4.6 Article

Effects of Human Parvovirus B19 and Bocavirus VP1 Unique Region on Tight Junction of Human Airway Epithelial A549 Cells

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107970

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Council (NSC) [101-2314-B-040-008]
  2. Chunghua Christian Hospital [101-CCH-IRP-09]
  3. Chung Shan Medical University, Taiwan [CSMU-INT-102-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As is widely recognized, human parvovirus B19 (B19) and human bocavirus (HBoV) are important human pathogens. Obviously, both VP1 unique region (VP1u) of B19 and HBoV exhibit the secreted phospholipase A2 (sPLA2)-like enzymatic activity and are recognized to participate in the pathogenesis of lower respiratory tract illnesses. However, exactly how, both VP1u from B19 and HBoV affect tight junction has seldom been addressed. Therefore, this study investigates how B19-VP1u and HBoV-VP1u may affect the tight junction of the airway epithelial A549 cells by examining phospholipase A2 activity and transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) as well as performing immunoblotting analyses. Experimental results indicate that TEER is more significantly decreased in A549 cells by treatment with TNF-alpha (10 ng), two dosages of B19-VP1u and BoV-VP1u (400 ng and 4000 ng) or bee venom PLA2 (10 ng) than that of the control. Accordingly, more significantly increased claudin-1 and decreased occludin are detected in A549 cells by treatment with TNF-alpha or both dosages of HBoV-VP1u than that of the control. Additionally, more significantly decreased Na+/K+ ATPase is observed in A549 cells by treatment with TNF-alpha, high dosage of B19-VP1u or both dosages of BoV-VP1u than that of the control. Above findings suggest that HBoV-VP1u rather than B19 VP1u likely plays more important roles in the disruption of tight junction in the airway tract. Meanwhile, this discrepancy appears not to be associated with the secreted phospholipase A2 (sPLA2)-like enzymatic activity.

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