IV-1, simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) mac239, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), bovine immunodeficiency virus (BIV), and maedi-visna virus (MVV) Vif proteins demonstrated conservation of both mechanisms (LaRue et al., 2010). As expected, each Vif protein selectively degraded the A3 enzyme of its lentiviralVirology. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 01.Harris and DudleyPagehost. However, some cross degradation was observed as might also be GW9662 manufacturer expected because the A3 enzymes are relatively conserved (especially in comparison to Vif). Surprisingly, recent work has demonstrated that CBF- is specifically required for function of primate lentiviral Vif proteins, but not for non-primate Vifs (Ai et al., 2014; Han et al., 2014; Yoshikawa et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2014). These data indicate that either the Vif proteins of FIV, BIV, and MVV do not require a CBF–like factor, or these viruses have evolved to use one or more other as-yet-unknown cellular factors. Additional work will be needed to distinguish between these intriguing possibilities. Evidence for HIV-1 restriction and hypermutation in vivo Prior to the discovery of APOBEC3 enzymes and the elucidation of HIV-1 Vif counteraction mechanism, many studies reported strand-biased G-to-A mutations in patientderived viral sequences [e.g., (Janini et al., 2001; Vartanian et al., 1994; Wain-Hobson et al., 1995)]. These and other reports have combined to suggest that multiple A3 enzymes can impact the virus in vivo. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that both 5-GG-to-AG and 5GA-to-AA mutations are observed in patient-derived sequences and in viral sequences from humanized models [i.e., A3G and A3D/F/H attributable mutations (Krisko et al., 2013; Sato et al., 2014)]. However, because these data rely on standard nucleic acid purification and PCR amplification procedures, which survey all available substrates, it is possible that these hypermutations represent dead-end replication intermediates that may never have completed reverse transcription and resulted in a productive infection. In other words, some fraction of these sequences are genetic dead-ends that may never have been propagated regardless of APOBEC (i.e., interesting artifacts recovered through technology). This possibility is supported by far fewer viral G-to-A mutations observed in analyses of viral RNA in sera (from virus or virus-like particles) compared to viral DNA from cells of infected individuals [integrated or non-integrated viral DNA sequences; e.g., (Sato et al., 2014)]. Considerable effort has therefore been invested in characterizing viral and/or host genetic variations in an attempt to gauge the impact of the A3 restriction mechanism in vivo. Host genetic studies have the potential to be especially informative. However, most studies have shown conflicting effects or a clean negative result. For instance, a deletion of the full A3B gene that is common in some Southeast Asian populations provided an opportunity to unambiguously show that the encoded protein is not a factor in HIV-1 infection rates, viral loads, and CD4-positive T cell counts, and has no measurable effect on virus replication in primary cells ex vivo (get Valsartan/sacubitril Imahashi et al., 2014). In contrast, recent studies comparing stable and unstable A3H proteins have indicated that some naturally occurring viral variants with hypofunctional Vif alleles may be susceptible to restriction by stable A3H enzymes (Ooms et al., 2013; Refsland et al., 2014). Moreo.IV-1, simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) mac239, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), bovine immunodeficiency virus (BIV), and maedi-visna virus (MVV) Vif proteins demonstrated conservation of both mechanisms (LaRue et al., 2010). As expected, each Vif protein selectively degraded the A3 enzyme of its lentiviralVirology. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 May 01.Harris and DudleyPagehost. However, some cross degradation was observed as might also be expected because the A3 enzymes are relatively conserved (especially in comparison to Vif). Surprisingly, recent work has demonstrated that CBF- is specifically required for function of primate lentiviral Vif proteins, but not for non-primate Vifs (Ai et al., 2014; Han et al., 2014; Yoshikawa et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2014). These data indicate that either the Vif proteins of FIV, BIV, and MVV do not require a CBF–like factor, or these viruses have evolved to use one or more other as-yet-unknown cellular factors. Additional work will be needed to distinguish between these intriguing possibilities. Evidence for HIV-1 restriction and hypermutation in vivo Prior to the discovery of APOBEC3 enzymes and the elucidation of HIV-1 Vif counteraction mechanism, many studies reported strand-biased G-to-A mutations in patientderived viral sequences [e.g., (Janini et al., 2001; Vartanian et al., 1994; Wain-Hobson et al., 1995)]. These and other reports have combined to suggest that multiple A3 enzymes can impact the virus in vivo. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that both 5-GG-to-AG and 5GA-to-AA mutations are observed in patient-derived sequences and in viral sequences from humanized models [i.e., A3G and A3D/F/H attributable mutations (Krisko et al., 2013; Sato et al., 2014)]. However, because these data rely on standard nucleic acid purification and PCR amplification procedures, which survey all available substrates, it is possible that these hypermutations represent dead-end replication intermediates that may never have completed reverse transcription and resulted in a productive infection. In other words, some fraction of these sequences are genetic dead-ends that may never have been propagated regardless of APOBEC (i.e., interesting artifacts recovered through technology). This possibility is supported by far fewer viral G-to-A mutations observed in analyses of viral RNA in sera (from virus or virus-like particles) compared to viral DNA from cells of infected individuals [integrated or non-integrated viral DNA sequences; e.g., (Sato et al., 2014)]. Considerable effort has therefore been invested in characterizing viral and/or host genetic variations in an attempt to gauge the impact of the A3 restriction mechanism in vivo. Host genetic studies have the potential to be especially informative. However, most studies have shown conflicting effects or a clean negative result. For instance, a deletion of the full A3B gene that is common in some Southeast Asian populations provided an opportunity to unambiguously show that the encoded protein is not a factor in HIV-1 infection rates, viral loads, and CD4-positive T cell counts, and has no measurable effect on virus replication in primary cells ex vivo (Imahashi et al., 2014). In contrast, recent studies comparing stable and unstable A3H proteins have indicated that some naturally occurring viral variants with hypofunctional Vif alleles may be susceptible to restriction by stable A3H enzymes (Ooms et al., 2013; Refsland et al., 2014). Moreo.
Heme Oxygenase heme-oxygenase.com
Just another WordPress site
