Next Article in Journal
Bacteriophage Assembly
Previous Article in Journal
The Inside Out of Lentiviral Vectors
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Commentary

Flavivirus Cell Entry and Membrane Fusion

Department of Medical Microbiology, Molecular Virology Section, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Viruses 2011, 3(2), 160-171; https://doi.org/10.3390/v3020160
Submission received: 19 January 2011 / Revised: 10 February 2011 / Accepted: 10 February 2011 / Published: 22 February 2011

Abstract

:
Flaviviruses, such as dengue virus and West Nile virus, are enveloped viruses that infect cells through receptor-mediated endocytosis and fusion from within acidic endosomes. The cell entry process of flaviviruses is mediated by the viral E glycoprotein. This short review will address recent advances in the understanding of flavivirus cell entry with specific emphasis on the recent study of Zaitseva and coworkers, indicating that anionic lipids might play a crucial role in the fusion process of dengue virus [1].

1. Introduction

Dengue virus (DENV) is a major emerging arthopod-borne pathogen causing a significant burden of disease in tropical and subtropical areas of the world [2,3]. DENV is a positive-sense RNA virus, belonging to the genus “Flaviviruses” of the family Flaviviridae [4]. The flavivirus genus comprises more than 70 viruses including, besides DENV, a number of other important human pathogens such as West Nile virus (WNV), tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV), Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV), and yellow fever virus (YFV). Flaviviruses are enveloped viruses, which enter their host cells through a process of receptor-mediated endocytosis and subsequent fusion from within the endosomal cell compartment. This fusion process is triggered by the mildly acidic pH within the lumen of the endosome [4]. In this short review, new insights in flavivirus cell entry and membrane fusion will be discussed. We will emphasize specifically the role of target membrane lipids in the membrane fusion activity of DENV [1].

2. Structure of Flaviviruses

Flaviviruses are small, icosahedral viruses. The viral genome consists of a single-stranded, positive-sense RNA molecule which is complexed to multiple copies of the capsid protein [5]. The nucleocapsid is surrounded by a host-derived lipid membrane, in which two transmembrane proteins are inserted, the major envelope glycoprotein E (53 kDa) and the membrane protein M (8 kDa). The M protein is a small proteolytic fragment of its precursor form prM (approximately 21 kDa) and is anchored into the viral membrane by two transmembrane helices [6,7]. In mature virions, the E glycoproteins are arranged in 90 homodimers with sets of three E head-to-tail homodimers that lie in 30 rafts and form a herringbone pattern [6]. The E ectodomain has three structurally distinct domains (DI, DII, DIII) that are connected by flexible hinge regions [8]. Neither E nor M interacts with the nucleocapsid in mature virions [9]. In infected cells, virions are initially assembled in an immature form with a distinct structural organization. In these particles, the E glycoprotein is associated with the glycoprotein prM and three of these heterodimers form one viral spike [6,10]. Virus particle maturation occurs during viral egress.

3. Flavivirus Cell Entry

3.1 Receptor Binding

The first step in the infectious cell entry pathway of flaviviruses involves binding of the E glycoprotein to a cellular receptor. Flaviviruses must recognize a ubiquitous cell surface molecule or utilize multiple receptors for cell entry as flavivirus infection has been observed in a variety of cell lines derived from different host species [11]. In recent years several attachment factors have been identified, indicating that flaviviruses may use multiple receptors for cell entry.
Negatively charged glycoaminoglycans, such as heparan sulfate, which are abundantly expressed on numerous cell types, are utilized as low-affinity attachment factors by several flaviviruses [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. These interactions serve to concentrate the virus at the cell surface and are mediated by domain DIII of the E glycoprotein. Multiple other attachment factors have been identified for DENV in mammalian cells including heat-shock proteins 90 and 70 [19], neolactotetraosylceramide [20], CD14 [21], GRP78/BiP [22], 37-kDa/67-kDa laminin [23], and C-type lectins such as DC-SIGN (dendritic cell-specific intracellular adhesion molecule-3 (ICAM3)-grabbing non-integrin) [24,25,26], the mannose receptor [27], and C-type lectin domain family 5, member A (CLEC5, MDL-1) [28]. In mosquito cells, DENV has been shown to interact with heat-shock protein 70, R80, R67 and a 45-kDa protein [19,29,30]. Crystallographic studies on DENV-DC-SIGN complexes revealed that interaction with DC-SIGN is preferentially mediated through the carbohydrate moiety at Asn67 in EDII [31]. WNV has also been shown to interact with DC-SIGN and DC-SIGNR in dendritic cells [32,33]. Furthermore, WNV, JEV, and DENV, albeit to a lesser extent, have been documented to bind to αvβ3 integrins expressed on mammalian cells, mediated through interaction with EDIII [34,35]. On the other hand, entry of WNV into embryonic mouse fibroblasts and hamster melanoma is independent of αvβ3 integrin binding, suggesting that receptor molecule usage is strain-specific and/or cell type-dependent [36].

