Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Minireviews
    • JVI Classic Spotlights
    • Archive
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JVI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Virology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Minireviews
    • JVI Classic Spotlights
    • Archive
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JVI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Virus-Cell Interactions

Genetic Analysis of the Diversity and Origin of Hantaviruses in Peromyscus leucopus Mice in North America

Sergey P. Morzunov, Joan E. Rowe, Thomas G. Ksiazek, Clarence J. Peters, Stephen C. St. Jeor, Stuart T. Nichol
Sergey P. Morzunov
Department of Microbiology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, and
Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joan E. Rowe
Department of Microbiology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas G. Ksiazek
Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clarence J. Peters
Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen C. St. Jeor
Department of Microbiology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart T. Nichol
Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.1.57-64.1998
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Nucleotide sequences were determined for the complete M genome segments of two distinct hantavirus genetic lineages which were detected in hantavirus antibody- and PCR-positive white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus) from Indiana and Oklahoma. Phylogenetic analyses indicated that although divergent from each other, the virus lineages in Indiana and Oklahoma were monophyletic and formed a newly identified unique ancestral branch within the clade of Sin Nombre-like viruses found in Peromyscus mice. Interestingly, P. leucopus-borne New York virus was found to be most closely related to the P. maniculatus-borne viruses, Sin Nombre and Monongahela, and monophyletic with Monongahela virus. In parallel, intraspecific phylogenetic relationships ofP. leucopus were also determined, based on the amplification, sequencing, and analysis of the DNA fragment representing the replication control region of the rodent mitochondrial genome. P. leucopus mitochondrial DNA haplotypes were found to form four separate genetic clades, referred to here as Eastern, Central, Northwestern, and Southwestern groups. The distinct Indiana and Oklahoma virus lineages were detected in P. leucopus of the Eastern and Southwestern mitochondrial DNA haplotypes, respectively. Taken together, our current data suggests that both cospeciation of Peromyscus-borne hantaviruses with their specific rodent hosts and biogeographic factors (such as allopatric migrations, geographic separation, and isolation) have played important roles in establishment of the current genetic diversity and geographic distribution of Sin Nombre-like hantaviruses. In particular, the unusual position of New York virus on the virus phylogenetic tree is most consistent with an historically recent host-switching event.

Hantaviruses are rodent-borne members of the family Bunyaviridae (34). They possess a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA genome contained within three separate segments referred to as the small, medium, and large (S, M, and L) segments. The S segment (1.7 to 2.0 kb) codes for the nucleocapsid (N) protein, the M segment (3.6 kb) codes for the glycoprotein precursor of two viral glycoproteins (G1 and G2), and the L segment (6.5 kb) codes for the viral RNA polymerase (14). The number of known distinct hantavirus serotypes and genotypes has grown significantly during the last 5 years and currently totals 16 (44).

Each hantavirus appears to be primarily associated with a specific rodent species, causing a persistent, asymptomatic, life-long infection in that species. They are thought to be primarily transmitted via infectious aerosol generated by contaminated urine and feces, and possibly via saliva during bites. Most of the current data appears consistent with cospeciation of hantaviruses and their rodent hosts being the predominant pattern in the long-term evolution of this group of viruses (2, 37, 43, 52, 62). This is certainly true at the higher levels, hantaviruses carried by species in the rodent subfamilies Murinae, Arvicolinae, and Sigmodontinae falling into three phylogenetically distinct groups, irrespective of their global geographic locations (22, 39, 44).

Many hantaviruses are pathogenic for humans. Well-characterized Old World hantaviruses which cause diseases collectively known as hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome include Hantaan, Dobrava, Seoul, and Puumala viruses, associated with the striped field mouse,Apodemus agrarius, the yellow-necked field mouse, A. flavicollis, the Norway rat, Rattus norvegicus, and the bank vole, Clethrionomys glareolus, respectively (for reviews see references 22 and44).

Sin Nombre (SN) virus was identified as the causative agent in an outbreak of severe pulmonary disease (hantavirus pulmonary syndrome) in the southwestern United States in 1993 (10, 12, 13, 40, 52). The deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), an indigenous North American rodent of the subfamily Sigmodontinae, was shortly identified as the primary natural reservoir for SN virus (9). Subsequently, additional distinct hantaviruses associated with rodents of other sigmodontine genera were discovered in North and South America. Some, like Bayou (BAY), Black Creek Canal (BCC), Juquitiba, Andes, and Laguna Negra viruses (associated with Oryzomys palustris, Sigmodon hispidus, unknown,Oligoryzomys longicaudatus, and Calomys laucharodents, respectively) have already proven to be pathogenic for humans (28, 31, 36, 39, 46, 47, 55, 59). Others, such as El Moro Canyon (ELMC) virus (from the harvest mouse, Reithrodontomys megalotis) (20, 21) and several hantaviruses from the Prospect Hill (PH) virus group (found in several different North American Microtus species) (42, 48, 51), have not been associated with human disease.

An extensive study of SN virus throughout North America revealed high genetic diversity as well as geographic clustering of genetic variants (18, 30, 35, 39, 40, 52), both of which may be connected with the genetic diversity of its natural rodent host, P. maniculatus (37). Adding further complexity to the picture, several other SN-like hantaviruses have been detected and genetically characterized. These include the P. leucopus-borne New York (NY) virus (23, 24) and Monongahela (MGL) virus (50), which was originally found in a morphologically distinct subspecies of P. maniculatus,P. maniculatus nubiterrae (cloudland deer mouse), in the Appalachians. These findings lead one to consider (i) how many hantaviruses are associated with Peromyscus rodents in North America, (ii) how many of them are capable of causing hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, and (iii) how hantavirus detection and differential diagnostics can potentially be improved. To begin to address such questions, a broad study of the genetic variability of different hantavirus strains, their geographic distribution, and their mode of maintenance in nature has been initiated. The pivotal component of such a study is investigation of the association and possible cospeciation of SN-like viruses with particular Peromyscus taxa.

To attempt to clarify these issues for P. leucopus-borne hantaviruses, the nucleotide sequences of the entire hantavirus M genome segments were determined for two previously unreported highly divergent SN-like virus lineages detected in P. leucopusfrom Indiana and Oklahoma. In parallel, intraspecific phylogenetic relationships of P. leucopus were also determined, based on the amplification, sequencing, and phylogenetic analysis of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) fragment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sample selection and origin.Rodent blood and tissue samples were selected from an extensive collection at the Special Pathogens Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga. This collection is supported with voucher specimens deposited at the Museum of Southwestern Biology, Albuquerque, N.Mex. Rodent samples from West Virginia were kindly provided by Richard Yanagihara.

