoclonal antibody to the Flag tag (Sigma), the V5 tag (anti-Pk) (22), or the myc tag (clone 4A6; Upstate). Immune complexes were collected on protein A-Sepharose beads (GE Healthcare), which were then washed three times with Co-IP buffer and resuspended in sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) loading buffer. For poly(I-C)-agarose binding assays, 150 to 300 µl extract was mixed with an equal volume of a 10% slurry of poly(I-C)-agarose beads (GE Healthcare) in Co-IP buffer. After incubation at 4°C for 2 h, beads were washed three times with Co-IP buffer and resuspended in SDS-PAGE loading buffer. After separation by SDS-PAGE, tagged proteins were detected by immunoblotting using antibodies against the Flag, V5 or myc tags. Western blots for mda-5 and STAT-1 were carried out using an anti-mda-5 antibody (Alexis Biochemicals) or an anti-STAT-1 antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
Yeast two-hybrid assays.
Combinations of GAL4 DBD and GAL4 AD fusion plasmids were introduced into Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain PJ69-4
using polyethylene glycol-lithium acetate-mediated transformation. Double transformants were selected on synthetic dropout (SD) medium lacking leucine and tryptophan (SD –L –W). Individual colonies were subsequently streaked onto SD –L –W medium also lacking histidine (SD –L –W –H) and containing 5 to 20 mM 3-aminotriazole (3-AT). When the pHON7-derived third plasmid was used, triple transformants were selected on SD medium lacking leucine, tryptophan, and uracil (SD –L –W –U), and individual colonies were subsequently streaked onto SD –L –W –U medium also lacking histidine (SD –L –W –U –H) and containing 5 mM 3-AT. Growth was monitored for 4 to 10 days at 30°C.
|
|
|---|
In order to begin to address this question, we first set out to define the region of mda-5 that contains the binding site for paramyxovirus V proteins. We showed previously that PIV5-V interacts with aa 287 to 1025 of mda-5, a sequence which encompasses the entire helicase domain and C-terminal domain but lacks the N-terminal CARDs (2). To define the binding site in more detail, a series of plasmids were constructed that express various fragments of the mda-5 helicase domain, and the ability of these fragments to bind to PIV5-V was assessed using the yeast two-hybrid assay (Fig. 1A). Interestingly, we found that several nonoverlapping fragments of the helicase domain were capable of binding to PIV5-V. The C-terminal domain of mda-5 with most of the helicase domain removed, mda-5(816-1025), retained the ability to bind to PIV5-V; however, neither a fragment containing aa 816 to 935 nor one containing residues 934 to 1025 was sufficient. In addition, mda-5(287-458), mda-5(500-676), and mda-5(676-816), were also capable of interacting with PIV5-V.
![]() View larger version (50K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Mapping the binding sites for paramyxovirus V proteins on mda-5. Interactions between different fragments of mda-5 and various paramyxovirus V proteins were assessed using the yeast two-hybrid assay. Yeast cells were transformed with a plasmid expressing one of the indicated fragments of mda-5 fused to the GAL4 DBD and a plasmid expressing the indicated paramyxovirus V protein fused to the GAL4 AD. Positive transformants were selected on SD –L –W and then streaked onto SD –L –W –H plus 3-AT as indicated to assay for an interaction. All mda-5 fragments used in these experiments failed to promote growth on SD –L –W –H plus 3-AT in the absence of an interacting partner (data not shown). (A) Interactions of mda-5 fragments with PIV5-V. The line diagram shows the domain structure of mda-5 including the two N-terminal CARDs, the RNA helicase domain defined by seven conserved motifs (shaded boxes), and the CTD. The mda-5 deletion constructs used in this work are shown beneath this line. Interactions with PIV5-V are shown to the right of the panel. +, positive interaction; –, no interaction. (B) Interactions of mda-5 fragments with the V proteins of SeV, HeV, Menangle virus, Mapuera virus, and Salem virus were assessed under selection conditions incorporating 5 mM 3-AT, a competitive inhibitor of HIS3. (C) Interactions of mda-5 fragments with the V proteins of PIV5, Menangle virus, and Salem virus under increasingly stringent conditions; the concentration of 3-AT is indicated.