3.2 Entry of Flavivirus Particles into Cells

Flaviviruses enter cells through clathrin-mediated endocytosis. Single-particle tracking analysis of DENV particles in living cells revealed that DENV particles diffuse along the cell surface towards a pre-existing clathrin-coated pit [37]. This implies that virions roll over distinct attachment factors untill they bind to the entry receptor localized to clathrin hotspots at the cell surface or that the initially formed virus-receptor complex is transported towards a pre-existing clathrin-coated pit. Subsequently, the clathrin-coated pit evolves and the invagination in the plasma membrane is closed by membrane scission mediated by dynamin to form a clathrin-coated vesicle. The clathrin-coated vesicle is transported away from the plasma membrane after which the clathrin coat is released from the vesicle. Real-time microscopy analysis showed that DENV particles remain associated with clathrin for approximately 80 seconds [37]. Earlier evidence that flaviviruses utilize clathrin-mediated endocytosis for cell entry was obtained by ultrastructural studies showing the presence of Kunjin and YFV in coated pits [38,39]. Furthermore, inhibition of WNV infection was observed in cells treated with chemical inhibitors like chlorpromazine [40] that prevent clathrin-coated pit formation and in cells expressing dominant-negative mutants of Eps15, a protein which is involved in clathrin-coated pit formation [41,42]. The route of flavivirus cell entry appears to be dependent on the virus strain and the cell type as a recent report documented entry of DENV in mammalian cells independent of clathrin, caveolae and lipid rafts [43].
After clathrin-mediated uptake, the endocytic vesicle carrying the virus is delivered to early endosomes. Internalization of flavivirus particles occurs rapidly as a large fraction of WNV and DENV particles were observed to localize to early endosomes within five minutes post-entry [37,41]. Thereafter, the early endosome carrying the virus matures into a late endosome. For DENV, membrane fusion has been observed to occur primarily from within late endosomal compartments [37]. Membrane fusion was detected on average at 10-13 minutes after initiation of infection. It is important to note that the subcellular compartment from which membrane fusion occurs is most likely dependent on the pH-dependent membrane fusion properties of the virus and may therefore vary between individual DENV strains [37,44].

4. Molecular Mechanism of Membrane Fusion

4.1 Low-pH-induced Conformational Changes in the E Glycoprotein

The low-pH environment within endosomes triggers a series of molecular events within the E glycoprotein leading to membrane fusion of the viral membrane with the endosomal membrane and subsequent release of the nucleocapsid into the cell cytosol. Protonation of one or more histidine residues has been postulated to trigger the conformational changes of the E protein [45,46]. Indeed, studies on TBEV identified two conserved histidines (at position 146 and 323) that may act as pH sensors and destabilize the DI-DIII interface [47]. On the other hand, site-specific mutagenesis studies on WNV revealed that histidine residues are not required for the initiation of the conformational changes required for membrane fusion [48].
The conformational changes of the E glycoprotein that occur during the membrane fusion process of flaviviruses have been studied extensively [45,46,49]. The initial step in membrane fusion involves protonation-dependent disruption of the E protein rafts at the viral surface, including dissociation of E homodimers into monomers. This leads to the outward projection of DII and exposure of the fusion loop at the distal tip of DII to the target membrane. Subsequently, the E proteins insert their fusion loops into the outer leaflet of the membrane and three copies of E interact with one another via their fusion loops or DII domains to form an unstable trimer. The E trimers stabilize through additional interactions between the DI domains of the three E proteins [50]. Next, DIII is believed to fold back against the trimer to form a hairpin-like configuration. The energy released by these conformational changes induces the formation of a hemifusion intermediate, in which the monolayers of the interacting membranes are merged while the inner membranes are still intact. Finally, a fusion pore is formed and after enlargement of the pore, the nucleocapsid is released into the cytosol.

4.2 Role of Cholesterol in Flavivirus Membrane Fusion

Besides the mildly acidic endosomal pH, it is the composition of the target membrane that plays an important role in the membrane fusion process of flaviviruses. In vitro studies have revealed that flaviviruses such as TBEV and WNV have the capacity to fuse with artificial receptor-free lipid membranes (liposomes) consisting of phosphatidylcholine (PC) and phosphatidylethanolamine (PE) at low pH, albeit with low efficiency [51,52,53]. Addition of cholesterol to target membranes was found to have a strong promoting effect on the membrane fusion capacity of TBEV and WNV [51,52,53,54]. Subsequent virus-liposome coflotation studies have indicated that cholesterol stimulates the low-pH-triggered interaction of the E glycoprotein with lipid membranes [54,55]. The 3-hydroxyl group of cholesterol is important for this function [54]. Interestingly, and in contrast to alphaviruses, the E glycoprotein does not appear to directly interact with cholesterol in the target membrane [55]. These observations suggest that the promoting effect of cholesterol on membrane fusion is due to an overall change in the fluidity or physico-chemical properties of the target membrane. Although most studies were performed with TBEV and WNV, several recent studies show that DENV also has the capacity to interact and fuse with artifical membranes consisting of PC, PE, sphingolipids and cholesterol [56,57,58]. Cholesterol also plays an important role in facilitating efficient cell entry of flaviviruses as viral infectivity was found to be significantly impaired in cholesterol-depleted cells [36,59,60,61].