P. leucopus samples used for amplification of the entire hantavirus M RNA genome segments were collected in La Porte County, Indiana (11), and Murray County, Oklahoma. DNA samples used for reconstructing rodent phylogeny included 49 P. leucopussamples from Arkansas, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

RNA and DNA preparation.Total RNA used for the recovery of the hantavirus genetic sequences was extracted from whole blood or lung tissue by using a standard guanidinium isothiocyanate-acid phenol extraction procedure as described previously (40). Total DNA from rodent blood or tissue samples was purified by proteinase K digestion followed by phenol-chloroform extraction and ethanol precipitation (7).

Oligonucleotide primer design.A standard nested set of generic primers specific to the G2 region of the hantavirus M RNA genome segment (40) was used for the original recovery of the hantavirus genetic sequences (35). A variety of oligonucleotide primers were used to generate overlapping DNA fragments for the entire hantavirus M genome RNA segments. Nine sets of nested primer sequences were designed from conserved regions between SN (strains NMh10 and CC107), ELMC, BAY, BCC, and PH published sequences. These provided sufficient sequence for each virus that specific primers could be designed to fill gaps in the sequence. The virus sequences are reported in GenBank, and specific primer sequences are available from the authors upon request.

To identify highly variable genetic sequences suitable for the determination of the phylogenetic relationship amongPeromyscus rodents, the GenBank sequence database and existing literature were examined, and the noncoding region of rodent mtDNA surrounding the origin of replication (D-loop-containing region) was chosen for study. Known mtDNA sequences of Norway rat (R. norvegicus) (15), house mouse (Mus domesticus) (6), and human (1) were aligned by using the LINEUP program of the Genetics Computer Group (Madison, Wis.) software package. Three pairs of generic primers (named CB1, CB2, CB3, 12S1, 12S2, and 12S3) were designed (Fig.1; Table 1) and used in different combinations to amplify a replication control region of Peromyscus mtDNA. The mtDNA sequences obtained were aligned by using the LINEUP program. Then two P. leucopus/P. maniculatus-specific primer pairs were designed for amplification of the variable parts of the rodent mtDNA (Fig. 1; Table 1).

Fig. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Linear map of the P. leucopus 1.8-kb mitochondrial genome fragment containing the replication control region. Directions of primers used are shown with arrows. Grey bars represent fragments selected for amplification, sequencing, and phylogenetic analyses.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Oligonucleotide primers used to amplify mtDNA sequences of P. leucopus

RT-PCR amplification and sequencing.Extracted total RNA was assayed for the presence of hantavirus RNA by using nested reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) as described previously (40). Amplifications were performed on a TwinBlock system thermocycler (Ericomp, Inc., San Diego, Calif.). Peromyscus mtDNA fragments were amplified in a simple PCR using 40 cycles of 93°C for 30 s, 48°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 120 s. Synthesized DNA products were separated on agarose gels, purified by using a MERMaid kit (Bio 101, La Jolla, Calif.), and sequenced directly, using the DyeDeoxy cycle sequencing technique (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, Calif.). The exact sequences of 3′ and 5′ termini of the M genome segment of Indiana (IN) virus were determined by ligation of the individual RNA segment termini, followed by RT-PCR amplification and nucleotide sequence analysis through the ligation site (33).

Phylogenetic analyses.Phylogenetic analyses of nucleotide sequence differences between different hantavirus strains, as well as between subspecies of P. leucopus, were performed by using both the distance-based neighbor-joining (NJ) method (MEGA software [29]) and the maximum-parsimony (MP) method (PAUP software [54]). Both analyses were carried out by using different algorithms and weighting schemes.

In the NJ method, different distance corrections including Jukes-Cantor and Tamura models, and gamma distance for the Tamura-Nei model, were used. Since the rate of transitional substitutions is known to be higher than the rate of transversional substitutions in the hantavirus genetic sequences (52), and frequencies of the four different nucleotides deviate from 25%, the Tamura model was selected for the final phylogenetic analysis of the hantavirus data set. This model includes estimations for the frequencies of different nucleotides in the analyzed sequences and for differences in the rate of transitional and transversional substitutions. ForPeromyscus mtDNA sequences, the Jukes-Cantor model and gamma distances for the Tamura-Nei model were used in the analysis. The former algorithm is generally recommended when the Jukes-Cantor estimate of the number of nucleotide substitutions per site between different sequences is about 0.05 or less (29), as it was in our data set. However, since the variable region of the mammalian mtDNA is known to have extreme bias in the frequencies of the four nucleotides and in the rate of nucleotide substitutions among different sites, and a higher rate of transitional over transversional substitutions, the latter algorithm was also applied.

For the MP analysis, the transition/transversion ratio was estimated by using MacClade software (32) analyses of unweighted trees generated from nucleotide sequence differences detected among hantavirus strains (transition/transversion ratio of 4:1 [reference52 and this report]) or among Peromyscusrodents (transition/transversion ratio of 7:1 [this report]). Such weighting is predicted to improve the effectiveness of the MP method for estimation of the correct phylogeny (19). Phylogenetic trees were obtained by using the branch-and-bound (hantavirus sequence data set) or heuristic (rodent mtDNA sequence data set) search method. Bootstrap confidence limits were calculated by 1,000 heuristic search repetitions of the analyses.

Nucleotide sequence accession numbers.The nucleotide sequences reported in this article can be obtained from GenBank. The accession numbers for the IN and Oklahoma (OK) hantavirus lineages areAF030551 and AF030552 , respectively. The accession numbers for P. leucopus mtDNA fragments are AF031710 to AF031807 .

RESULTS

Genetic characterization of the M RNA segments of the virus lineages present in P. leucopus samples from Indiana and Oklahoma.Earlier analysis of PCR fragments amplified fromP. leucopus samples from Indiana and Oklahoma indicated the existence of two previously unrecognized hantavirus lineages (35). Two individual rodents containing the representative IN and OK virus lineages were chosen for further virus sequence analysis. The complete sequences of the M segments of the IN and OK virus lineages were determined to be 3,664 and 3,662 nucleotides in length, respectively. The terminal nucleotides (28 bases at the 3′ end and 31 bases at the 5′ end) of the OK virus lineage M genome segment were not determined directly but inferred from primers used for cDNA synthesis. The single open reading frame (ORF) (nucleotides 52 to 3472) for the glycoprotein precursor (GPC) was found to potentially encode an unprocessed GPC 1,140 amino acids in length. Percentage identity of both the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of the entire M segments and encoded proteins of IN and OK virus lineages compared with previously published sequences of other hantaviruses are shown in Table2. The M RNA genome segments of IN and OK virus lineages show 84.3% nucleotide identity and 95.8% amino acid identity of encoded GPCs. As expected, they also display a high degree of nucleotide identity with SN (79.9 and 80.5% for IN and OK, respectively), MGL (81.2 and 80.6%), and NY (80.0 and 80.4%) viruses. The distribution of nucleic and amino acid substitutions found in IN and OK lineage M segments correlates well with the pattern of conserved and variable areas described for other hantaviruses (14, 42, 52).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