|
For those V proteins that were able to bind to more than one fragment of mda-5, the relative affinities of these interactions were assessed by plating the yeast onto selective media containing increasing concentrations of 3-AT (Fig. 1C). 3-AT is a competitive inhibitor of the HIS3 gene product, and therefore only the strongest interactions which give the highest levels of reporter gene activity will be detected in the presence of high concentrations of 3-AT. On 10 mM 3-AT, yeast cells expressing mda-5(816-1025) and PIV5-V showed impaired growth relative to growth on 5 mM 3-AT (compare Fig. 1B with C), but all other interacting pairs grew equally well. For PIV5-V and Menangle virus V, the only interaction [apart from the intact helicase domain, mda-5(287-1025)] that could support growth of yeast on 20 mM 3-AT was with mda-5(676-816), indicating that this fragment contains the highest-affinity binding site for these V proteins. The interaction between Salem V and mda-5(287-458) was also strong enough to support yeast growth on 20 mM 3-AT, but the interaction with mda-5(500-676) was not.
For those V proteins that can interact with multiple sites on mda-5, there are three possibilities: first that several molecules of V can bind to a single molecule of mda-5 at different sites along the length of the helicase domain; second, that a single molecule of V binds to a single mda-5 but makes contacts with multiple sites that are juxtaposed in the context of the folded protein; and third, that individual molecules of V interact with distinct molecules of mda-5. We reasoned that if a single molecule of V can bind to several sites on mda-5, it might be possible to see recruitment of one mda-5 fragment to another in the presence of V. None of the three fragments mda-5(287-458), mda-5(500-816), or mda-5(816-1025) could interact with themselves or each other in the yeast two-hybrid assay, and when we coexpressed PIV5-V, we failed to observe any bridging between different fragments (data not shown). Conversely, we also expressed mda-5 to see if it could bridge two V proteins, but again no interaction was observed (data not shown).
PIV5-V does not target mda-5 for degradation. We then considered possible mechanisms through which the V protein might inhibit mda-5. In addition to their role in limiting IFN production, paramyxovirus V proteins can also block IFN signaling. In the case of PIV5, the V protein targets STAT1 for proteasome-mediated degradation (4), so we therefore investigated whether PIV5-V could also target mda-5 for degradation. We analyzed the levels of mda-5 in cells that had been infected with the W3 strain of PIV5 (Fig. 2) and found that the amount of mda-5 protein in the infected cells was comparable to that found in uninfected cells. As expected, mda-5 was highly inducible by IFN pretreatment, and the induced levels were similarly unaffected by PIV5 infection of the IFN-pretreated cells. For comparison, we also looked at STAT1 levels in the same cell extracts and observed that in the infected cells all the STAT1 had been completely degraded. We therefore conclude that PIV5-V does not target mda-5 for proteasome-mediated degradation.
![]() View larger version (44K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. PIV5 infection does not cause degradation of mda-5. HEp-2 cells were or were not pretreated for 12 h with type I IFN before mock infection or infection with the W3A strain of PIV5 at a multiplicity of infection of 50 for 12 h. Levels of mda-5 and STAT1 were analyzed by Western blotting.
|
![]() View larger version (21K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. PIV5-V prevents activation of mda-5. Vero cells were transfected with the IFN-β reporter plasmid pIF (–116)lucter, the β-galactosidase expression vector pJatlacZ, a plasmid expressing mda-5 (pEF.mda-5), the CARD domains of mda-5 (pEF.mda-5C) and IPS-1 (pCMVSPORT6.IPS-1), and either pEF.PIV5-V, pdl.NS3/4a, or the empty vector pEFpl2. Luciferase and β-galactosidase assays were carried out 48 h after transfection, and relative expression levels were calculated. Results shown represent the average from three independent experiments, with the highest and lowest values shown as error bars. A reference value of 100% has been assigned to the level of induction seen with mda-5, mda-5C, and IPS-1.
