4.6 Article

Rotaviruses Reach Late Endosomes and Require the Cation-Dependent Mannose-6-Phosphate Receptor and the Activity of Cathepsin Proteases To Enter the Cell

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 88, 期 8, 页码 4389-4402

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.03457-13

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Council for Science and Technology-Mexico (CONACYT) [153639]
  2. CONACYT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rotaviruses (RVs) enter cells through different endocytic pathways. Bovine rotavirus (BRV) UK uses clathrin-mediated endocytosis, while rhesus rotavirus (RRV) employs an endocytic process independent of clathrin and caveolin. Given the differences in the cell internalization pathway used by these viruses, we tested if the intracellular trafficking of BRV UK was the same as that of RRV, which is known to reach maturing endosomes (MEs) to infect the cell. We found that BRV UK also reaches MEs, since its infectivity depends on the function of Rab5, the endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT), and the formation of endosomal intraluminal vesicles (ILVs). However, unlike RRV, the infectivity of BRV UK was inhibited by knocking down the expression of Rab7, indicating that it has to traffic to late endosomes (LEs) to infect the cell. The requirement for Rab7 was also shared by other RV strains of human and porcine origin. Of interest, most RV strains that reach LEs were also found to depend on the activities of Rab9, the cation-dependent mannose-6-phosphate receptor (CD-M6PR), and cathepsins B, L, and S, suggesting that cellular factors from the trans-Golgi network (TGN) need to be transported by the CD-M6PR to LEs to facilitate RV cell infection. Furthermore, using a collection of UK x RRV reassortant viruses, we found that the dependence of BRV UK on Rab7, Rab9, and CD- M6PR is associated with the spike protein VP4. These findings illustrate the elaborate pathway of RV entry and reveal a new process (Rab9/CD-M6PR/cathepsins) that could be targeted for drug intervention.

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