4.3 Role of Negatively Charged Lipids in Dengue Virus Membrane Fusion

A recent study from Zaitseva and coworkers showed that DENV may utilize anionic lipids as a cofactor during the low-pH-driven membrane fusion process of the virus [1]. The investigation, by these authors, of the lipid dependence of DENV membrane fusion was triggered by the observation that DENV does not fuse with the plasma membrane of mammalian cells under low-pH conditions whereas efficient fusion occurred with the plasma membrane of insect cells. A difference between these cell types is that insect cells have an unusually high concentration of anionic lipids in their plasma membrane. Accordingly, the authors found that addition of anionic lipids, such as bis(monoacylglycero)phosphate (BMP) and phosphatidylserine (PS), to the plasma membrane of mammalian cells facilitates low-pH-induced plasma membrane fusion of DENV. The role of anionic lipids in DENV membrane fusion was confirmed by in vitro virus-liposome fusion measurements, in which efficient membrane fusion was only observed using target membranes consisting of PC (70 mol%) and BMP or PS or phosphatidylglycerol (PG). Furthermore, anionic lipids were observed to act downstream of the formation of a restricted hemifusion intermediate and likely promote the opening of the fusion pore. Interestingly, in mammalian cells, anionic lipids are enriched in late endosomal compartments, thus this observation may also explain why DENV fusion is primarily initiated from within these compartments [37].
While the study of Zaitseva et al. is elegant and may explain a number of the characteristics of DENV cell entry, a word of caution seems justified. In earlier studies, negatively charged phospholipids have been observed to promote a number of viral membrane fusion reactions. First, PS has been suggested to serve as a receptor in cell entry of vesicular stomatitis virus [62], but more recent studies have challenged this view [63]. Furthermore, influenza virus was found to fuse quite efficiently with liposomes consisting of the anionic lipid cardiolipin in a low-pH-dependent manner [64]. However, subsequent detailed characterization of this fusion reaction revealed that it does not reflect the physiological fusion process of the virus. Specifically, the well-documented conformational change in the viral hemagglutinin (HA) turned out not to be involved [65]. Indeed, influenza virus pre-exposed to low pH in the absence of target membranes remained fusion-active with cardiolipin target liposomes [65,66], while such a low-pH pretreatment is known to result in a rapid and irreversible loss of fusion capacity—and infectivity—of the virus [66]. It thus appears that anionic lipids have a tendency to promote membrane fusion of enveloped viruses (and, for that matter, other biological membranes as well [67]), in a general, sometimes nonphysiological, manner [68]. The fact that, in the study of Zaitseva et al., several structurally different negatively charged phospholipids stimulate fusion of DENV, including lipids—such as phosphatidylglycerol (PG)—that are not present in the natural endosomal target membrane of the virus does not seem to support the notion of a highly specific cofactor role of these lipids in the process [1]. On the other hand, the experiments of Zaitseva et al. are well-designed and convincing. In particular, the observation that the anionic lipids act at a stage downstream of the formation of the hemifusion intermediate [1] is reassuring, as this localizes the role of these lipids to the cytoplasmic half of the endosomal target membrane, which is the leaflet where negatively charged phospholipids are primarily located. Further studies will be required to elucidate whether indeed anionic phospholipids represent a necessary and sufficient factor involved in infectious DENV fusion from within acidic endosomes.

5. Particle Maturation Status and Infectivity

Flavivirus-infected cells are known to secrete a mixture of mature, immature and partially mature particles. The prM quantity appears to be different between flaviviruses; whereas high numbers of prM-containing particles have been described for WNV and DENV [53,69,70,71,72,73,74,75], low numbers were observed for TBEV [76]. A recent study showed that as much as 40% of all extracellular DENV particles derived from C6/36 mosquito cells are partially immature [77]. Overall, this demonstrates that flavivirus maturation during virus egress is rather inefficient. Upon assembly of immature virions in the ER, all virus particles are transported to the Golgi apparatus [78,79,80,81,82]. Within the mildly acidic environment of the Golgi, the virion undergoes a global conformational change leading to dissociation of E/prM heterodimers and formation of 90 homodimers [58,76,83]. This conformational change allows the host protease furin to cleave prM to M and a “pr” peptide [58,76,83,84]. The pr peptide dissociates from the particle upon release of the virion to the extracellular milieu [58,76,84,85]. It appears that furin processing of prM is rather inefficient and flavivirus particles that contain uncleaved prM proteins will, after the release of the virion to the extracellular milieu, reorganize back to form prM/E heterodimers at the viral surface.
Numerous functional studies have shown that fully immature particles are noninfectious [53,58,74,75,76,83,86]. However, we and others recently demonstrated that fully immature particles can be rendered infectious by antibodies [87,88]. We observed that the lack of infectivity of fully immature particles was found to be related to inefficient binding to the cell surface [88]. Upon cell entry, immature virions are efficiently processed by furin, the pr peptide presumably being released at the low-pH environment of endosomes [85]. Whereas proteolytic cleavage of prM is a prerequisite for viral infectivity, multiple studies have shown that complete cleavage is not required for infectivity [74,75,89,90]. In partially mature particles, the mature aspect of the virion is most likely responsible for virus cell binding and entry after which the processing of prM may occur within the target cell and membrane fusion may be initiated. The threshold for viral infectivity in relation to the number of prM proteins present at the viral surface is as yet not understood.