|
![]() View larger version (47K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. mda-5 and RIG-I self-associate in response to poly(I-C). 293 cells were transfected with plasmids expressing (A) myc- and Flag-tagged forms of mda-5, (B) myc- and Flag-tagged forms of RIG-I, or (C) myc-tagged RIG-I and Flag-tagged mda-5. Twenty-four hours after transfection, cells were transfected with poly(I-C) and left for a further 2 to 16 h before harvesting. Cell extracts were subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with an antibody against the Flag tag, and proteins present in the immunoprecipitate were analyzed by Western blotting (WB). (D) Extracts from cells transfected with myc- and Flag-tagged mda-5 (top panel) or myc- and Flag-tagged RIG-I (lower panel) were incubated with increasing concentrations of poly(I-C) in the presence of 1 mM ATP for 1 h at 4°C. Samples were then subjected to immunoprecipitation with an antibody against the Flag tag, and the presence of myc-tagged protein in the immunoprecipitate was determined by Western blotting for the myc tag. (E) Western blots were carried out on the extracts used in panel D to determine expression levels of tagged proteins.
|
The helicase domains of mda-5 and RIG-I contain a dsRNA-dependent oligomerization domain. We next determined which domains of mda-5 and RIG-I are required for oligomerization. To do this, we constructed plasmids that express V5- and Flag-tagged versions of the CARD or the helicase domains alone and assayed by Co-IP whether they were able to form oligomers in the presence or absence of poly(I-C). Figure 5A shows that the CARD domains of mda-5 self-associate in the absence of an inducer (lane 1) and that this is unaffected by treatment of the cells with poly(I-C) (lane 2). In contrast, oligomerization of the RIG-I CARD domain was not observed under either condition (lanes 5 and 6). Interestingly, the helicase domain of mda-5 was also found to self-associate in uninduced cells, but the amount of Flag-tagged mda-5H being coimmunoprecipitated with the V5-tagged mda-5H was reproducibly increased in the induced cells, suggesting that this interaction may be regulated by poly(I-C) (lanes 3 and 4). In contrast to mda-5, the helicase domain of RIG-I does not constitutively oligomerize, but self-associates only in the presence of exogenously added poly(I-C) (lanes 7 and 8). As expected, no interaction was detected between mda-5H and RIG-IH in the absence or presence of poly(I-C) (lanes 9 and 10).
![]() View larger version (30K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. The helicase domains of mda-5 and RIG-I contain a dsRNA-dependent oligomerization domain. (A). 293 cells were transfected with plasmids expressing V5- and Flag-tagged forms of the mda-5C domains (lanes 1 and 2), V5- and Flag-tagged forms of the mda-5H domain (lanes 3 and 4), V5- and Flag-tagged forms of the RIG-IC domains (lanes 5 and 6), V5- and Flag-tagged forms of the RIG-IH domain (lanes 7 and 8), or V5-tagged mda-5H and Flag-tagged RIG-IH (lanes 9 and 10). Where indicated (+), one of each pair was transfected the following day with poly(I-C) for 8 h prior to harvesting. Cell extracts were subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with an antibody against the V5 tag, and then the presence of the Flag-tagged protein in the immunoprecipitate was analyzed by Western blotting (WB). Expression of all tagged proteins was confirmed by Western blotting on the cell extracts (data not shown). The experiment was performed three times, images were scanned using a Molecular Dynamics Storm 840 PhosphorImager and quantitated using ImageQuant software, and the increase in the amount of Flag-tagged mda-5H in lane 4 compared to lane 3 was determined to be statistically significant by Student's t test with a P value of <0.05. (B). Extracts were prepared from 293 cells transfected with plasmids expressing either Flag-mda-5H, V5-mda-5H, the dsRNA-binding domains of PKR [PKR(1-207)], a mutant form of PKR that is unable to bind dsRNA [M2(1-207)], or the PIV5-V protein. In vitro oligomerization assays were performed by mixing together 50 µl extract from cells expressing Flag-mda-5H with 50 µl extract from cells expressing V5-mda-5H in the presence of 300 µl buffer (lane 1), 300 µl extract from cells expressing PKR(1-207) (lane 2), 300 µl extract from cells expressing M2(1-207) (lane 3), or 300 µl extract from cells expressing PIV5-V (lane 4). Following incubation for 1 h at 4°C to allow complexes to form, immunoprecipitation assays were carried out using an antibody against the Flag tag and the presence of the V5-tagged protein in the immunoprecipitate was determined by