M segment nucleotide and amino acid sequence identitiesa

The GPCs of IN and OK lineages possess a number of common structural features which are conserved among hantaviruses. These include conserved potential N-glycosylation sites, cysteine residues, locations of transmembrane regions of G1 and G2 (36, 49, 52), and the five amino acids preceding the proposed site for cotranslational cleavage of GPC (14, 36, 52). The major conserved type-specific linear epitope, reported to be located at amino acid positions 58 to 88 in the SN virus G1 protein (27), contains four amino acid substitutions in IN and OK virus lineages, with three of them being shared and one being unique for each virus. Whether these substitutions lead to the change of the immunological specificity of this epitope remains to be determined.

Phylogenetic relationship of the IN and OK viruses to other hantaviruses.To clarify the phylogenetic relationship of IN and OK viruses to other SN-like hantaviruses, NJ and MP phylogenetic analyses of a 1,141-nucleotide fragment of the G2 ORF (positions from 2330 to 3470 of the IN sequence) were performed. The NJ tree and the single MP tree obtained display very similar topologies (Fig.2). Although divergent from each other, IN and OK viruses group together and form a new, unique branch which diverges at a node that is ancestral to the node containing the clade including the other Peromyscus-borne hantaviruses. Interestingly, P. leucopus-borne NY virus appeared to be most closely related to the P. maniculatus-borne viruses, SN and MGL, and diverges from the same ancestral node as MGL virus. Bootstrap analysis of both NJ and MP trees provides good support for these clades, as well as for other major clades on the trees. The NJ and MP phylogenetic analyses of the complete virus M segments (data not shown) revealed a similar well-supported topology within the clade containing Peromyscus-borne SN-like viruses (except that the complete MGL virus M segment sequence was not available for inclusion in this analysis).

Fig. 2.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Phylogenetic relationships of the IN and OK hantavirus lineages to previously known hantaviruses, based on sequence differences of the 1,141-nucleotide fragment of the M genome RNAs. Sequences were aligned with BR IN and OK M genome RNA sequences and then edited to match the length of the shortest sequence which was the partial-length sequence of MGL. (A) NJ analysis was performed with MEGA, using the Tamura algorithm with options of using both transversional and transitional changes and complete deletion of gaps. Bootstrap values were calculated by 1,000 replicates of the analysis. (B) MP analysis was performed with PAUP, version 3.1.1, using the branch-and-bound search option and a 4:1 weighting of transversions over transitions. Bootstrap analysis was carried out by using 1,000 heuristic search replicates with the aforementioned weighting of transversions. Numbers above horizontal branches indicate distances (NJ) or nucleotide step differences (MP). The percentage of bootstrap support exceeding 50% is indicated by numbers in parentheses below corresponding branches near the appropriate branching point. Vertical branches are for visual clarity only. Previously published hantavirus sequences (for abbreviations not provided below, see the text and Table2, footnote a) used in the analysis include the following: HTN virus strain 76118 (49), GenBank accession no. M14627 ; SEO virus strain SR-11 (3), M34882 ; PH virus strain PHV-1 (42), X55129 ; TUL virus strain Moravia (43),Z66538 ; PUU virus strain CG1820 (16), M29979 ; BAY virus (36), L36930 ; BCC virus (46), L39950 ; ELMC virus strain RM-97 (56), U26828 ; NY virus strains RI1, NY-1, and NY-2 (24), U36801 , U36802 , and U36803 , respectively; SN virus strains New Mexico h10 (NMh10) (52), L25783 ; Convict Creek 74 (CC74) and Convict Creek 107 (CC107) (30), L33684 and L33474 ; and MGL virus strain Monongahela-2 (50),U32653 .

Amplification and sequencing of the mtDNA replication control region of P. leucopus and P. maniculatus. All three pairs of generic primers used (Fig. 1) produced amplicons of rodent mtDNA. However, the most efficient amplifications were obtained with primers CB3 and 12S2. A 1.8-kb fragment of mtDNA containing the replication control region was generated for P. leucopus,P. gossypinus, P. maniculatus, and P. polionotus (species identification supported by analysis of respective voucher specimens). Two variable fragments of mtDNA surrounding the replication control region were identified (fragments 1 and 2 in Fig. 1). Changes among the rodent species mentioned above included numerous nucleotide substitutions, a 75-nucleotide duplication in fragment 2 in all P. polionotus samples compared withP. leucopus and P. maniculatus samples, and a 9-nucleotide duplication in some P. gossypinus samples. Intraspecies variability appeared to be lower (up to 4.3% in P. leucopus), with most changes being transitional nucleotide substitutions.

Based on these data, P. leucopus/P. maniculatus-specific primers were designed and used to amplify variable 384- and 427-nucleotide mtDNA fragments (333 and 380 nucleotides in length, respectively, after exclusion of primer sequences) surrounding the replication control region (using primer pairs MD1-12ST and CBT-MR1, respectively [Fig. 1]). These fragments were successfully amplified for 49 P. leucopus samples from different regions of its geographic distribution (see Materials and Methods).

Phylogenetic relationship of white-footed mice from different geographic areas.To determine the phylogenetic relationship of geographically distant populations of P. leucopus, data obtained by sequencing two variable mtDNA fragments were combined and aligned. The original data set was 717 nucleotides long and contained 49 sequences of P. leucopus, with two sequences of P. gossypinus used as the outgroup. Redundant taxa were omitted in the final phylogenetic analyses, which were performed by NJ and MP methods. Despite extreme bias in nucleotide composition and a high transition/transversion ratio in the mtDNA data set, the two models used in the NJ analysis produced very similar phylogenetic trees. The phylogenetic tree based on the Jukes-Cantor model is shown in Fig.3. All MP trees obtained in both unweighted and weighted (7:1) analyses also displayed the same major clades of P. leucopus mtDNA sequences (data not shown). In both NJ and MP analyses, the bootstrap estimates provide good support for all these major clades.

