|
Http://www.abbs.info e-mail:[email protected] ISSN
0582-9879
ACTA BIOCHIMICA et BIOPHYSICA SINICA 2003, 35(9):
801-805
CN 31-1300/Q |
Inhibition of Replication of Goose
Paramyxovirus SF02 by Hammerhead Ribozyme Targeting to the SF02 F mRNA in
Chicken Embryo Fibroblasts
( Key laboratory of Proteomics, Institute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China)
Goose paramyxovirus (designated as GPMV in this paper) disease is highly infectious that has caused frequent outbreak since 1997 in China. The incidence and mortality of disease are high in fowls. In 1999, an acute and virulent disease occurred in goose flocks in Shanghai. The virus isolate was designated as SF02 and identified as the causal agent of the outbreaks[6]. Liu et al.[7] and Chen et al.[8] also isolated goose paramyxovirus from infected geese in other regions in China. GPMV was identified to be a member of avian paramyxovirus-1 (APMV-1) by genomic and serotype analyses. It may be an aberrant strain of NDV. There are significant differences between GPMV and NDV in their host range. The NDV is pathogenic only to fowls, such as chickens and pigeons, whereas SF02 is highly pathogenic to fowls and waterfowls, including chicken, pigeon, partridges, geese and ducks.
The SF02 genome is a nonsegmented single-strand negative RNA. Both SF02 and NDV contain 6 ORFs in the same order of NP, P, M, F, HN and L, and each of which encodes the nucleocapsid protein (NP), phosphoprotein (P), matrix protein (M), fusion protein (F), haemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN), and large polymerase protein (L). The genomes of SF02 and NDV strains are of 83% identities and the 6 ORFs 81.9%－86.1%. The NDV isolates are classified as highly virulent (velogenic), intermediate (mesogenic), or nonvirulent (lentogenic) according to their pathogenicity and virulence to chickens. The amino acid sequence of the protease cleavage site of fusion protein is essential for NDV pathogenicity[9－12]. Fusion protein is synthesized as an inactive precursor glycoprotein (F0), and must be cleaved proteolytically to form a disulfide-linked heterodimer of F1 and F2 in order to direct the membrane fusion.
Ribozyme is an efficient agent in knocking down and blocking gene expression in vivo, and hopefully, both single-strand or double-strand RNA viruses could be its ideal targets. In this study, a ribozyme designated as RzF598 targeting to the F gene has been constructed. The mRNA of F gene (F mRNA) of GPMV SF02 was successfully cleaved with RzF598 in vitro and virus replication was efficiently suppressed in chicken embryo fibroblasts (CEFs). In order to assess the input of antisense effect in inhibition of virus replication by the ribozyme, a dysfunctional ribozyme, dRzF598 with a nucleotide substitution in the catalytic domain of RzF598, was synthesized and was inactive in RNA cleavage in vitro.
1.1 Cells and virus
CEFs were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's
medium (DMEM) (Invitrogen)supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum (Invitrogen)
with penicillin (100 u/ml) and streptomycin (100 mg/L). The viruses SF02 and
F48E9 (a velogenic NDV strain) were propagated in 10-day-old special pathogen
free (SPF) chicken embryos. The virus-containing allantoic was collected and
stored at －80 ℃
for use.
1.2 Synthesis of ribozyme genes: RzF598 and
dRzF598
The GUA site at position 598 in F mRNA of SF02 was
chosen as ribozyme target site. An oligodeoxyribonucleotide, RzF598 was
designed by program PCFOLD, ST and RNASE (Fig.1) and synthesized. For
assessment of the antisense effect, a mutant oligodeoxyribonucleotide, dRzF598
containing a single nucleotide substitution (G/A) in the catalytic domain of
RzF598 was synthesized (Fig.1).