Western blotting. The experiment was performed three times, and the reduction in V5-tagged protein in the immunoprecipitate in the presence of PKR(1-207) and PIV5-V was determined to be statistically significant according to Student's t test with P values of <0.01 and <0.05, respectively. (C) 293 cells were transfected with pIF (–116)lucter, pJatlacZ, 80 ng of a plasmid expressing mda-5 and 160 ng of either the empty vector pEFpl2, a plasmid expressing the dsRNA-binding domains of PKR [PKR(1-207)], or a plasmid expressing a mutant form of PKR that is unable to bind dsRNA [M2(1-207)]. Luciferase and β-galactosidase assays were carried out 48 h after transfection, and relative expression levels were calculated. The results shown represent the average from three independent experiments, with the highest and lowest values shown as error bars. A reference value of 100% has been assigned to the level of induction seen in the presence of full-length mda-5. (D) Extracts from 293 cells expressing Flag-tagged full-length mda-5(1-1025) or Flag-tagged mda-5(1-935) were incubated with poly(I-C)-agarose beads for 1 h at 4°C. After washing the beads, bound proteins were analyzed by Western blotting for the Flag tag (upper panel). Expression of both proteins was confirmed by Western blotting of the cell extracts (lower panel). (E) Vero cells were transfected with pIF (–116)lucter, pJatlacZ, and either the empty vector pEFpl2, a plasmid expressing full-length mda-5, or a plasmid expressing mda-5(1-935). After 24 h, the cells were either left untreated or were transfected with poly(I-C). Luciferase and β-galactosidase assays were carried out 48 h after transfection, and relative expression levels were calculated. The results shown represent the average from three independent experiments, with the highest and lowest values shown as error bars. A reference value of 100% has been assigned to the level of induction seen in the presence of full-length mda-5 and poly(I-C). (F) Interactions between the CARD and helicase domains of mda-5 and RIG-I were assessed in the yeast two-hybrid assay. Yeast cells were transformed with plasmids expressing the indicated fragments of mda-5 and RIG-I as GAL4 DBD fusions (given first) and GAL4 AD fusions (given second). Positive transformants were selected on SD –L –W, and growth on this medium demonstrates that the yeast cells have been transformed by both plasmids. They were then streaked onto SD –L –W –H plus 5 mM 3-AT, and growth on this medium demonstrates an interaction between the two proteins. (G) The dependence of the helicase domain interactions on the presence of yeast dsRNA was assessed. Yeast cells were transformed with a plasmid expressing a GAL4 DBD fusion protein (given first), a plasmid expressing a GAL4 AD fusion protein (given third), and either the empty vector pHON7, pHON7 expressing the dsRNA-binding domains of PKR [PKR(1-207)], or pHON7 expressing a mutant form of PKR that is unable to bind dsRNA [M2(1-207)] (given second). Positive transformants were selected on SD –L –W –U, and growth on this medium indicates that the yeast cells have been transformed by all three plasmids. They were then streaked onto SD –L –W –U –H plus 5 mM 3-AT, and growth on this medium demonstrates an interaction between the GAL4 DBD fusion protein and the GAL4 AD fusion protein.
|
Since 293 cells contain endogenous mda-5 and RIG-I and also other proteins such as IPS-1 that may be involved in the formation of high-molecular-weight complexes, it is possible that the interactions observed in Co-IP experiments are formed indirectly through association with these endogenous molecules. Therefore, in order to look at whether oligomerization of mda-5 and RIG-I is mediated through direct protein-protein interactions, we chose to use the yeast two-hybrid system since yeast have no homologues of these proteins. In this assay the CARD domains of mda-5 were unable to interact (Fig. 5F), which suggests that the interaction seen by Co-IP from mammalian cells may require the presence of another protein(s) that is not present in yeast. In contrast, we found that the helicase domains of mda-5 and RIG-I were both able to self-associate in yeast, indicating that these interactions are direct. Deletion of the C-terminal 90 aa of mda-5 (103 aa from RIG-I) or deletion of around 200 aa from the N terminus of either helicase domain resulted in a loss of the ability of mda-5H and RIG-IH to homo-oligomerize, indicating that both the helicase domain and the C-terminal domain are involved in the interaction (Fig. 5F). Again, no heterologous interaction was observed between the helicase domain of mda-5 and the helicase domain of RIG-I.