Fig. 3.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Phylogeny of P. leucopus inferred from NJ analysis of combined 333- and 380-nucleotide fragments of the mtDNA replication control region. NJ analysis was performed with MEGA, using the Jukes-Cantor model. Bootstrap values were obtained by 1,000 repetitions of the analysis. The standard error test support numbers and bootstrap support numbers (in parentheses) for major clades are indicated below the corresponding branches near the appropriate branching point. The horizontal scale bar indicates a distance of 0.01. Vertical branches are for visual clarity only. Prefixes: Pl, P. leucopus; Pg, P. gossypinus. States of origin are indicated by two-letter postal code. Four clades or haplotypes are indicated. The first clade contains mtDNA sequences from the eastern United States including East Coast (Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Maryland, and District of Columbia), Appalachian Mountain region (West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Georgia), and areas between the Appalachians and Great Lakes (Indiana and Ohio). The second clade is comprised of mtDNA sequences from the northern region of the Central Plains (Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, and North Dakota). The third clade contains mtDNA sequences from Kansas and Arkansas, while the fourth clade is comprised of mtDNA sequences from Texas and Oklahoma.

P. leucopus mtDNA haplotypes appear to form four genetically distinct clades, referred to here for simplicity as the Eastern, Northwestern, Central, and Southwestern groups of haplotypes (Fig. 3and 4). It is noteworthy that theP. leucopus from Indiana, from which IN virus lineage sequence was obtained, belongs to the Eastern group, while the P. leucopus from Oklahoma, which carries OK virus lineage, belongs to the Southwestern group.

Fig. 4.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Geographic distribution of mtDNA haplotypes of P. leucopus and P. leucopus-borne hantaviruses. The shaded area represents the geographic distribution of P. leucopusaccording to Hall (17). White, dotted, grey, and black mouse figures designate localities containing Eastern, Northwestern, Central, and Southwestern mtDNA haplotypes, respectively. Black squares, triangles, and diamonds indicate localities containing northeastern, southwestern, and “hybrid” karyotypes, respectively, according to Baker et al. (5). White virion figures indicate localities where IN and OK hantavirus lineages were recovered from P. leucopus. The grey virion figure shows NY hantavirus. Mice from northern Ohio, southwestern Kentucky, and Colorado were assigned to mtDNA haplotype groups based on phylogenetic analysis of the fragment 1 only and therefore were not included in Fig. 3.

DISCUSSION

To gain a better understanding of the genetic variability, geographic distribution, and association (and potential cospeciation) of SN-like viruses with particular species and subspecies of P. leucopus, the complete M RNA genome segment sequences were determined for two divergent hantavirus lineages detected in P. leucopus from distant geographic areas (35). As expected, nucleotide sequences of the entire M RNA genome segments of IN and OK virus lineages possess all of the specific features (i.e., overall structure, imperfectly complementary ends of the genome, length of the GPC ORF and nontranslated regions, features of encoded proteins, etc.) known for other hantaviruses (24, 36, 46, 49, 52).

Analysis of virus sequence difference by both NJ and MP phylogenetic methods showed that (i) the IN and OK virus lineages form a new, unique ancestral branch within the clade of SN-like viruses and (ii) although placed together, IN and OK viruses are still relatively divergent, with the evolutionary distance being almost as great as that between two SN-like viruses currently recognized by others as distinct, i.e., NY and MGL (Fig. 2). Surprisingly, another P. leucopus-borne hantavirus, NY virus, is phylogenetically placed within the clade containing the P. maniculatus-borne hantaviruses and appears to be most closely related to the MGL virus. Considering that all well-known hantaviruses are each primarily associated with a single rodent species, a possible explanation for these results might lie in the phylogenetic relationship and history of the rodent hosts of these SN-like hantaviruses.

The two closely related species of Peromyscus rodents,P. maniculatus (about 60 named subspecies) and P. leucopus (17 subspecies), are widespread and abundant on the North American continent (4, 17, 25, 26, 41) (Fig. 4). Despite considerable efforts, intraspecific phylogenetic histories of both species remain unclear (reviewed in reference 8). In the case of P. leucopus, the existence of two distinct chromosomal races has been well documented during the last two decades (5, 38, 53, 57) (Fig. 4), supporting the earlier morphological subdivision of the P. leucopus species (41). White-footed mice belonging to both races were shown to hybridize easily along the contact line in Oklahoma, forming a geographically stable narrow hybrid zone (38, 53, 57). Chromosomal, allozymic, and mtDNA restriction pattern data suggest different phylogenetic histories for the two chromosomal races and an allopatric origin of the contact zone (38, 53). Presumed allopatric subdivision of the parental types took place between 20,000 and 250,000 years ago (53). Secondary contact took place approximately 9,000 generations ago (i.e., at less than 9,000 years, and, probably, less than half that time) (53). These estimates are in agreement with the hypothesis that the Wisconsin glaciation, which eliminated plant and animal life from a large section of North America for about 30,000 years, was responsible for splitting the range of this species (53). It is likely that during the Wisconsinian time the eastern population survived glaciation in the southern Appalachians (58), while the second (southwestern) population was probably located somewhere in the region of Texas, New Mexico, or Mexico.

The data presented here identify not two but four phylogenetically distinct mtDNA haplotypes of P. leucopus (Fig. 3 and 4). Since the geographic distribution of the previously defined Northeastern chromosomal race of P. leucopus (5) covers areas shown in this study to be inhabited by P. leucopus possessing the Eastern, Northwestern, and Central mtDNA haplotypes (Fig. 4), these mtDNA haplotypes probably represent P. leucopus populations which survived the Wisconsin glacial period in the southern Appalachians, while the Southwestern haplotype originated from another glacial age refuge (or, alternatively, represents an earlier division of P. leucopus). Unfortunately, the current analysis, which allowed us to clearly identify four distinct mtDNA haplotypes, cannot unambiguously resolve the phylogenetic relationships between them.

The data discussed above lead us to the conclusion that the two divergent SN-like hantavirus lineages from Indiana and Oklahoma are associated with two distinct contemporary chromosomal races and phylogenetically distinct mtDNA haplotypes of the white-footed mouse. The OK virus lineage is clearly associated with the Southwestern chromosomal race (and the Southwestern mtDNA haplotype) of P. leucopus. The IN virus lineage is associated with the Northeastern race but may not truly belong to P. leucopus of the Eastern mtDNA haplotype. Based on absence of IN hantavirus lineage in samples from the rest of the geographic range of P. leucopus of the Eastern mtDNA haplotype (Appalachians and coastal areas [Fig. 4]) (24, 35, 50), it seems likely that this virus lineage is predominantly associated with P. leucopus of the Northwestern mtDNA haplotype (which inhabits areas west from Indiana) and invaded border populations of P. leucopus of the Eastern mtDNA haplotype.

