J Gen Virol Try Microbiology Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Gen Virol 87 (2006), 2021-2029; DOI 10.1099/vir.0.81721-0

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mahapatra, M.
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mahapatra, M.
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, T.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Mahapatra, M.
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, T.
© 2006 Society for General Microbiology

Matrix protein and glycoproteins F and H of Peste-des-petits-ruminants virus function better as a homologous complex

M. Mahapatra{dagger}, S. Parida{dagger}, M. D. Baron and T. Barrett

Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey GU24 0NF, UK

Correspondence
T. Barrett
tom.barrett{at}bbsrc.ac.uk

The matrix (M) protein of paramyxoviruses forms an inner coat to the viral envelope and serves as a bridge between the surface glycoproteins (F and H) and the ribonucleoprotein core. Previously, a marker vaccine (RPV-PPRFH) was produced for the control of peste des petits ruminants (PPR) disease, where the F and H genes of Rinderpest virus (RPV) were replaced with the equivalent genes from Peste-des-petits-ruminants virus (PPRV); however, this virus grew poorly in tissue culture. The poor growth of the RPV-PPRFH chimeric virus was thought to be due to non-homologous interaction of the surface glycoproteins with the internal components of the virus, in particular with the M protein. In contrast, replacement of the M gene of RPV with that from PPRV did not have an effect on the viability or replication efficiency of the recombinant virus. Therefore, in an effort to improve the growth of the RPV-PPRFH virus, a triple chimera (RPV-PPRMFH) was made, where the M, F and H genes of RPV were replaced with those from PPRV. As expected, the growth of the triple chimera was improved; it grew to a titre as high as that of the unmodified PPRV, although comparatively lower than that of the parental RPV virus. Goats infected with the triple chimera showed no adverse reaction and were protected from subsequent challenge with wild-type PPRV. The neutralizing-antibody titre on the day of challenge was ~17 times higher than that in the RPV-PPRFH group, indicating RPV-PPRMFH as a promising marker-vaccine candidate.

{dagger}These authors contributed equally to this work.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Gen. Virol.Home page
S. Parida, M. Mahapatra, S. Kumar, S. C. Das, M. D. Baron, J. Anderson, and T. Barrett
Rescue of a chimeric rinderpest virus with the nucleocapsid protein derived from peste-des-petits-ruminants virus: use as a marker vaccine
J. Gen. Virol., July 1, 2007; 88(7): 2019 - 2027.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL MICROBIOLOGY J GEN VIROL
J MED MICROBIOL ALL SGM JOURNALS
Copyright © 2006 by the Society for General Microbiology.