Oligomerization of mda-5 and RIG-I is dependent upon poly(I-C) in mammalian cells, and yet we see these interactions occurring in yeast without adding exogenous dsRNA. It has been known for some time that most yeast strains are naturally infected with dsRNA viruses (reviewed in references 25 and 31), so it was of interest to determine whether the interactions we observe are dependent on the presence of dsRNA in yeast. To do this, we coexpressed the dsRNA-binding domain of PKR for the purpose of sequestering any dsRNA present in the yeast cells and thus suppressing any interactions that are dsRNA dependent. When this is coexpressed with the helicase domains of mda-5 or RIG-I, it clearly inhibits their oligomerization (Fig. 5G). In contrast, the mutant form of PKR, M2(1-207), which is unable to bind dsRNA, had no effect on oligomerization of mda-5H or RIG-IH.
Paramyxovirus V proteins inhibit dsRNA binding to mda-5 and the consequent oligomerization of the mda-5H domain. Having shown that activation of mda-5 occurs through dsRNA-dependent oligomerization of the helicase domain, we then wanted to establish how paramyxovirus V proteins are able to interfere with this. The interaction between mda-5 and PIV5-V occurs irrespective of the presence of dsRNA since it is not affected by coexpression of the dsRNA-binding domain of PKR (Fig. 6A). Therefore, we assessed the effect of PIV5-V on the ability of Flag-tagged mda-5H to bind poly(I-C)-agarose beads. Figure 6B shows that mda-5H bound strongly to the beads in the absence of PIV5-V, but binding was substantially reduced when PIV5-V was added to the reaction in a dose-dependent manner. In contrast, PIV5-V had no effect on the ability of RIG-IH to bind poly(I-C).
![]() View larger version (61K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. The V protein inhibits poly(I-C) binding and oligomerization of the helicase domain. (A) Yeast cells were transformed with pGBKT7.mda-5, pGADT7.PIV5-V, and either pHON7, pHON7.PKR(1-207), or pHON7.M2(1-207). Positive transformants were selected on SD –L –W –U and streaked onto SD –L –W –U –H plus 5 mM 3-AT to assay for interactions. (B) Extracts from cells expressing Flag-tagged mda-5H (top panel) or Flag-tagged RIG-IH (lower panel) were mixed with buffer (lane 1), an equal volume of an extract from cells expressing PIV5-V (lane 2), or twice the volume of an extract from cells expressing PIV5-V (lane 3) and incubated for 1 h at 4°C to allow V/mda-5 binding. Poly(I-C)-agarose beads were then added to the samples and incubated for a further hour. Proteins that had bound to the beads were analyzed by Western blotting for the Flag tag. (C) Yeast cells were transformed with plasmids expressing either mda-5H or RIG-IH as GAL4 DBD and GAL4 AD fusion proteins (given first and third, respectively) and either the empty vector pHON7 or pHON7 expressing PIV5-V, the C terminus of PIV5-V (PIV5-V N104), the V protein from SeV, the V protein from MeV, or the V protein from HeV (given second). Positive transformants were selected on SD –L –W –U and then streaked onto SD –L –W –U –H plus 5 mM 3-AT to assay for interactions.
|
N104) is also sufficient to block oligomerization of the helicase domain in yeast (Fig. 6C). In contrast, the expression of PIV5-V had no effect on oligomerization of the RIG-IH domain, which is consistent with our previous data showing that PIV5-V could not interact with RIG-I nor inhibit its function (2). We have studied the V proteins of 13 paramyxoviruses from several genera, and we have found that they all share the capacity to bind to mda-5 and inhibit IFN-β induction (2). Having shown that PIV5-V is able to block oligomerization of mda-5, we then repeated the experiment with the V proteins from SeV, HeV, and MeV (Fig. 6C). All three V proteins were capable of blocking oligomerization of mda-5, which suggests that this mechanism of inhibition is conserved.