When discussing the association and possible cospeciation of closely related SN-like hantaviruses with their closely relatedPeromyscus rodent hosts, one could consider three possible hypotheses. (i) Cospeciation of hantaviruses with their specific rodent hosts remains a critical factor in the fine scale, short-term evolution (i.e., closely related Peromyscus-borne SN-like hantaviruses undergo cospeciation with their specific rodent hosts, genetically distinct forms of P. maniculatus and P. leucopus). (ii) At such a fine temporal scale, there is no cospeciation of closely related Peromyscus-borne SN-like hantaviruses with their rodent hosts: SN-like hantaviruses are able to be maintained in both P. maniculatus and P. leucopus, and only biogeographic factors (such as allopatric migrations, geographic separation, and isolation) and founder events in natural infections of rodents have led to the current divergence and geographic distribution of SN-like hantaviruses. (iii) Both factors mentioned above play an important role: cospeciation ofPeromyscus-borne SN-like hantaviruses with their specific rodent hosts remains an important factor, although biogeographic factors are equally important, and host-switching events can occur when closely related rodent species are sympatric.

Our current data taken together with those from previously published studies are most consistent with the last hypothesis. There is ample evidence of cospeciation occurring at the rodent and virus species level. For instance, although P. maniculatus and P. leucopus are sympatric almost everywhere in the Central Plains (including Indiana and Oklahoma), the IN and OK virus lineages have not been detected in P. maniculatus captured in this region despite analysis of numerous specimens (35). At the subspecies level, the association of genetically distinct IN and OK virus genotypes with two genetically distinct chromosomal forms ofP. leucopus, and the association of SN and MGL viruses with two genetically distinct forms of P. maniculatus (37, 50), are consistent with cospeciation.

However, the position of the P. leucopus-borne NY virus on the virus phylogenetic tree inside the clade of the P. maniculatus-borne SN-like hantaviruses (Fig. 2) suggests that one or more host-switching events may have occurred in the past. There are several possible scenarios which include multiple host-switching events. Nevertheless, from both historical and phylogenetic perspectives, the most likely and parsimonious explanation for the unusual position of NY virus on the hantavirus phylogenetic tree is a single historically recent host-switching event. Both P. maniculatus nubiterrae and P. leucopus are known to inhabit the Appalachian Mountain region, often sharing common habitats (4, 17, 60, 61). This situation is thought to have existed since the Wisconsin glacial period, when this region served as an ice age refuge for both species (58). Most likely an ancient MGL-like virus originally was associated with P. maniculatus, based on virus position on the phylogenetic tree and its current association solely with P. maniculatus in Quebec and Ontario, outside the geographic range of P. leucopus(35). At present, this virus can be found in the southern Appalachians predominantly in P. maniculatus nubiterrae but also in P. leucopus (35), suggesting that MGL virus may have become well adapted to both closely related rodent species during the ice age. After the glacial ice sheet retreated from New England more than 10,000 years ago, ancient populations of both species expanded northward along the Appalachian Mountain chain (P. maniculatus, which generally follows higher elevations) and coastal plains (P. leucopus, which generally follows lower elevations) (58). It seems likely that cospeciation of the ancient MGL-like virus strain with such coastal populations ofP. leucopus resulted in the constitution of the SN-like hantavirus, now known as NY virus.

Data presented here once again demonstrate the great genetic complexity of the group of SN-like hantaviruses in North America. Considering the significant geographic variation among hantaviruses of a single species, it is not easy to determine whether the IN and OK virus lineages described here constitute true hantavirus species or whether they should be considered divergent strains of a single novel virus. It has been proposed that combination of three major pieces of evidence must be considered when one evaluates new hantavirus species (20). (i) The first is immunologic evidence, with a four-fold or greater two-way difference between viruses in plaque reduction neutralization assays. This is a problem in the case of hantaviruses, which are known to be generally difficult to adapt to cell culture. (ii) The second is ecological/physiological evidence, with a clear association of a new hantavirus with a different rodent host. “Different rodent host” usually means different rodent species. However, analysis of the mammalogical literature (for instance, reference 25; for a review, see reference8) shows that in some cases such a definition is limited due to uncertainties in rodent taxonomy. We propose to adopt the definition of a different rodent host as a reproductively and/or ecologically and/or geographically separated rodent species or subspecies, which carries a phylogenetically distinct hantavirus and which is capable of being the sole carrier of this virus in a rodent community. (iii) Finally, one must consider molecular evidence, with significant nucleotide and amino acid differences from previously characterized hantaviruses. Commonly, a hantavirus is considered to be a new species if it has more than a 25% nucleotide difference in the GPC ORF. Nucleotide differences of 15 to 25% usually are considered a “grey area” where the significance of sequence differences cannot be properly evaluated without phylogenetic analysis. At the amino acid level, a threshold of 5 to 6% difference in the nucleocapsid protein sequence has been proposed to distinguish new hantavirus species (45).

Viruses of the IN and OK lineages have not been isolated in cell culture, and so immunological criteria cannot be used. They are associated with two phylogenetically distinct chromosomal races (and mtDNA haplotypes) of their rodent host. However, since these two groups of P. leucopus are in contact, and hybridize easily, it is hard to characterize this situation as a true separation. Finally, 16% nucleotide difference of the virus M genome segments and 4.2% amino acid difference of the corresponding GPC proteins are insufficient to constitute the IN and OK lineages as separate virus species. Based on these criteria, we consider these virus lineages to be two divergent strains of a new SN-like hantavirus for which we propose the name Blue River (BR) virus, after a geographic feature near the location of rodent capture in Oklahoma.

The average nucleotide and amino acid sequence differences between SN, NY, MGL viruses, which are currently recognized by others as distinct virus species (23, 24, 50, 52), and BR virus are still in the same grey area (Table 1). However, the genetic distance between these SN-like viruses is greater than that between the IN and OK lineages of BR virus (Fig. 2), and most of them are associated with reproductively isolated, phylogenetically distinct and/or geographically separated rodent hosts (9, 24, 50). Immunological comparisons for SN-like viruses have not yet been done, since only SN and NY viruses so far have been adapted to cell culture. Therefore, further studies are needed to determine whether SN, NY, MGL, and BR viruses are taxonomically distinct entities or divergent strains of SN virus and whether we should adopt the group name “Sin Nombre-like viruses” or “Sin Nombre group.”

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Terry Yates, Jim Mills, and Richard Yanagihara for providing rodent blood and tissue samples; Wallace Dawson, Michael Bowen, Vladimir Chizhikov, and Michael Kosoy for fruitful discussions; Elmer Otteson for synthesizing oligonucleotide primers for this study; and Brian Mahy for support and encouragement. We are grateful to Marty Monroe, Mary Lane Martin, George Gallucci, Vera Semenova, Brad Hotard, and Lora Morgan for excellent technical assistance.