Fig.1
Sequences and secondary structures of ribozymes, and the cleavage site of
RzF598 against F mRNA
The catalytic core of RzF598 is flanked by
arm sequences complementary to F genes. The poly(A) signal (UAUAAAAA) is
underlined and the arrow indicates the cleavage site. The nucleotide
substitution in the catalytic domain disabling the function of ribozyme is
shown by an asterisk.
1.3 Plasmids construction
The oligodeoxyribonucleotides were cloned into plasmid pRG523[13] between self-cleavage 5′ cis and 3′ cis structures. The resulting plasmids were designated as pRzF598 and pdRzF598 respectively. Ribozyme genes containing 5′ cis and 3′ cis were transferred to eukaryotic expression plasmid pcDNA3 (Invitrogen), resulting in two plasmids were designated as pcDNA-RzF598 and pcDNA-dRzF598. The plasmid pcDNA3 that lacks the whole ribozyme sequence was set as the control.
The cleavage efficiency of ribozymes against F mRNA in vitro was analyzed. F gene fragments of SF02 and F48E9 containing 440 bp (461－ 900 nt) were cloned into transcriptional plasmid pSPT18 (Boeringer Mannheim Gmbh) using primer 1 (5′-GGCTTAAGGAGAGCATTGCTGCA-3′) and primer 2 (5′-GGCACGCATATTATTTAAG-3′). The resulting plasmids were designated as pSF02F and pF48E9F, respectively.
1.4 Cleavage of F gene fragment with ribozymes in vitro
Plasmids pRzF598, pdRzF598, pSF02F and pF48E9F were linearized and transcribed by T7 RNA polymerase according to protocol of the supplier (Promega). The cleavage reaction was conducted at 37 ℃ for 30 min in 10 μL reaction solution containing 50 mmol/L Tris·HCL (pH 7.5), 2 mmol/L EDTA, 20 mmol/L NaCl and 10 mmol/L MgCl2 and ended by adding 1 μL 5 mol/L EDTA. The products were identified by 10% PAGE containing 7 mol/L urea.
1.5 Measurement of inhibition of virus replication by ribozymes in CEFs
CEFs were incubated in 24-well plate at 5 × 105 per well. Full-confluent (90%－95% of the dish surface) monolayers were used for transfection with 2 μL Lipofectamine 2000 reagent (Invitrogen). 1 μg each of pcDNA-RzF598, pcDNA-dRzF598 and pcDNA3 plasmids were used for delivering according to protocol of the supplier. Selection for neomycin resistance was done with G418 at a concentration of 200 mg/L DMEM at 24 h post transfection. 48 h after selection, CEFs were infected with 1 or 10 μL SF02-containing or F48E9-containing allantoic. Cells were washed twice by PBS. 60 min after virus adsorption, the maintenance medium (DMEM containing 2% fetal bovine serum) was added and the cells were incubated at 37 ℃. The medium containing dead cells and virus was collected at 84 h after infection. Number of survival cells attached to the wells was counted by MTT assay according to the manufacturer's instructions (Sigma). A total of 3 wells for each sample were accomplished and the average MTT value was calculated.
1.6 RT-PCR determination of the virus titration in cell medium
The CEF mediums
of infected with 10 μL virus-containing allantoic were collected. Total RNA of
15 μL medium was extracted with Trizol (Invitrogen) and used in RT-PCR with
primer 1 and primer 2. RT-PCR products were detected by electrophoresis in 1.0%
agarose gel.
2.1 Constructions of plasmids
Sequence analysis showed that all plasmids, pRzF598, pdRzF598, pcDNA-RzF598, pcDNA-dRzF598, pSF02F and pF48E9F, were constructed correctly.
2.2 Cleavage
of F gene fragment with ribozymes in vitro
The results indicated that RzF598 cleaved efficiently the transcripted 440 nt F gene fragment of SF02 into two fragments of 138 nt and 302 nt as designed. However, RzF598 did not cleave F gene fragment of NDV strain F48E9. The dRzF598 did not cleave F gene fragments of either SF02 or F48E9 (Fig.2).