6. Concluding Remarks

In recent years, our knowledge on the cell entry properties and membrane fusion activity of flaviviruses has improved significantly. Microscopic analysis of virus-infected cells has taught us how viruses hijack cellular pathways to deposit their genome into the host cell cytosol. Also, biochemical and structural approaches have identified important steps in the membrane fusion process of flaviviruses. The observation that viral infectivity is dependent on the maturation status of the particle is interesting and adds yet another layer of complexity to flavivirus cell entry. Future studies should be directed at a further dissection of the dynamics of flavivirus entry into human target cells and a detailed understanding of, not only the conformational changes of the E glycoprotein during membrane fusion, but also the role of target membrane lipids in the fusion process. Furthermore, given the substantial levels of prM in wt DENV, it will be crucial to gain more insight in the role of immature or partially immature virions in viral infectivity. A detailed understanding of the cell entry and membrane fusion process of flaviviruses is important and will facilitate the generation of novel antiviral drugs that prevent early steps of infection.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Pediatric Dengue Vaccine Initiative, and by the Dutch Organization for Scientific research (NWO-ALW).

References

  1. Zaitseva, E.; Yang, S.T.; Melikov, K.; Pourmal, S.; Chernomordik, L.V. Dengue virus ensures its fusion in late endosomes using compartment-specific lipids. PLoS. Pathog. 2010, 6, e1001131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. World Health Organization. Dengue fact sheet, 2009. Available online: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs117/en/ (accessed on Jan 2011).
  3. Gubler, D.J. Dengue/dengue haemorrhagic fever: history and current status. Novartis. Found. Symp. 2006, 277, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  4. Burke, D.S.; Monath, T.P. Flaviviruses. In Fields Virology; Knipe, D.M., Howley, P.M, Eds.; Lippincott Williams and Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2001; Volume 1, pp. 1043–1125. [Google Scholar]
  5. Lindenbach, B.D.; Rice, C.M. Molecular biology of flaviviruses. Adv. Virus Res. 2003, 59, 23–61. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Kuhn, R.J.; Zhang, W.; Rossmann, M.G.; Pletnev, S.V.; Corver, J.; Lenches, E.; Jones, C.T.; Mukhopadhyay, S.; Chipman, P.R.; Strauss, E.G.; Baker, T.S.; Strauss, J.H. Structure of dengue virus: implications for flavivirus organization, maturation, and fusion. Cell 2002, 108, 717–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, W.; Chipman, P.R.; Corver, J.; Johnson, P.R.; Zhang, Y.; Mukhopadhyay, S.; Baker, T.S.; Strauss, J.H.; Rossmann, M.G.; Kuhn, R.J. Visualization of membrane protein domains by cryo-electron microscopy of dengue virus. Nat. Struct. Biol. 2003, 10, 907–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rey, F.A.; Heinz, F.X.; Mandl, C.; Kunz, C.; Harrison, S.C. The envelope glycoprotein from tick-borne encephalitis virus at 2 Å resolution. Nature 1995, 375, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mukhopadhyay, S.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G. A structural perspective of the flavivirus life cycle. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2005, 3, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhang, Y.; Corver, J.; Chipman, P.R.; Zhang, W.; Pletnev, S.V.; Sedlak, D.; Baker, T.S.; Strauss, J.H.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G. Structures of immature flavivirus particles. EMBO J. 2003, 22, 2604–2613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Rodenhuis-Zybert, I.A.; Wilschut, J.; Smit, J.M. Dengue virus life cycle: viral and host factors modulating infectivity. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2010, 67, 2773–2786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chen, Y.; Maguire, T.; Hileman, R.E.; Fromm, J.R.; Esko, J.D.; Linhardt, R.J.; Marks, R.M. Dengue virus infectivity depends on envelope protein binding to target cell heparan sulfate. Nat. Med. 1997, 3, 866–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Germi, R.; Crance, J.M.; Garin, D.; Guimet, J.; Lortat-Jacob, H.; Ruigrok, R.W.; Zarski, J.P.; Drouet, E. Heparan sulfate-mediated binding of infectious dengue virus type 2 and yellow fever virus. Virology 2002, 292, 162–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hilgard, P.; Stockert, R. Heparan sulfate proteoglycans initiate dengue virus infection of hepatocytes. Hepatology 2000, 32, 1069–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Chen, H.L.; Her, S.Y.; Huang, K.C.; Cheng, H.T.; Wu, C.W.; Wu, S.C.; Cheng, J.W. Identification of a heparin binding peptide from the Japanese encephalitis virus envelope protein. Biopolymers 2010, 94, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kozlovskaya, L.I.; Osolodkin, D.I.; Shevtsova, A.S.; Romanova, L.I.; Rogova, Y.V.; Dzhivanian, T.I.; Lyapustin, V.N.; Pivanova, G.P.; Gmyl, A.P.; Palyulin, V.A.; Karganova, G.G. GAG-binding variants of tick-borne encephalitis virus. Virology 2010, 398, 262–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lee, E.; Lobigs, M. E protein domain III determinants of yellow fever virus 17D vaccine strain enhance binding to glycosaminoglycans, impede virus spread, and attenuate virulence. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 6024–6033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mandl, C.W.; Kroschewski, H.; Allison, S.L.; Kofler, R.; Holzmann, H.; Meixner, T.; Heinz, F.X. Adaptation of tick-borne encephalitis virus to BHK-21 cells results in the formation of multiple heparan sulfate binding sites in the envelope protein and attenuation in vivo. J. Virol. 2001, 75, 5627–5637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Reyes-Del, V.J.; Chavez-Salinas, S.; Medina, F.; del Angel, R.M. Heat shock protein 90 and heat shock protein 70 are components of dengue virus receptor complex in human cells. J. Virol. 2005, 79, 4557–4567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Aoki, C.; Hidari, K.I.; Itonori, S.; Yamada, A.; Takahashi, N.; Kasama, T.; Hasebe, F.; Islam, M.A.; Hatano, K.; Matsuoka, K.; et. al. Identification and characterization of carbohydrate molecules in mammalian cells recognized by dengue virus type 2. J. Biochem. 2006, 139, 607–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, Y.C.; Wang, S.Y.; King, C.C. Bacterial lipopolysaccharide inhibits dengue virus infection of primary human monocytes/macrophages by blockade of virus entry via a CD14-dependent mechanism. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 2650–2657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jindadamrongwech, S.; Thepparit, C.; Smith, D.R. Identification of GRP 78 (BiP) as a liver cell expressed receptor element for dengue virus serotype 2. Arch. Virol. 2004, 149, 915–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Thepparit, C.; Smith, D.R. Serotype-specific entry of dengue virus into liver cells: identification of the 37-kilodalton/67-kilodalton high-affinity laminin receptor as a dengue virus serotype 1 receptor. J. Virol. 2004, 78, 12647–12656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Lozach, P.Y.; Burleigh, L.; Staropoli, I.; Navarro-Sanchez, E.; Harriague, J.; Virelizier, J.L.; Rey, F.A.; Despres, P.; Renzana-Seisdedos, F.; Amara, A. Dendritic cell-specific intercellular adhesion molecule 3-grabbing non-integrin (DC-SIGN)-mediated enhancement of dengue virus infection is independent of DC-SIGN internalization signals. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 23698–23708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Navarro-Sanchez, E.; Altmeyer, R.; Amara, A.; Schwartz, O.; Fieschi, F.; Virelizier, J.L.; renzana-Seisdedos, F.; Despres, P. Dendritic-cell-specific ICAM3-grabbing non-integrin is essential for the productive infection of human dendritic cells by mosquito-cell-derived dengue viruses. EMBO Rep. 2003, 4, 723–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Tassaneetrithep, B.; Burgess, T.H.; Granelli-Piperno, A.; Trumpfheller, C.; Finke, J.; Sun, W.; Eller, M.A.; Pattanapanyasat, K.; Sarasombath, S.; Birx, D.L.; et al. DC-SIGN (CD209) mediates dengue virus infection of human dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 2003, 197, 823–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Miller, J.L.; de Wet, B.J.; Martinez-Pomares, L.; Radcliffe, C.M.; Dwek, R.A.; Rudd, P.M.; Gordon, S. The mannose receptor mediates dengue virus infection of macrophages. PLoS. Pathog. 2008, 4, e17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chen, S.T.; Lin, Y.L.; Huang, M.T.; Wu, M.F.; Cheng, S.C.; Lei, H.Y.; Lee, C.K.; Chiou, T.W.; Wong, C.H.; Hsieh, S.L. CLEC5A is critical for dengue-virus-induced lethal disease. Nature 2008, 453, 672–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mercado-Curiel, R.F.; Esquinca-Aviles, H.A.; Tovar, R.; az-Badillo, A.; Camacho-Nuez, M.; Munoz, M.L. The four serotypes of dengue recognize the same putative receptors in Aedes aegypti midgut and Ae. albopictus cells. BMC. Microbiol. 2006, 6, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yazi, M.M.; Salas-Benito, J.S.; Lanz-Mendoza, H.; Hernandez-Martinez, S.; del Angel, R.M. A putative receptor for dengue virus in mosquito tissues: localization of a 45-kDa glycoprotein. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2002, 67, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pokidysheva, E.; Zhang, Y.; Battisti, A.J.; Bator-Kelly, C.M.; Chipman, P.R.; Xiao, C.; Gregorio, G.G.; Hendrickson, W.A.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G. Cryo-EM reconstruction of dengue virus in complex with the carbohydrate recognition domain of DC-SIGN. Cell 2006, 124, 485–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Davis, C.W.; Nguyen, H.Y.; Hanna, S.L.; Sanchez, M.D.; Doms, R.W.; Pierson, T.C. West Nile virus discriminates between DC-SIGN and DC-SIGNR for cellular attachment and infection. J. Virol. 