This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health grants 5RO1AI36418-04 and 1PO1AI39808-01 through the University of Nevada—Reno.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 23 June 1997.
    • Accepted 18 September 1997.
  • Copyright © 1998 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Anderson S.,
    2. Bankier A. T.,
    3. Barrell B. G.,
    4. de Bruijn M. H. L.,
    5. Coulson A. R.,
    6. Drouin J.,
    7. Eperon I. C.,
    8. Nierlich D. P.,
    9. Roe B. A.,
    10. Sanger F.,
    11. Schreier P. H.,
    12. Smith A. J. H.,
    13. Staden R.,
    14. Young I. G.
    Sequence and organization of the human mitochondrial genome.Nature 290 1981 457 465
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    1. Antic D.,
    2. Yong Kang C.,
    3. Spik K.,
    4. Schmaljohn C. S.,
    5. Vapalahti O.,
    6. Vaheri A.
    Comparison of the deduced gene products of the L, M and S genome segments of hantaviruses.Virus Res. 24 1992 35 46
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Arikawa J.,
    2. Lapenotiere H. F.,
    3. Iacono-Connors L.,
    4. Wang M.,
    5. Schmaljohn C. S.
    Coding properties of the S and M genome segments of Sapporo rat virus: comparison to other causative agents of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome.Virology 176 1990 114 125
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    1. Baker R. H.
    Habitats and distribution Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Special publication. King J. A. 1968 98 126 American Society of Mammalogists Lawrence, Kans
  5. 5.↵
    1. Baker R. J.,
    2. Robbins L. W.,
    3. Stangl F. B. Jr.,
    4. Birney E. C.
    Chromosomal evidence for a major subdivision in Peromyscus leucopus.J. Mammal. 64 1983 356 359
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    1. Bibb M. J.,
    2. van Etten R. A.,
    3. Wright C. T.,
    4. Walberg M. W.,
    5. Clayton D. A.
    Sequence and gene organization of mouse mitochondrial DNA.Cell 26 1981 167 180
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    1. Blin N.,
    2. Stafford D. W.
    A general method for isolation of high molecular weight DNA from eukaryotes.Nucleic Acids Res. 3 1976 2303 2308
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. Carleton M. D.
    Systematics and evolution Advances in the study of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Kirkland G. L. Jr., Layne J. N. 1989 7 141 Texas Tech University Press Lubbock, Tex
  9. 9.↵
    1. Childs J. E.,
    2. Ksiazek T. G.,
    3. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    4. Krebs J. W.,
    5. Morzunov S.,
    6. Maupin G. O.,
    7. Gage K. L.,
    8. Rollin P.,
    9. Sarisky J.,
    10. Enscore R.,
    11. Peters C. J.,
    12. Nichol S. T.
    Serologic and genetic identification of Peromyscus maniculatus as the primary rodent reservoir for a new hantavirus in the southwestern United States.J. Infect. Dis. 169 1994 1271 1280
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    1. Chizhikov V. E.,
    2. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    3. Morzunov S. P.,
    4. Monroe M. C.,
    5. Peters C. J.,
    6. Nichol S. T.
    Complete genetic characterization and analysis of isolation of Sin Nombre virus.J. Virol. 69 1995 8132 8136
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Dietrich N.,
    2. Pruden S.,
    3. Ksiazek T. G.,
    4. Morzunov S. P.,
    5. Camp J. W.
    A small-scale survey of hantavirus in mammals from Indiana.J. Wildl. Dis. 33 1997 818 822
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Duchin J. S.,
    2. Koster F. T.,
    3. Peters C. J.,
    4. Simpson G. L.,
    5. Tempest B.,
    6. Zaki S. R.,
    7. Ksiazek T. G.,
    8. Rollin P. E.,
    9. Nichol S. T.,
    10. Umland E. T.,
    11. Moolenaar R. L.,
    12. Reef S. E.,
    13. Nolte K. B.,
    14. Gallaher M. M.,
    15. Butler J. C.,
    16. Breiman R. F.,
    17. the Hantavirus Study Group
    Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome: a clinical description of 17 patients with a newly recognized disease.N. Engl. J. Med. 330 1994 949 955
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    1. Elliott L. H.,
    2. Ksiazek T. G.,
    3. Rollin P. E.,
    4. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    5. Morzunov S. P.,
    6. Monroe M.,
    7. Goldsmith C. S.,
    8. Humphrey C. D.,
    9. Zaki S. R.,
    10. Krebs J. W.,
    11. Maupin G.,
    12. Gage K.,
    13. Childs J. E.,
    14. Nichol S. T.,
    15. Peters C. J.
    Isolation of the causative agent of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 51 1994 102 108
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Elliott R. M.,
    2. Schmaljohn C. S.,
    3. Collet M. S.
    Bunyaviridae genome structure and gene expression.Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 169 1991 91 141
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    1. Gadaleta G.,
    2. Pepe G.,
    3. De Candia G.,
    4. Quagliariello C.,
    5. Sbisa E.,
    6. Saccone C.
    The complete nucleotide sequence of the Rattus norvegicus mitochondrial genome: cryptic signals revealed by comparative analysis between vertebrates.J. Mol. Evol. 28 1989 497 516
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.↵
    1. Giebel L. B.,
    2. Stohwasser R.,
    3. Zoeller L.,
    4. Bautz E. K.,
    5. Darai G.
    Determination of the coding capacity of the M genome segment of Nephropathia epidemica virus strain Hallnas B1 by molecular cloning and nucleotide sequence analysis.Virology 172 1989 498 505
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Hall E. R.
    Mammals of North America 2nd ed. 1981 John Wiley and Sons New York, N.Y
  18. 18.↵
    1. Henderson W. W.,
    2. Monroe M. C.,
    3. St. Jeor S. C.,
    4. Thayer W. P.,
    5. Rowe J. E.,
    6. Peters C. J.,
    7. Nichol S. T.
    Naturally occurring Sin Nombre virus genetic reassortants.Virology 214 1996 602 610
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    1. Hillis D. M.,
    2. Huelsenbeck J. P.,
    3. Cunningham C. W.
    Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies.Science 264 1994 671 677
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Hjelle B.,
    2. Anderson B.,
    3. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    4. Song W.,
    5. Gannon W. L.,
    6. Yates T. L.
    Prevalence and geographic genetic variation of hantaviruses of New World harvest mice (Reithrodontomys): identification of a divergent genotype from a Costa Rican Reithrodontomys mexicanus.Virology 207 1995 452 459
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hjelle B.,
    2. Chavez-Giles F.,
    3. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    4. Yates T.,
    5. Sarisky J.,
    6. Webb J.,
    7. Ascher M.
    Genetic identification of a novel hantavirus of the harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis.J. Virol. 68 1994 6751 6754