Fig.2 Cleavage of F mRNA with RzF598 and dRzF598 in vitro
1, 440 nt fragment of F mRNA of SF02; 2, F
mRNA fragment of SF02 cleaved with RzF598; 3, F mRNA fragment of SF02 cleaved with
dRzF598; 4, 440 nt fragment of F mRNA of F48E9; 5, F mRNA fragment of F48E9
cleaved with RzF598; 6, F mRNA fragment of F48E9 cleaved with dRzF598.
2.3 Determination of virus concentration released into medium by CEFs with RT-PCR
RT-PCR results showed that the concentration of virus released by CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 and infected with SF02 was the lowest. The concentration of virus released by CEFs infected with SF02 or F48E9 but without transfection, and by CEFs being transfected with pcDNA3 and infected with SF02 or F48E9 were almost at the same level and were the highest. The concentration of virus released by CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 and infected with F48E9, and by CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 and infected with SF02 or F48E9 were also at the same level (Fig.3).
Fig.3 Determination of the concentration of virus released into medium by CEFs with RT-PCR
M, marker; 1, CEFs; 2, CEFs infected with SF02 but not transfected; 3, CEFs infected with F48E9 but not transfected; 4, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 but not infected; 5, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 and infected with SF02; 6, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 and infected with F48E9; 7, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 but not infected; 8, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 and infected with SF02; 9, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 and infected with F48E9; 10, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA3 but not infected; 11, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA3 and infected with SF02; 12, CEFs being transfected with pcDNA3 and infected with F48E9.
2.4 Survival percentages of CEFs being transfected with ribozymes and infected with viruses
MTT assays revealed that RzF598 remarkably inhibited the replication of SF02 in CEFs. The maximal survival percentages of CEFs was 89.3% and 78.8%when CEFs were infected with 1 μL and 10 μL SF02-containing allantoic respectively. CEFs trans-fected with pcDNA-RzF598 showed a little resistance to F48E9. CEFs transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 also showed resistance to viruses in some degree. RzF598 is dysfunctional for F48E9, and dRzF598 is also dysfunctional for SF02 and F48E9. It is noteworthy that the survival percentages of CEFs expressing the dysfunctional ribozyme infected with 1 μL virus-containing allantoic was much higher than ones infected 10 μL virus-containing allantoic. The results of CEFs survival percentages are summarized in Fig.4 and Table 1.
Fig.4 Inhibition efficiency of replication of viruses by ribozymes
(A) Survival percentages of CEFs with 1 μL virus-containing allantoic; (B) Survival percentages of CEFs with 10 μL virus-containing allantoic. Groups 1 both in A and B are non-transfected CEFs; groups 2 both in A and B are CEFs transfected pcDNA-RzF598; groups 3 both in A and B are CEFs transfected pcDNA-dRzF598; groups 4 both in A and B are CEFs transfected pcDNA3.
Table 1 MTT scores of survival CEFs being transfected with ribozymes and
infected with viruses
(A)
|
|
Non-infection CEFs |
CEFs infected with SF02 |
CEFs infected with F48E9 |
|
Non-transfection |
1.27±0.036 |
0.26±0.027 |
0.21±0.056 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 |
1.13±0.086 |
1.01±0.060 |
0.63±0.046 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 |
1.28±0.066 |
0.65±0.044 |
0.58±0.027 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA3 |
1.21±0.070 |
0.28±0.050 |
0.24±0.027 |
MTT scores of CEFs infected with 1 μL virus-containing allantoic. Data are represented as x±s.
(B)
|
|
Non-infection CEFs |
CEFs infected with SF02 |
CEFs infected with F48E9 |
|
Non-transfection |
1.27±0.036 |
0.07±0.0360.05±0.017 |
0.05±0.017 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA-RzF598 |
1.13±0.086 |
0.89±0.046 |
0.23±0.066 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA-dRzF598 |
1.28±0.066 |
0.31±0.036 |
0.25±0.068 |
|
Transfected with pcDNA3 |
1.21±0.070 |
0.04±0.015 |
0.06±0.026 |
MTT scores of CEFs infected with 10 μL
virus-containing allantoic. A total of 3 wells for each sample were accomplished
and the average MTT value was calculated. Data are represented as x±s.
