4.6 Article

Characterization of two monoclonal antibodies, 38F10 and 44D11, against the major envelope fusion protein of Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus

期刊

VIROLOGICA SINICA
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 490-499

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12250-016-3831-4

关键词

HearNPV F protein; monoclonal antibody; 38F10; 44D11; epitope; neutralizing activity; membrane fusion

类别

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [31370191, 31621061]
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB11030400]
  3. Open Research Fund Program of the Key Laboratory of Agricultural and Environmental Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The envelope fusion protein F of baculoviruses is a class I viral fusion protein which play a significant role during virus entry into insect cells. F is initially synthesized as a precursor (F-0) and then cleaved into a disulfide-linked F-1 and F-2 subunits during the process of protein maturation and secretion. To facilitate further investigation into the structure and function of F protein during virus infection, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against the F-2 subunit of Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus (HearNPV) (HaF) were generated. Two kinds of mAbs were obtained according to their different recognition epitopes: one kind of mAbs, as represented by 38F10, recognizes amino acid (aa) 85 to 123 of F-2 and the other kind, represented by 44D11, recognizes aa 148 to 173 of F-2. Western blotand immunofluo rescence assay confirmed that both of the mAbs recognized the F protein expressed in HearNPV infected cells, however, only 44D11 could neutralize HearNPV infection. The results further showed that 44D11 may not interact with a receptor binding epitope, rather it was demonstrated to inhibit syncytium formation in cells expressing the HaF protein. The results imply that the monoclonal antibody 44D11 recognizes a region within HaF2 that may be involved in the F-mediated membrane fusion process.

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