|
|
|---|
Oligomerization of mda-5 and RIG-I occurred independently of the N-terminal CARD domains but required the entire helicase domain and the CTD and was also dependent on dsRNA binding. Previous studies have shown that the CTD of RIG-I contains the ligand binding site, but while it is sufficient for binding to 5'-triphosphate RNA and short dsRNAs, poly(I-C) binding involves both the CTD and the helicase domain (23, 29). Therefore, the requirement for both domains for oligomerization may reflect the need for both domains to bind dsRNA. Consistent with this, we observed that excess dsRNA could function as a competitive inhibitor of oligomerization in in vitro assays (Fig. 4D). Interestingly, self-association of the helicase domains in the yeast two-hybrid assay could be suppressed by expression of the dsRNA-binding domain of PKR, but not by a mutant which is defective in dsRNA binding. This implies that yeast contain some sort of dsRNA which can act as a ligand for both mda-5 and RIG-I. There are many ssRNA and dsRNA viruses that infect yeast, and in fact, most strains of S. cerevisiae are known to contain at least one type of dsRNA virus from the L-A and L-BC families (reviewed in references 25 and 31). These viruses may therefore provide a source of dsRNA that can facilitate oligomerization of mda-5 and RIG-I. It is important to note that we failed to see an interaction between the mda-5 helicase domain and the RIG-I helicase domain in yeast, indicating that the interactions we observe are not a result of two proteins being indirectly tethered via a dsRNA intermediate.
We generated an extensive panel of deletion constructs in order to map the V binding site on mda-5, and surprisingly we found that PIV5-V could bind to several nonoverlapping fragments of the helicase domain. Analysis of the amino acid sequences of these fragments did not reveal any regions of internal homology which might account for this, and although there are conserved motifs, all three sections showed relatively low homology (ranging from 34 to 45%) with the equivalent regions in RIG-I. Interestingly, the only site that was conserved in its ability to bind the V proteins of several diverse paramyxoviruses was mda-5(676-816), and indeed this fragment gave the strongest interaction with PIV5-V. It therefore seems likely that this region contains the main, conserved binding site for the paramyxovirus V protein and that different V proteins might make further contacts in a virus-specific manner. We were unable to demonstrate V binding to more than one fragment of mda-5 simultaneously or show that mda-5 could interact with two molecules of V at the same time. It will be of interest to obtain the crystal structure of mda-5 bound to V in order to determine the stoichiometry of the complex and to further define the residues involved in the interaction.
In this report, we have established that paramyxovirus V proteins inhibit mda-5 activation by binding to the helicase domain and preventing it from binding dsRNA, thus inhibiting oligomerization. Viruses from diverse genera within the Paramyxovirinae share what appears to be a universal mechanism, which is contrary to the many different ways in which paramyxoviruses have been shown to block IFN signaling (reviewed in reference 21). Interestingly, the V protein specifically targets mda-5 and not RIG-I. None of the V proteins we have looked at can either bind RIG-I or inhibit IFN induction by RIG-I overexpression, and consistent with this, we also show that PIV5-V has no effect on poly(I-C) binding or oligomerization of RIG-I. It is possible that paramyxovirus infections fail to generate RNAs that are efficient RIG-I inducers or that RIG-I is not generally present in the types of cells that they infect, and as a consequence, they may have no real need to block RIG-I activation. However, several studies have indicated a potential role for RIG-I in IFN induction in response to SeV and Newcastle disease virus (12, 27, 28, 32, 33), implying that paramyxoviruses can induce through RIG-I, at least under some circumstances. This raises the possibility that paramyxoviruses have other mechanisms to block signaling responses through RIG-I. In this context, it has recently been reported that SeV-C can block RIG-I (28) and that some paramyxovirus V proteins, including PIV5-V, can block IRF-3 phosphorylation by interacting with IKK
/TBK1 and acting as alternative substrates (16). The latter phenomenon is presumably cell type specific, since we have failed to observe the expected inhibition of RIG-I by PIV5-V (2), and furthermore PIV5-V does not block induction by overexpression of the CARD domains of mda-5 or IPS-1 (Fig. 3). Consistent with this, we have observed that PIV5-V has an inhibitory effect on TBK1 in 293 cells but not in Vero cells (unpublished data). Paramyxoviruses thus appear to interact with the host IFN response on multiple levels, and this may reflect the need to target different pathways depending on the cell type and stage of the replicative cycle.
We thank Craig Ross for comments on the manuscript.
Published ahead of print on 19 November 2008. ![]()
|
|
|---|
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»