3 Discussion
There are no effective therapies applicable to the treatment of virus diseases, although the vaccines against the virus or against any viral component that is vital to virus replication can effectively prevent the virus infection. However, up to date, abundant evidences indicated that the hammerhead ribozymes could be one of the potential tools to inhibit virus infection[14－16]. The possibility of ribozyme strategy for the therapy of SF02 virus infection was investigated in present study.
acid sequence of the cleavage activation site[11, 12]. Moreover, F protein is the key factor for the fusion of viral lipoprotein membrane to the cellular surface membrane of host. Therefore, the F mRNA is a good target selected for the ribozyme action in order to inhibit the virus infection.
Our results showed that ribozyme RzF598 targeting F mRNA could work well not only in vitro. It also demonstrated the inhibition of virus replication inside CEFs after transfection of RzF598 gene into cells. Expression of RzF598 in CEFs could increase the survival percentage of virus-infected cells up to 80% and 90% depending on the virus concentration. The virus concentration dependent resistance of ribozyme-transfected and virus-infected CEFs provided the evidence that the RzF598 expressed in cells could cleave the designed target, full mRNA molecules of F gene produced during the viral life cycle, as in vitro for the F mRNA fragment by the ribozyme activity. The results of RT-PCR experiments gave another direct evidence for the suppression activity of RzF598 in virus infection. Interestingly, RzF598 could not attack the NDV strain -- F48E9， either in the in vitro or in the in vivo cases. The reason for this failure of cleavage of F mRNA of F48E9 with RzF598 is that one nucleotide difference (606C→A) in the sequences of SF02 and F48E9 complementary to the left arm of RzF598. Feng et al.[17] has report that a disabled ribozyme losses the RNA cleavage activity without affecting its substrate binding due to introducing a one base mutation (G→A) in helix II of the active hammerhead ribozyme. A same disabled ribozyme dRzF598 was designed and used in present studies as control. The dysfunction of dRzF598 indicated that the cleavage by RzF598, indeed, requires ribozyme activity. However, when dRzF598 was transfected into CEFs before virus infection, it also showed certain virus resistance of the cells. The resistance was virus concentration dependent. The cellular resistance could be caused by the antisense RNA function of disabled ribozyme because it still remained the binding activity. The same explanation could be accepted in the case when RzF598, as a kind of dysfunctional ribozyme, attacked the F mRNA of NDV F48E9 strain. The ribozyme RzF598 was unable to cleave the target in vitro, but the cells transfected with RzF598 also showed some resistance against the infection of F48E9. These results suggested that the ribozyme strategy could be used for the prevention and therapy of virus infection in the future.
Acknowledgement We
thank Prof. CHEN Nong-An for helping design the sequence of ribozymes, Prof. QI
Guo-Rong for vector pRG523, and Dr. SHAN Song-Hua for chicken embryo. We are
also indebted to Miss WU Jian-Hua for her technical assistance.