2006, 80, 1290–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Davis, C.W.; Mattei, L.M.; Nguyen, H.Y.; nsarah-Sobrinho, C.; Doms, R.W.; Pierson, T.C. The location of asparagine-linked glycans on West Nile virions controls their interactions with CD209 (dendritic cell-specific ICAM-3 grabbing nonintegrin). J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 37183–37194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Chu, J.J.; Ng, M.L. Interaction of West Nile virus with alpha v beta 3 integrin mediates virus entry into cells. J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 54533–54541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Lee, J.W.; Chu, J.J.; Ng, M.L. Quantifying the specific binding between West Nile virus envelope domain III protein and the cellular receptor alphaVbeta3 integrin. J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 1352–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Medigeshi, G.R.; Hirsch, A.J.; Streblow, D.N.; Nikolich-Zugich, J.; Nelson, J.A. West Nile virus entry requires cholesterol-rich membrane microdomains and is independent of alphavbeta3 integrin. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 5212–5219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. van der Schaar, H.M.; Rust, M.J.; Chen, C.; van der Ende. -Metselaar; Wilschut, J.; Zhuang, X.; Smit, J.M. Dissecting the cell entry pathway of dengue virus by single-particle tracking in living cells. PLoS. Pathog. 2008, 4, e1000244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ishak, R.; Tovey, D.G.; Howard, C.R. Morphogenesis of yellow fever virus 17D in infected cell cultures. J. Gen. Virol. 1988, 69, 325–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ng, M.L.; Lau, L.C. Possible involvement of receptors in the entry of Kunjin virus into Vero cells. Arch. Virol. 1988, 100, 199–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nawa, M.; Takasaki, T.; Yamada, K.; Kurane, I.; Akatsuka, T. Interference in Japanese encephalitis virus infection of Vero cells by a cationic amphiphilic drug, chlorpromazine. J. Gen. Virol. 2003, 84, 1737–1741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Chu, J.J.; Ng, M.L. Infectious entry of West Nile virus occurs through a clathrin-mediated endocytic pathway. J. Virol. 2004, 78, 10543–10555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chu, J.J.; Leong, P.W.; Ng, M.L. Analysis of the endocytic pathway mediating the infectious entry of mosquito-borne flavivirus West Nile into Aedes albopictus mosquito (C6/36) cells. Virology 2006, 349, 463–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Acosta, E.G.; Castilla, V.; Damonte, E.B. Alternative infectious entry pathways for dengue virus serotypes into mammalian cells. Cell Microbiol. 2009, 11, 1533–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Krishnan, M.N.; Sukumaran, B.; Pal, U.; Agaisse, H.; Murray, J.L.; Hodge, T.W.; Fikrig, E. Rab 5 is required for the cellular entry of dengue and West Nile viruses. J. Virol. 2007, 81, 4881–4885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Harrison, S.C. The pH sensor for flavivirus membrane fusion. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 183, 177–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Stiasny, K.; Fritz, R.; Pangerl, K.; Heinz, F.X. Molecular mechanisms of flavivirus membrane fusion. Amino Acids 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fritz, R.; Stiasny, K.; Heinz, F.X. Identification of specific histidines as pH sensors in flavivirus membrane fusion. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 183, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Nelson, S.; Poddar, S.; Lin, T.Y.; Pierson, T.C. Protonation of individual histidine residues is not required for the pH-dependent entry of west nile virus: evaluation of the "histidine switch" hypothesis. J. Virol. 2009, 83, 12631–12635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mukhopadhyay, S.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G. A structural perspective of the flavivirus life cycle. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2005, 3, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Liao, M.; Sanchez-San, M.C.; Zheng, A.; Kielian, M. In vitro reconstitution reveals key intermediate states of trimer formation by the dengue virus membrane fusion protein. J. Virol. 2010, 84, 5730–5740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Corver, J.; Ortiz, A.; Allison, S.L.; Schalich, J.; Heinz, F.X.; Wilschut, J. Membrane fusion activity of tick-borne encephalitis virus and recombinant subviral particles in a liposomal model system. Virology 2000, 269, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gollins, S.W.; Porterfield, J.S. pH-dependent fusion between the flavivirus West Nile and liposomal model membranes. J. Gen. Virol. 1986, 67, 157–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Moesker, B.; Rodenhuis-Zybert, I.A.; Meijerhof, T.; Wilschut, J.; Smit, J.M. Characterization of the functional requirements of West Nile virus membrane fusion. J. Gen. Virol. 2010, 91, 389–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Stiasny, K.; Koessl, C.; Heinz, F.X. Involvement of lipids in different steps of the flavivirus fusion mechanism. J. Virol. 2003, 77, 7856–7862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Umashankar, M.; Sanchez-San, M.C.; Liao, M.; Reilly, B.; Guo, A.; Taylor, G.; Kielian, M. Differential cholesterol binding by class II fusion proteins determines membrane fusion properties. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 9245–9253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Poh, M.K.; Yip, A.; Zhang, S.; Priestle, J.P.; Ma, N.L.; Smit, J.M.; Wilschut, J.; Shi, P.Y.; Wenk, M.R.; Schul, W. A small molecule fusion inhibitor of dengue virus. Antiviral Res. 2009, 84, 260–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Schmidt, A.G.; Yang, P.L.; Harrison, S.C. Peptide inhibitors of dengue-virus entry target a late-stage fusion intermediate. PLoS. Pathog. 2010, 6, e1000851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Yu, I.M.; Holdaway, H.A.; Chipman, P.R.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G.; Chen, J. Association of the pr peptides with dengue virus at acidic pH blocks membrane fusion. J. Virol. 2009, 83, 12101–12107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Das, S.; Chakraborty, S.; Basu, A. Critical role of lipid rafts in virus entry and activation of phosphoinositide 3' kinase/Akt signaling during early stages of Japanese encephalitis virus infection in neural stem/progenitor cells. J. Neurochem. 2010, 115, 537–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Puerta-Guardo, H.; Mosso, C.; Medina, F.; Liprandi, F.; Ludert, J.E.; del Angel, R.M. Antibody-dependent enhancement of dengue virus infection in U937 cells requires cholesterol-rich membrane microdomains. J. Gen. Virol. 2010, 91, 394–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Tani, H.; Shiokawa, M.; Kaname, Y.; Kambara, H.; Mori, Y.; Abe, T.; Moriishi, K.; Matsuura, Y. Involvement of ceramide in the propagation of Japanese encephalitis virus. J. Virol. 2010, 84, 2798–2807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Schlegel, R.; Tralka, T.S.; Willingham, M.C.; Pastan, I. Inhibition of VSV binding and infectivity by phosphatidylserine: is phosphatidylserine a VSV-binding site? Cell 1983, 32, 639–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Coil, D.A.; Miller, A.D. Phosphatidylserine is not the cell surface receptor for vesicular stomatitis virus. J. Virol. 2004, 78, 10920–10926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Stegmann, T.; Hoekstra, D.; Scherphof, G.; Wilschut, J. Kinetics of pH-dependent fusion between influenza virus and liposomes. Biochemistry 1985, 24, 3107–3113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Stegmann, T.; Hoekstra, D.; Scherphof, G.; Wilschut, J. Fusion activity of influenza virus. A comparison between biological and artificial target membrane vesicles. J. Biol. Chem. 1986, 261, 10966–10969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Stegmann, T.; Nir, S.; Wilschut, J. Membrane fusion activity of influenza virus. Effects of gangliosides and negatively charged phospholipids in target liposomes. Biochemistry 1989, 28, 1698–1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Stegmann, T.; Booy, F.P.; Wilschut, J. Effects of low pH on influenza virus. Activation and inactivation of the membrane fusion capacity of the hemagglutinin. J. Biol. Chem. 1987, 262, 17744–17749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Driessen, A.J.; Hoekstra, D.; Scherphof, G.; Kalicharan, R.D.; Wilschut, J. Low pH-induced fusion of liposomes with membrane vesicles derived from Bacillus subtilis. J. Biol. Chem. 1985, 260, 10880–10887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Anderson, R.; Wang, S.; Osiowy, C.; Issekutz, A.C. Activation of endothelial cells via antibody-enhanced dengue virus infection of peripheral blood monocytes. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 4226–4232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Cherrier, M.V.; Kaufmann, B.; Nybakken, G.E.; Lok, S.M.; Warren, J.T.; Chen, B.R.; Nelson, C.A.; Kostyuchenko, V.A.; Holdaway, H.A.; Chipman, P.R.; et al. Structural basis for the preferential recognition of immature flaviviruses by a fusion-loop antibody. EMBO J. 2009, 28, 3269–3276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. He, R.T.; Innis, B.L.; Nisalak, A.; Usawattanakul, W.; Wang, S.; Kalayanarooj, S.; Anderson, R. Antibodies that block virus attachment to Vero cells are a major component of the human neutralizing antibody response against dengue virus type 2. J. Med. Virol. 1995, 45, 451–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Putnak, R.; Cassidy, K.; Conforti, N.; Lee, R.; Sollazzo, D.; Truong, T.; Ing, E.; Dubois, D.; Sparkuhl, J.; Gastle, W.; et al. Immunogenic and protective response in mice immunized with a purified, inactivated, Dengue-2 virus vaccine prototype made in fetal rhesus lung cells. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1996, 55, 504–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Se-Thoe, S.Y.; Ng, M.M.; Ling, A.E. Retrospective study of Western blot profiles in immune sera of natural dengue virus infections. J. Med. Virol. 1999, 57, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zybert, I.A.; van der Ende-Metselaar, H.H.; Wilschut, J.; Smit, J.M. Functional importance of dengue virus maturation: infectious properties of immature virions. J. Gen. Virol. 