4.6 Article

Impact of Quaternary Organization on the Antigenic Structure of the Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Envelope Glycoprotein E

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 83, 期 17, 页码 8482-8491

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00660-09

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (Fonds zur Foerderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung) [P17035-B09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The envelope protein E of flaviviruses mediates both receptor-binding and membrane fusion. At the virion surface, 180 copies of E are tightly packed and organized in a herringbone-like icosahedral structure, whereas in noninfectious subviral particles, 60 copies are arranged in a T = 1 icosahedral symmetry. In both cases, the basic building block is an E dimer which exposes the binding sites for neutralizing antibodies at its surface. It was the objective of our study to assess the dependence of the antigenic structure of E on its quaternary arrangement, i.e., as part of virions, recombinant subviral particles, or soluble dimers. For this purpose, we used a panel of 11 E protein-specific neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, mapped to distinct epitopes in each of the three E protein domains, and studied their reactivity with the different soluble and particulate forms of tick-borne encephalitis virus E protein under nondenaturing immunoassay conditions. Significant differences in the reactivities with these forms were observed that could be related to (i) limited access of certain epitopes at the virion surface; (ii) limited occupancy of epitopes in virions due to steric hindrance between antibodies; (iii) differences in the avidity to soluble forms compared to the virion, presumably related to the flexibility of E at its domain junctions; and (iv) modulations of the external E protein surface through interactions with its stem-anchor structure. We have thus identified several important factors that influence the antigenicity of the flavivirus E protein and have an impact on the interaction with neutralizing antibodies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据