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Hjelle B.,
    2. Jenison S. A.,
    3. Goade D. E.,
    4. Green W. B.,
    5. Feddersen R. M.,
    6. Scott A. A.
    Hantaviruses: clinical, microbiologic, and epidemiologic aspects.Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 32 1995 469 508
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    1. Hjelle B.,
    2. Krolikowski J.,
    3. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    4. Chavez-Giles F.,
    5. Vanner C.,
    6. Laposata E.
    Phylogenetically distinct hantavirus implicated in a case of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome in the Northeastern United States.J. Med. Virol. 46 1995 21 27
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    1. Hjelle B.,
    2. Lee S.-W.,
    3. Song W.,
    4. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    5. Song J.-W.,
    6. Yanagihara R.,
    7. Gavrilovskaya I.,
    8. Mackow E. R.
    Molecular linkage of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome to the white-footed mouse, Peromyscus leucopus: genetic characterization of the M genome of New York virus.J. Virol. 69 1995 8137 8141
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Hogan K. M.,
    2. Hedin M. C.,
    3. Koh H. S.,
    4. Davis S. K.,
    5. Greenbaum I. F.
    Systematic and taxonomic implications of karyotypic, electrophoretic, and mitochondrial-DNA variation in Peromyscus from the Pacific Northwest.J. Mammal. 74 1993 819 831
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    1. Hooper E. T.
    Classification Biology of Peromyscus. Special publication. King J. A. 1968 27 74 American Society of Mammalogists Lawrence, Kans
  27. 27.↵
    1. Jenison S.,
    2. Yamada T.,
    3. Morris C.,
    4. Anderson B.,
    5. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    6. Keller N.,
    7. Hjelle B.
    Characterization of human antibody responses to Four Corners hantavirus infections among patients with hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.J. Virol. 68 1994 3000 3006
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Khan A. S.,
    2. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    3. Morzunov S.,
    4. Zaki S. R.,
    5. Kohn M. A.,
    6. Nawas S. R.,
    7. McFarland L.,
    8. Nichol S. T.
    Fatal illness associated with a new hantavirus in Louisiana.J. Med. Virol. 46 1995 281 286
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  29. 29.↵
    1. Kumar S.,
    2. Tamura K.,
    3. Nei M.
    MEGA: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis, version 1.01. 1993 The Pennsylvania State University University Park, Pa (Computer program.)
  30. 30.↵
    1. Li D.,
    2. Schmaljohn A. L.,
    3. Anderson J.,
    4. Schmaljohn C. S.
    Complete nucleotide sequences of the M and S segments of two hantavirus isolates from California: evidence for reassortment in nature among viruses related to hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.Virology 206 1995 973 983
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.↵
    1. Lopez N.,
    2. Padula P.,
    3. Rossi C.,
    4. Lazaro M. E.,
    5. Franze-Fernandez M. T.
    Genetic identification of a new hantavirus causing severe pulmonary syndrome in Argentina.Virology 220 1996 223 226
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. 32.↵
    1. Maddison W. P.,
    2. Maddison D. R.
    MacClade: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution, version 3.05. 1992 Sinauer Associates Sunderland, Mass (Computer program.)
  33. 33.↵
    1. Mandl C. W.,
    2. Heinz F. X.,
    3. Puchhammer-Stockl E.,
    4. Kunz C.
    Sequencing the termini of capped viral RNA by 5′-3′ ligation and PCR.BioTechniques 10 1991 485 486
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. McKee K. T. Jr.,
    2. LeDuc J. W.,
    3. Peters C. J.
    Hantaviruses Textbook of human virology 2nd ed. Belshe R. B. 1991 615 632 Mosby Year Book St. Louis, Mo
  35. 35.↵
    Monroe, M. C., S. P. Morzunov, A. Johnson, M. Bowen, H. Artsob, T. Yates, T. G. Ksiazek, and S. T. Nichol. 1997. Unpublished results.
  36. 36.↵
    1. Morzunov S. P.,
    2. Feldmann H.,
    3. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    4. Semenova V. A.,
    5. Rollin P. E.,
    6. Ksiazek T. G.,
    7. Peters C. J.,
    8. Nichol S. T.
    A newly recognized virus associated with a fatal case of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome in Louisiana.J. Virol. 69 1995 1980 1983
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Morzunov S. P.,
    2. St. Jeor S. C.,
    3. Yates T. L.,
    4. Rowe J.,
    5. Ksiazek T. G.,
    6. Peters C. J.,
    7. Nichol S. T.
    Co-evolution of North American Peromyscus-borne hantaviruses with specific rodent hosts, W 11-5 Abstracts of the Xth International Congress of Virology 1996. 1996 23 Virology Division, International Union of Microbiological Societies Jerusalem, Israel
  38. 38.↵
    1. Nelson K.,
    2. Baker R. J.,
    3. Honeycutt R. L.
    Mitochondrial DNA and protein differentiation between hybridizing cytotypes of the white-footed mouse, Peromyscus leucopus.Evolution 4 1987 864 872
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. 39.↵
    1. Nichol S. T.,
    2. Ksiazek T. G.,
    3. Rollin P. E.,
    4. Peters C. J.
    Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome and newly described hantaviruses in the United States The Bunyaviridae. Elliott R. M. 1996 269 280 Plenum Press New York, N.Y
  40. 40.↵
    1. Nichol S. T.,
    2. Spiropoulou C.,
    3. Morzunov S.,
    4. Rollin P. E.,
    5. Ksiazek T. G.,
    6. Feldmann H.,
    7. Sanchez A.,
    8. Childs J.,
    9. Zaki S.,
    10. Peters C. J.
    Genetic identification of a hantavirus associated with an outbreak of acute respiratory illness.Science 262 1993 914 917
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Osgood W. H.
    Revision of the mice of the American genus Peromyscus.N. Am. Fauna 28 1909 1 285
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. 42.↵
    1. Parrington M. A.,
    2. Lee P. W.,
    3. Kang C. Y.
    Molecular characterization of the Prospect Hill virus M RNA segment: comparison with the M RNA segments of other hantaviruses.J. Gen. Virol. 72 1991 1845 1854
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  43. 43.↵
    1. Plyusnin A.,
    2. Vapalahti O.,
    3. Lankinen H.,
    4. Lehvaeslaiho H.,
    5. Apekina N.,
    6. Myasnikov Y.,
    7. Kallio-Kokko H.,
    8. Henttonen H.,
    9. Lundkvist Å.,
    10. Brummer-Korvenkontio M.,
    11. Gavrilovskaya I.,
    12. Vaheri A.
    Tula virus: a newly detected hantavirus carried by European common voles.J. Virol. 68 1994 7833 7838
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Plyusnin A.,
    2. Vapalahti O.,
    3. Vaheri A.
    Hantaviruses: genome structure, expression and evolution.J. Virol. 77 1996 2677 2687
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    1. Puthavathana P.,
    2. Dobbs M.,
    3. Baek L.-J.,
    4. Chu Y.-K.,
    5. Lee H. W.,
    6. Kang C. Y.
    Comparison of nucleotide sequences among hantaviruses belonging to the same serotype: an analysis of amplified DNA by thermal cycle sequencing.Virus Res. 30 1993 161 169
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Ravkov E. V.,
    2. Rollin P. E.,
    3. Ksiazek T. G.,
    4. Peters C. J.,
    5. Nichol S. T.
    Genetic and serologic analysis of the Black Creek Canal virus and its association with human disease and Sigmodon hispidus infection.Virology 210 1995 482 489
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. 47.↵
    1. Rollin P. E.,
    2. Ksiazek T. G.,
    3. Elliott L. H.,
    4. Ravkov E. V.,
    5. Martin M. L.,
    6. Morzunov S.,
    7. Livingstone W.,
    8. Monroe M.,
    9. Glass G.,
    10. Ruo S.,
    11. Khan A. S.,
    12. Childs J. E.,
    13. Nichol S. T.,
    14. Peters C. J.
    Isolation of Black Creek Canal virus, a new hantavirus from Sigmodon hispidus in Florida.J. Med. Virol. 46 1995 35 39
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.↵
    1. Rowe J. E.,
    2. St. Jeor S. C.,
    3. Riolo J.,
    4. Otteson E.,
    5. Monroe M. C.,
    6. Henderson W. W.,
    7. Ksiazek T. G.,
    8. Rollin P. E.,
    9. Nichol S. T.
    Coexistence of several novel hantaviruses in rodents indigenous to North America.Virology 213 1995 122 130
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. 49.↵
    1. Schmaljohn C. S.,
    2. Schmaljohn A. L.,
    3. Dalrymple J. M.
    Hantaan virus M RNA: coding strategy, nucleotide sequence, and gene order.Virology 157 1987 31 39
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  50. 50.↵
    1. Song J. W.,
    2. Baek L. J.,
    3. Nagle J. W.,
    4. Schlitter D.,
    5. Yanagihara R.
    Genetic and phylogenetic analyses of hantaviral sequences amplified from archival tissues of deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus nubiterrae) captured in the eastern United States.Arch. Virol. 141 1996 959 967
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  51. 51.↵
    1. Song W.,
    2. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    3. Irwin W.,
    4. Harrison F. J.,
    5. Davis R.,
    6. Ascher M.,
    7. Jay M.,
    8. Hjelle B.
    Isla Vista virus: a genetically novel hantavirus of the California vole Microtus californicus.J. Gen. Virol. 76 1995 3195 3199
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  52. 52.↵
    1. Spiropoulou C. F.,
    2. Morzunov S.,
    3. Feldmann H.,
    4. Sanchez A.,
    5. Peters C. J.,
    6. Nichol S. T.
    Genome structure and variability of a virus causing hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.Virology 200 1994 715 723
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  53. 53.↵
    1. Stangl F. B. Jr.
    Aspects of a contact zone between two chromosomal races of Peromyscus leucopus (Rodentia: Cricetidae).J. Mammal. 67 1986 465 473
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  54. 54.↵
    1. Swofford D. L.
    PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, version 3.1.1. 1991 Illinois Natural History Survey Champaign, Ill (Computer program.)
  55. 55.↵
    1. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    2. Hjelle B.
    Enzootic of Bayou hantavirus in rice rats (Oryzomys palustris) in 1983.Lancet 346 1995 780 781
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. 56.↵
    1. Torrez-Martinez N.,
    2. Song W.,
    3. Hjelle B.
    Nucleotide sequence analysis of the M genomic segment of El Moro Canyon hantavirus: antigenic distinction from Four Corners hantavirus.Virology 211 1995 336 338
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  57. 57.↵
    1. Van Den Bussche R. A.,
    2. Chesser R. A.,
    3. Hamilton M. J.,
    4. Bradley R. D.,
    5. Porter C. A.,
    6. Baker R. J.
    Maintenance of a narrow hybrid zone in Peromyscus leucopus: a test of alternative models.J. Mammal. 74 1993 832 845
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  58. 58.↵
    1. Waters J. H.
    Biochemical relationships of the mouse Peromyscus in New England.Syst. Zool. 12 1963 122 132
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  59. 59.↵
    1. Williams R. J.,
    2. Bryan R. T.,
    3. Mills J. N.,
    4. Palma E.,
    5. Vera I.,
    6. de Velasquez F.,
    7. Baez E.,
    8. Schmidt W.,
    9. Figueroa R.,
    10. Mexa A. E.,
    11. Peters C. J.,
    12. Zaki S. R.,
    13. Khan A. S.,
    14. Ksiazek T. G.
    An outbreak of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome among Mennonite colonies in western Paraguay.Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 57 1997 274 282
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  60. 60.↵
    1. Wolff J. O.
    Getting along in Appalachia.Nat. History 9 1986 45 48
    OpenUrl
  61. 61.↵
    1. Wolff J. O.
    Social behavior Advances in the study of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Kirkland G. L. Jr., Layne J. N. 1989 271 291 Texas Tech University Press Lubbock, Tex
  62. 62.↵
    1. Xiao S.-Y.,
    2. LeDuc J. M.,
    3. Chu Y. K.,
    4. Schmaljohn C. S.
    Phylogenetic analysis of virus isolates in genus Hantavirus, family Bunyaviridae.Virology 198 1994 205 217
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Genetic Analysis of the Diversity and Origin of Hantaviruses in Peromyscus leucopus Mice in North America
Sergey P. Morzunov, Joan E. Rowe, Thomas G. Ksiazek, Clarence J. Peters, Stephen C. St. Jeor, Stuart T. Nichol
Journal of Virology Jan 1998, 72 (1) 57-64; DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.1.57-64.1998

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Virology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Genetic Analysis of the Diversity and Origin of Hantaviruses in Peromyscus leucopus Mice in North America
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Virology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Virology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Genetic Analysis of the Diversity and Origin of Hantaviruses in Peromyscus leucopus Mice in North America
Sergey P. Morzunov, Joan E. Rowe, Thomas G. Ksiazek, Clarence J. Peters, Stephen C. St. Jeor, Stuart T. Nichol
Journal of Virology Jan 1998, 72 (1) 57-64; DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.1.57-64.1998
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

genetic variation
hantavirus
Peromyscus

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JVI
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #Jvirology

@ASMicrobiology

       

 

JVI in collaboration with

American Society for Virology

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0022-538X; Online ISSN: 1098-5514