2008, 89, 3047–3051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Randolph, V.B.; Winkler, G.; Stollar, V. Acidotropic amines inhibit proteolytic processing of flavivirus prM protein. Virology 1990, 174, 450–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Heinz, F.X.; Stiasny, K.; Puschner-Auer, G.; Holzmann, H.; Allison, S.L.; Mandl, C.W.; Kunz, C. Structural changes and functional control of the tick-borne encephalitis virus glycoprotein E by the heterodimeric association with protein prM. Virology 1994, 198, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Junjhon, J.; Edwards, T.J.; Utaipat, U.; Bowman, V.D.; Holdaway, H.A.; Zhang, W.; Keelapang, P.; Puttikhunt, C.; Perera, R.; Chipman, P.R.; et al. Influence of pr-M cleavage on the heterogeneity of extracellular dengue virus particles. J. Virol. 2010, 84, 8353–8358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Deubel, V.; Digoutte, J.P.; Mattei, X.; Pandare, D. Morphogenesis of yellow fever virus in Aedes aegypti cultured cells. II. An ultrastructural study. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1981, 30, 1071–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Hase, T.; Summers, P.L.; Eckels, K.H.; Baze, W.B. An electron and immunoelectron microscopic study of dengue-2 virus infection of cultured mosquito cells: maturation events. Arch. Virol. 1987, 92, 273–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Mackenzie, J.M.; Westaway, E.G. Assembly and maturation of the flavivirus Kunjin virus appear to occur in the rough endoplasmic reticulum and along the secretory pathway, respectively. J. Virol. 2001, 75, 10787–10799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ng, M.L. Ultrastructural studies of Kunjin virus-infected Aedes albopictus cells. J. Gen. Virol. 1987, 68, 577–582. [Google Scholar]
  82. Welsch, S.; Miller, S.; Romero-Brey, I.; Merz, A.; Bleck, C.K.; Walther, P.; Fuller, S.D.; Antony, C.; Krijnse-Locker, J.; Bartenschlager, R. Composition and three-dimensional architecture of the dengue virus replication and assembly sites. Cell Host. Microbe 2009, 5, 365–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yu, I.M.; Holdaway, H.A.; Chipman, P.R.; Kuhn, R.J.; Rossmann, M.G.; Chen, J. Structure of the immature dengue virus at low pH primes proteolytic maturation. J. Virol. 2009, 83, 12101–12107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Wengler, G.; Wengler, G. Cell-associated West Nile flavivirus is covered with E+pre-M protein heterodimers which are destroyed and reorganized by proteolytic cleavage during virus release. J. Virol. 1989, 63, 2521–2526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zheng, A.; Umashankar, M.; Kielian, M. In vitro and in vivo studies identify important features of dengue virus pr-E protein interactions. PLoS. Pathog. 2010, 6, e1001157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Stadler, K.; Allison, S.L.; Schalich, J.; Heinz, F.X. Proteolytic activation of tick-borne encephalitis virus by furin. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 8475–8481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Dejnirattisai, W.; Jumnainsong, A.; Onsirisakul, N.; Fitton, P.; Vasanawathana, S.; Limpitikul, W.; Puttikhunt, C.; Edwards, C.; Duangchinda, T.; Supasa, S.; et al. Cross-reacting antibodies enhance dengue virus infection in humans. Science 2010, 328, 745–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Rodenhuis-Zybert, I.A.; van der Schaar, H.M.; da Silva Voorham, J.; van der Ende-Metselaar, H.; Lei, H.Y.; Wilschut, J.; Smit, J.M. Immature dengue virus: a veiled pathogen? PLoS. Pathog. 2010, 6, e1000718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Junjhon, J.; Lausumpao, M.; Supasa, S.; Noisakran, S.; Songjaeng, A.; Saraithong, P.; Chaichoun, K.; Utaipat, U.; Keelapang, P.; Kanjanahaluethai, A.; et al. Differential modulation of prM cleavage, extracellular particle distribution, and virus infectivity by conserved residues at nonfurin consensus positions of the dengue virus pr-M junction. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 10776–10791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nelson, S.; Jost, C.A.; Xu, Q.; Ess, J.; Martin, J.E.; Oliphant, T.; Whitehead, S.S.; Durbin, A.P.; Graham, B.S.; Diamond, M.S.; et al. Maturation of West Nile virus modulates sensitivity to antibody-mediated neutralization. PLoS. Pathog. 2008, 4, e1000060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Smit, J.M.; Moesker, B.; Rodenhuis-Zybert, I.; Wilschut, J. Flavivirus Cell Entry and Membrane Fusion. Viruses 2011, 3, 160-171. https://doi.org/10.3390/v3020160

AMA Style

Smit JM, Moesker B, Rodenhuis-Zybert I, Wilschut J. Flavivirus Cell Entry and Membrane Fusion. Viruses. 2011; 3(2):160-171. https://doi.org/10.3390/v3020160

Chicago/Turabian Style

Smit, Jolanda M., Bastiaan Moesker, Izabela Rodenhuis-Zybert, and Jan Wilschut. 2011. "Flavivirus Cell Entry and Membrane Fusion" Viruses 3, no. 2: 160-171. https://doi.org/10.3390/v3020160

APA Style

Smit, J. M., Moesker, B., Rodenhuis-Zybert, I., & Wilschut, J. (2011). Flavivirus Cell Entry and Membrane Fusion. Viruses, 3(2), 160-171. https://doi.org/10.3390/v3020160

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop