Judit Pogany

The dependence of viral RNA replication on co-opted host factors

Positive-sense RNA ((+)RNA) viruses such as hepatitis C virus exploit host cells by subverting host proteins, remodelling subcellular membranes, co-opting and modulating protein and ribonucleoprotein complexes, and altering cellular metabolic pathways during infection. To facilitate RNA replication, (+)RNA viruses interact with numerous host molecules through protein–protein, RNA–protein and protein–lipid interactions. These interactions lead to the formation of viral replication complexes, which produce new viral RNA progeny in host cells. This Review presents the recent progress that has been made in understanding the role of co-opted host proteins and membranes during (+)RNA virus replication, and discusses common themes employed by different viruses.

Specific Binding of Tombusvirus Replication Protein p33 to an Internal Replication Element in the Viral RNA Is Essential for Replication

ABSTRACT The mechanism of template selection for genome replication in plus-strand RNA viruses is poorly understood. Using the prototypical tombusvirus, Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV), we show that recombinant p33 replicase protein binds specifically to an internal replication element (IRE) located within the p92 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase coding region of the viral genome. Specific binding of p33 to the IRE in vitro depends on the presence of a C · C mismatch within a conserved RNA helix. Interestingly, the absence of the p33:p33/p92 interaction domain in p33 prevented specific but allowed nonspecific RNA binding, suggesting that a multimeric form of this protein is involved in the IRE-specific interaction. Further support for the selectivity of p33 binding in vitro was provided by the inability of the replicase proteins of the closely related Turnip crinkle virus and distantly related Hepatitis C virus to specifically recognize the TBSV IRE. Importantly, there was also a strong correlation between p33:IRE complex formation in vitro and viral replication in vivo, where mutations in the IRE that disrupted selective p33 binding in vitro also abolished TBSV RNA replication both in plant and in Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells. Based on these findings and the other known properties of p33 and the IRE, it is proposed that the p33:IRE interaction provides a mechanism to selectively recruit viral RNAs into cognate viral replicase complexes. Since all genera in Tombusviridae encode comparable replicase proteins, these results may be relevant to other members of this large virus family.

In vitro assembly of the Tomato bushy stunt virus replicase requires the host Heat shock protein 70

To gain insights into the functions of a viral RNA replicase, we have assembled in vitro and entirely from nonplant sources, a fully functional replicase complex of Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV). The formation of the TBSV replicase required two purified recombinant TBSV replication proteins, which were obtained from E. coli, the viral RNA replicon, rATP, rGTP, and a yeast cell-free extract. The in vitro assembly of the replicase took place in the membraneous fraction of the yeast extract, in which the viral replicase-RNA complex became RNase- and proteinase-resistant. The assembly of the replicase complex required the heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70 = yeast Ssa1/2p) present in the soluble fraction of the yeast cell-free extract. The assembled TBSV replicase performed a complete replication cycle, synthesizing RNA complementary to the provided RNA replicon and using the complementary RNA as template to synthesize new TBSV replicon RNA.

A replication silencer element in a plus‐strand RNA virus

Replication represents a key step in the infectious cycles of RNA viruses. Here we describe a regulatory RNA element, termed replication silencer, that can down‐regulate complementary RNA synthesis of a positive‐strand RNA virus via an RNA–RNA interaction. This interaction occurs between the 5‐nucleotide‐long, internally positioned replication silencer and the extreme 3′‐terminus of the viral RNA comprising part of the minimal minus‐strand initiation promoter. Analysis of RNA synthesis in vitro, using model defective interfering (DI) RNA templates of tomato bushy stunt virus and a partially purified, RNA‐dependent RNA polymerase preparation from tombusvirus‐infected plants, revealed that this interaction inhibits minus‐strand synthesis 7‐fold. This functional interaction was supported further by: (i) RNA structure probing; (ii) phylogenetic analysis; (iii) inhibition of activity by short complementary DNAs; and (iv) compensatory mutational analysis. The silencer was found to be essential for accumulation of DI RNAs in protoplasts, indicating that it serves an important regulatory role(s) in vivo. Because similar silencer–promoter interactions are also predicted in other virus genera, this type of RNA‐based regulatory mechanism may represent a widely utilized strategy for modulating replication.

Emerging picture of host chaperone and cyclophilin roles in RNA virus replication

Many plus-strand (+)RNA viruses co-opt protein chaperones from the host cell to assist the synthesis, localization and folding of abundant viral proteins, to regulate viral replication via activation of replication proteins and to interfere with host antiviral responses. The most frequently subverted host chaperones are heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70), Hsp90 and the J-domain co-chaperones. The various roles of these host chaperones in RNA virus replication are presented to illustrate the astonishing repertoire of host chaperone functions that are subverted by RNA viruses. This review also discusses the emerging roles of cyclophilins, which are peptidyl-prolyl isomerases with chaperone functions, in replication of selected (+)RNA viruses.

RNA elements required for RNA recombination function as replication enhancers in vitro and in vivo in a plus‐strand RNA virus

RNA replication requires cis‐acting elements to recruit the viral RNA‐dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) and facilitate de novo initiation of complementary strand synthesis. Hairpins that are hot spots for recombination in the genomic RNA of turnip crinkle virus (TCV) and satellite (sat)‐RNA C, a parasitic RNA associated with TCV infections, stimulate RNA synthesis 10‐fold from a downstream promoter sequence in an in vitro assay using partially purified TCV RdRp. Artificial hairpins had an inhibitory effect on transcription. RNA accumulation in single cells was enhanced 5‐ to 10‐fold when the natural stem‐loop structures were inserted into a poorly accumulating sat‐RNA. The effect of the stem‐loop structures on RNA replication was additive, with insertion of three stem‐loop RNA elements increasing sat‐RNA accumulation to the greatest extent (25‐fold). These stem‐loop structures do not influence the stability of the RNAs in vivo, but may serve to recruit the RdRp to the template.

Translation elongation factor 1A facilitates the assembly of the tombusvirus replicase and stimulates minus-strand synthesis.

Replication of plus-strand RNA viruses depends on host factors that are recruited into viral replicase complexes. Previous studies showed that eukaryotic translation elongation factor (eEF1A) is one of the resident host proteins in the highly purified tombusvirus replicase complex. Using a random library of eEF1A mutants, we identified one mutant that decreased and three mutants that increased Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV) replication in a yeast model host. Additional in vitro assays with whole cell extracts prepared from yeast strains expressing the eEF1A mutants demonstrated several functions for eEF1A in TBSV replication: facilitating the recruitment of the viral RNA template into the replicase complex; the assembly of the viral replicase complex; and enhancement of the minus-strand synthesis by promoting the initiation step. These roles for eEF1A are separate from its canonical role in host and viral protein translation, emphasizing critical functions for this abundant cellular protein during TBSV replication.

Global genomics and proteomics approaches to identify host factors as targets to induce resistance against Tomato bushy stunt virus.

Abstract The success of RNA viruses as pathogens of plants, animals, and humans depends on their ability to reprogram the host cell metabolism to support the viral infection cycle and to suppress host defense mechanisms. Plus-strand (+)RNA viruses have limited coding potential necessitating that they co-opt an unknown number of host factors to facilitate their replication in host cells. Global genomics and proteomics approaches performed with Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV) and yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) as a model host have led to the identification of 250 host factors affecting TBSV RNA replication and recombination or bound to the viral replicase, replication proteins, or the viral RNA. The roles of a dozen host factors involved in various steps of the replication process have been validated in yeast as well as a plant host. Altogether, the large number of host factors identified and the great variety of cellular functions performed by these factors indicate the existence of a truly complex interaction between TBSV and the host cell. This review summarizes the advantages of using a simple plant virus and yeast as a model host to advance our understanding of virus–host interactions at the molecular and cellular levels. The knowledge of host factors gained can potentially be used to inhibit virus replication via gene silencing, expression of dominant negative mutants, or design of specific chemical inhibitors leading to novel specific or broad-range resistance and antiviral tools against (+)RNA plant viruses.

Authentic Replication and Recombination of Tomato Bushy Stunt Virus RNA in a Cell-Free Extract from Yeast

ABSTRACT To study the replication of Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV), a small tombusvirus of plants, we have developed a cell-free system based on a Saccharomyces cerevisiae extract. The cell-free system was capable of performing a complete replication cycle on added plus-stranded TBSV replicon RNA (repRNA) that led to the production of ∼30-fold-more plus-stranded progeny RNAs than the minus-stranded replication intermediate. The cell-free system also replicated the full-length TBSV genomic RNA, which resulted in production of subgenomic RNAs as well. The cell-free system showed high template specificity, since a mutated repRNA, minus-stranded repRNA, or a heterologous viral RNA could not be used as templates by the tombusvirus replicase. Similar to the in vivo situation, replication of the TBSV replicon RNA took place in a membraneous fraction, in which the viral replicase-RNA complex was RNase and protease resistant but sensitive to detergents. In addition to faithfully replicating the TBSV replicon RNA, the cell-free system was also capable of generating TBSV RNA recombinants with high efficiency. Altogether, tombusvirus replicase in the cell-free system showed features remarkably similar to those of the in vivo replicase, including carrying out a complete cycle of replication, high template specificity, and the ability to recombine efficiently.

Comparison of Turnip Crinkle Virus RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Preparations Expressed in Escherichia coli or Derived from Infected Plants

ABSTRACT Turnip crinkle virus (TCV) is a small, plus-sense, single-stranded RNA virus of plants. A virus-coded protein, p88, which is required for replication has been expressed and purified from Escherichia coli. In vitro assays revealed that the recombinant p88 has an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) activity and can also bind to RNA. Deletion of the N-terminal region in p88 resulted in a more active RdRp, while further deletions abolished RdRp activity. Comparison of the E. coli-expressed p88, the N-terminal deletion mutant of p88, and a TCV RdRp preparation obtained from infected plants revealed that these preparations show remarkable similarities in RNA template recognition and usage. Both the recombinant and the plant TCV RdRp preparations are capable of de novo initiation on both plus- and minus-strand satC and satD templates, which are small parasitic RNAs associated with TCV infections. In addition, these RdRp preparations can efficiently recognize the related Tomato bushy stunt virus promoter sequences, including the minus- and plus-strand initiation promoters. Heterologous viral and artificial promoters are recognized poorly by the recombinant and the plant TCV RdRps. Further comparison of the single-component recombinant TCV RdRp and the multicomponent plant TCV RdRp will help dissect the functions of various components of the TCV replicase.