Nigel J. Dimmock

Identification of the sequence responsible for the nuclear accumulation of the influenza virus nucleoprotein in Xenopus oocytes

Influenza virus nucleoprotein (NP), synthesized in Xenopus oocytes after injection of cloned NP cDNA, enters and accumulates in the nucleus. We have used in vitro mutagenesis of this cDNA to study the cellular distribution of mutated NP polypeptides. Mutants lacking amino acids 327-345 of wild-type NP enter the nucleus but do not accumulate there to the same extent as the wild-type protein, suggesting that this region has a role in nuclear accumulation. This possibility is further strengthened by similar studies involving the production of fusion proteins in which various amino-terminal sequences of the NP gene are fused to the complete chimpanzee alpha 1-globin sequence: when globin cDNA was injected into and expressed in oocytes the protein remains exclusively in the cytosol; however, when the globin cDNA is fused to a portion of NP cDNA that includes the region encoding amino acids 327-345, the resulting fusion protein enters and accumulates in the nucleus. Fusion proteins lacking this region of the NP enter but do not accumulate in the nucleus.

Mechanisms of neutralization of animal viruses.

For the sake of brevity, I shall confine this review to the inactivation of virus infectivity which is the direct result of combination with neutralizing antibody. This restriction is solely for convenience and is not intended as a judgement of the importance of neutralization versus inactivation involving secondary factors such as complement or cells which interact with antibodies. Neutralizing antibody is one of the main arms of protective immunity and is the type of immunity which usually results from vaccination, so it is somewhat surprising to find that we understand little of the interaction between neutralizing antibody and antigenic determinants of the virus, and how as a result infectivity is lost. In fact, the situation is worse than mere ignorance and it is probably not overstating the case to say that in the past the dogma of neutralization has been based on a logical fallacy.

Neutralization of animal virus infectivity by antibody

SummaryNeutralization is the ability of antibody to bind to and inactivate virus infectivity under defined conditions in vitro. Most neutralizing antibodies also protect animals in vivo, but protection is more complex as it also involves interaction of antibody with cells and molecules of the innate immune system. Neutralization by antibody can be mediated by a number of different mechanisms: by aggregation of virions, destabilization of the virion structure, inhibition of virion attachment to target cells, inhibition of the fusion of the virion lipid membrane with the membrane of the host cell, inhibition of the entry of the genome of non-enveloped viruses into the cell cytoplasm, inhibition of a function of the virion core through a signal transduced by an antibody, transcytosing IgA, and binding to nascent virions to block their budding or release from the cell surface. The mechanism of neutralization is determined by the properties of both a virion epitope and the antibody that reacts with it. Further, since a virus has at least several unique epitopes sited in different locations on the virion, and since the paratope and other properties of the reacting antibody can vary, this means that a virus can be neutralized by several different mechanisms. Understanding the processes of neutralization informs the creation of modern vaccines, and gives valuable insights into virus-cell interactions.

Stimulation of neutralizing antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in three strains of mice immunized with a 22 amino acid peptide of gp41 expressed on the surface of a plant virus

A plant virus, cowpea mosaic virus, expressing a 22 amino acid peptide 731-752 of the gp41 glycoprotein of human immunodeficency virus type 1 (HIV-1 IIIB), was shown previously to stimulate HIV-1 cross reactive neutralizing antibodies in adult C57/BL6 mice. Here some parameters concerning the stimulation of HIV-1-specific neutralizing and ELISA antibody have been determined in adult C57/BL6, C3H/He-mg and BALB/c mice. Two injections per mouse of all CPMV-HIV/1 doses tested (100, 10 and 1 microgram chimera which contained, respectively, 1700, 170 and 17 ng HIV peptide per injection) stimulated a strong serum neutralizing antibody response in all mice. One hundred micrograms or 10 micrograms CPMV-HIV/1 per injection gave 99% neutralization of HIV-1 IIIB in C8166 cells at a serum dilution of 1/200, whereas sera from mice immunized with 1 microgram per injection neutralized virus to 97%, 79% and 63% at a 1/200 dilution of serum from C3H/He-mg, C57/BL6 and BALB/c mice, respectively. Restimulation of these mice with the same immunogen dose marginally increased the neutralization titres. The longevity of the neutralizing antibody response increased as the immunogen dose decreased, and was dependent on the strain of mouse, in the order C57/BL6C3H/He-mg BALB/c. Re-immunization with a third injection improved the longevity of the antibody response. All mice immunized with 100 micrograms CPMV-HIV/1 responded with ELISA antibody to the gp41 peptide bound in solid phase. Ten micrograms stimulated ELISA antibody in some but not all mice, while mice immunized with 1 microgram had no detectable ELISA antibody. This synthesis of ELISA antibody decreased > or = 230-fold over the range of immunogen doses tested but, in the same mice, the neutralizing antibody response decreased only twofold, showing an unusual bias to production of the latter. Neutralizing antibodies were thus stimulated at a lower immunogen dose than ELISA antibodies. Antibody which was affinity purified using the free gp41 peptide gave a good ELISA titre but did not neutralize HIV-1, suggesting that the neutralizing antibody is recognizing a conformational epitope on the gp41 oligomer.

Intranasal immunization with a plant virus expressing a peptide from HIV-1 gp41 stimulates better mucosal and systemic HIV-1-specific IgA and IgG than oral immunization

Control of pandemic human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection ideally requires specific mucosal immunity to protect the genital regions through which transmission more often occurs. Thus a vaccine that stimulates a disseminated mucosal and systemic protective immune response would be extremely useful. Here we have investigated the ability of a chimeric plant virus, cowpea mosaic virus (CPMV), expressing a 22 amino acid peptide (residues 731-752) of the transmembrane gp41 protein of HIV-1 IIIB (CPMV-HIV/1), to stimulate HIV-1-specific and CPMV-specific mucosal and serum antibody following intranasal or oral immunization together with the widely used mucosal adjuvant, cholera toxin. CPMV-HIV/1 has been shown previously to stimulate HIV-1-specific serum antibody in mice by parenteral immunization. All mice immunized intranasally with two doses of 10 microg of CPMV-HIV/1 produced both HIV-1-specific IgA in faeces as well as higher levels of specific, predominantly IgG2a, serum antibody. Thus there was a predominantly T helper 1 cell response. All mice also responded strongly to CPMV epitopes. Oral immunization of the chimeric cowpea mosaic virus was less effective, even at doses of 500 microg or greater, and stimulated HIV-1-specific serum antibody in only a minority of mice, and no faecal HIV-1 specific IgA.

Defective interfering viruses and their potential as antiviral agents.

Defective interfering (DI) virus is simply defined as a spontaneously generated virus mutant from which a critical portion of the virus genome has been deleted. At least one essential gene of the virus is deleted, either in its entirety, or sufficiently to make it non‐functional. The resulting DI genome is then defective for replication in the absence of the product(s) of the deleted gene(s), and its replication requires the presence of the complete functional virus genome to provide the missing functions. In addition to being defective DI virus suppresses production of the helper virus in co‐infected cells, and this process of interference can readily be observed in cultured cells. In some cases, DI virus has been observed to attenuate disease in virus‐infected animals. In this article, we review the properties of DI virus, potential mechanisms of interference and progress in using DI virus (in particular that derived from influenza A virus) as a novel type of antiviral agent. Copyright

Studies on the Mechanism of Neutralization of Influenza Virus by Antibody: Evidence that Neutralizing Antibody (Anti-haemagglutinin) Inactivates Influenza Virus in vivo by Inhibiting Virion Transcriptase Activity

Influenza viruses, which had lost up to 99.999% infectivity by incubation with antibody (a) specific for the haemagglutinin (HA) or with monoclonal alpha-HA, attached on to and penetrated chick embryo fibroblast (CEF) cells to the same extent as non-neutralized virus. Neutralized virus was also uncoated efficiently as shown by the accumulation of virion RNA in the nucleus and virion envelope in the cytoplasm. Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis of virion RNA segments recovered from the nucleus or cytoplasm of cells inoculated with neutralized or non-neutralized virus showed that antibody did not potentiate degradation of RNA. However, these RNAs were not expressed since virus-induced proteins were not detected in cells to which neutralized virus had been added. Assay of virion transcriptase of neutralized virus in vitro showed that its activity was reduced up to sevenfold compared with non-neutralized virus, and annealing studies showed that no detectable transcription took place in vivo with neutralized virus. These studies support the conclusion that antibody directed specifically against the HA protein on the outer surface of the influenza virus particle neutralizes infectivity by inactivating virion transcriptase activity and it is suggested that antibody to HA brings about allosteric rearrangements in the HA molecule which are transmitted across the virus envelope to the interior of the particle.

Analysis of the ability of five adjuvants to enhance immune responses to a chimeric plant virus displaying an HIV-1 peptide.

The ability of five different adjuvants (alum, complete Freunds adjuvant, Quil A, AdjuPrime and Ribi) to stimulate humoral and T-cell mediated immune responses against a purified chimeric virus particle was investigated. Each adjuvant was administered subcutaneously to adult mice together with 10 microg of wildtype (wt) cowpea mosaic virus (CPMV) or a chimeric CPMV displaying the HIV-1 gp41 peptide, residues 731-752. All preparations elicited strong antibody responses to CPMV, but Quil A elicited the highest and most consistent responses to the HIV-1 peptide. This finding was reflected in both ELISA titres with immobilized peptide and in HIV-1-neutralizing antibody. In addition Quil A was also, the only adjuvant to stimulate an in vitro proliferative T-cell response. Surprisingly with all adjuvant formulations a predominately IgG2a anti-gp41 peptide response was observed, indicating a type 1 T-helper cell-like response. Furthermore, the efficiency of the CPMV display system was demonstrated by its ability to induce good levels of peptide specific antibody in the absence of any adjuvant.

Single- and multi-hit kinetics of immunoglobulin G neutralization of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by monoclonal antibodies

A quantal assay, based on syncytium formation in the human T cell leukaemia-derived C8166 cell line, was used to determine the kinetics of human immuno-deficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) strain IIIB neutralization. Three rat monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) were used, under physiological conditions of temperature and antibody concentration. MAb ICR39.3b (IgG2b) neutralized virus with no lag period while the other two MAbs, ICR39.13g (IgG2b) and ICR41.1i (IgG2a), neutralized with lag periods of 5 min and 15 min respectively. It was calculated that the latter two MAbs mediated neutralization by about two and three molecules of IgG per virion respectively. The highest neutralization rate constant (for MAb ICR 41.1i) was over 300-fold less than that of MAbs specific for the haemagglutinin of the enveloped influenza virus type A and for poliovirus type 1.

Semliki Forest Virus Infection of Mice: A Model for Genetic and Molecular Analysis of Viral Pathogenicity

Introduction. During the past two decades there has been a great increase in our knowledge of the mechanisms of virus multiplication in cultured cells. The cells utilized, however, have usually been undifferentiated standard cell lines, and little attention has been given to the interactions of viruses with differentiated cells, either in tissue culture or in the intact animal. Until recently, studies of viral pathogenicity have tended to be largely descriptive but a start has now been made in the analysis of the genetic and molecular control of virus pathogenicity for a number of model systems. Here we focus on one such system, Semliki Forest virus (SFV) infection of the laboratory mouse. This system has the initial advantages that the molecular biology of SFV and the closely related Sindbis virus has been extensively studied using standard tissue culture cell lines, that SFV is neurotropic, that strains of extremes of virulence for mice are available, and that inbred and immune-deficient mouse strains can be utilized.