References
1 Alexander DJ. Newcastle disease and other avian Paramyxoviridae infections. In： Diseases of poultry, 10th edn. Calnek BW ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press，1997， 541－569
2 Rima BK, Alexander DJ, Billeter MA, Collins PL, Kingsbury DW, Lipkind MA, Nagai Y et al. The Paramyxoviridae. In： Murphy FA, Fauquet CM, Bishop DHL, Ghabrial SA, Jarvis AW, Martelli GP, Mayo MA et al. ed. Virus Taxonomy. Sixth Report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses.Vienna & New York: Springer-Verlag， 1995, 268－274
3 de Leeuw O, Peeters B. Complete nucleotide sequence of Newcastle disease virus: Evidence for the existence of a new genus within the subfamily Paramyxovirinae. J Gen Virol, 1999, 80 (1): 131－136
4 Westover KM, Hughes AL. Molecular evolution of viral fusion and matrix protein genes and phylogenetic relationships among the Paramyxoviridae. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 2001, 21 (1): 128－134
5 Seal BS, Crawford JM, Sellers HS, Locke DP, King DJ. Nucleotide sequence analysis of the Newcastle disease virus nucleocapsid protein gene and phylogenetic relationships among the Paramyxoviridae. Virus Res, 2002, 83 (1-2): 119－129
6 Zou J, Shan SH, Yao LT, Gong ZX. Sequence analysis of F gene of SF02 isolate of goose paramyxovirus and its identification by multiplex RT-PCR. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin, 2002, 34 (4): 439－444
7 Liu HL, Wang YK, Yan WW, Zhu GQ, Zhou JH, Li YF. Cloning and sequencing of fusion glycoprotein gene of goose's paramyxovirus. China J Prev Vet Med, 2000, 22(5): 404－407
8 Chen JD, Liao M, Xin CA. Molecular cloning of the 3′-end cDNA fragments of the gene encoding the fusion protein of an avian paramyxovirus type 1 isolated from goose. China J Vet Sci Technol, 2000, 30 (1): 6－8
9 Collins MS, Bashiruddin JB, Alexander DJ. Deduced amino acid sequences at the fusion protein cleavage site of Newcastle disease viruses showing variation in antigenicity and pathogenicity. Arch Virol, 1993, 128 (3-4): 363－370
10 Peeters BP, de Leeuw OS, Koch G, Gielkens AL. Rescue of Newcastle disease virus from cloned cDNA evidence that cleavability of the fusion protein is a major determinant for virulence. J Virol, 1999, 73 (6): 5001－5009
11 Shengqing Y, Kishida N, Ito H, Kida H, Otsuki K, Kawaoka Y, Ito T. Generation of velogenic Newcastle disease viruses from a nonpathogenic waterfowl isolate by passaging in chickens. Virology, 2002, 301 (2): 206－211
12 Shan SH, Shao, CG, Xu CZ, Zou J, Hu YQ, Wu JH, Gong ZX. Differentiation of velogenic, mesogenic and lentogenic strains of Newcastle disease virus by multiplex RT-PCR. Ann Appl Bio, 2003, 142: 49－54
13 He YK, Lu CD, Qi GR. In vitro cleavage of HPV16 E6 and E7 RNA fragments by synthetic ribozymes and transcribed ribozymes from RNA-trimming plasmid. FEBS Lett, 1993, 322 (1): 21－24
14 Gavin DK, Gupta KC. Efficient hammerhead ribozymes targeted to the polycistronic Sendai virus P/C mRNA. Structure-function relationships. J Biol Chem, 1997, 272 (3): 1461－1472
15 Lazarev VN, Shmarov MM, Zakhartchouk AN, Yurov GK, Misurina OU, Akopian TA, Grinenko NF et al. Inhibition of influenza A virus reproduction by a ribozyme targeted against PB1 mRNA. Antiviral Res, 1999, 42 (1): 47－57
16 Warashina M, Kuwabara T, Kato Y, Sano M, Taira K. RNA-protein hybrid ribozymes that efficiently cleave any mRNA independently of the structure of the target RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2001, 98 (10): 5572－5577
17 Feng Y, Kong YY, Wang Y, Qi GR. Inhibition of hepatitis B Virus by hammerhead ribozyme targeted to the poly(A) signal sequence in cultured cells. Biol Chem, 2001, 382 (4): 655－660
Received:
April 22, 2003 Accepted: June 5, 2003
This work was
supported by a grant from Shanghai Agricultural Key Promoted by Science and
Technology
*Corresponding author: Tel, 86-21-64374430-220; Fax, 86-21-64746510; e-mail,[email protected]