|
|
||||||||
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and in some cases by IFN-
ß or bacterial LPS. This induction
pattern implicates these putative GTPases as part of the innate defense
of cells to infection, but their role in such defense has not yet been
defined. We have previously described the cloning of TGTP and now
confirm its intrinsic activity as a GTPase. We found that TGTP is
strongly induced by endogenous IFN-
ß produced in response to
standard lipofection of plasmid DNA or polyinosinic polycytidilic acid.
The ability of endogenously produced IFN-
ß to efficiently induce
expression of TGTP under these conditions suggested that TGTP might
participate in defense against viral infection. This proposal was borne
out when TGTP-transfected L cells displayed relative resistance to
plaque formation by vesicular stomatitis virus but not herpes simplex
virus. This observation places TGTP among a small family of innate
antiviral agents and has implications for the functions of other
members of this family of GTPases. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-treated
macrophages (2). These authors designated their clone Mg21
and demonstrated that it was an immediate-early
(IE)4 gene of IFN-
in macrophages.
TGTP/Mg21 had one relative in the sequence databases designated IRG-47.
IRG-47 was described as an IFN-
-inducible gene encoding a protein
with a putative GTP-binding domain. IRG-47 was expressed predominantly
in cell lines of B cell and fibroblast origin (3). Since
these publications, two more IFN-inducible relatives have been
described in macrophages, including LRG 47 and IGTP. LRG-47 was shown
to be induced by LPS and both type I IFN-
ß and type II IFN-
(4). IGTP was induced by LPS and IFN-
and its GTPase
activity were confirmed in vitro (5). Of the data so far
reported for this emerging gene family, members share approximately 47
kDa size, 25 to 40% amino acid identity, GTPase signature motifs, and
IFN-
inducibility. Indeed TGTP/Mg21, IGTP, and IRG-47 were shown to
be IE genes of IFN-
in macrophages and B cell lines, respectively.
Expression of these members was not induced by other cytokines tested,
including IL-2, -4, -10, and TNF-
, (TGTP/Mg21) (2), or
IL-1, -2, -4, -6, TNF-
, and granulocyte-macrophage-CSF (LRG47)
(4), reinforcing the view that these molecules function
primarily in response to IFN-
and therefore contribute to the innate
response to bacterial infections. However, the function of this family
of IFN-
-induced molecules remains unresolved.
The importance of IFNs in host defense against viral and bacterial
pathogens was clearly demonstrated by the increased susceptibility to
viral and bacterial challenge in mice lacking the capacity to respond
to type I (6) and type II (7, 8) IFNs,
respectively (9). IFN-
is known to influence the
expression of over 240 genes that fall into approximately 37 functional
categories (10). It has been proposed that this extensive
response to IFN-
reflects the induction of four major genetic
programs that collectively regulate immunity and promote the
elimination of infectious agents (7, 8, 10). These
programs include the regulation of cytokine networks governing T and B
cell differentiation, activation of phagocytic processes in macrophages
and neutrophils, enhancement of Ag presentation, and direct antiviral
activity (10). The genetic/functional complexity of the
response to IFN-
is impressive, but is also a confounding factor in
the assignment of function to novel IFN-induced genes.
In this report, we confirm that TGTP is indeed a GTPase. We show that
despite the rapid kinetics of TGTP RNA induction observed after TCR
cross-linking (2 to 3 h) (1), the induction is
nevertheless mediated by IFN-
. IFN-
is one of the most rapidly
induced IE genes induced upon TCR stimulation (11) and, as
in macrophages (2), TGTP is an IE gene of IFN-
in T
cells. Several observations directed our investigations toward the
possible association of TGTP with viral defense. First, TGTP was found
to be IFN inducible in cells lines of diverse lineages, including those
derived from both hemopoeitic and non-hemopoeitc tissues; TGTP
expression was not limited to phagocytic populations or T/B lineages.
Second, although exogenous IFN-
ß was a weak inducer of TGTP,
lipofection of plasmid DNA or poly(I:C) efficiently induced high levels
of TGTP and the induction was mediated by IFN-
ß. IFN-
ß is a
primary mediator of antiviral defense mechanisms. Third, difficulties
in obtaining stable transfectants of TGTP suggested that expression of
TGTP protein was tolerated poorly. This was consistent with possible
antiviral activity insofar as interference with protein synthesis is an
activity displayed by other known innate antiviral mechanisms,
including dsRNA-dependent protein kinase (PKR) (12), the
2-5A synthetase and RNase L systems, and dsRNA-specific adensoine
deaminase (dsRAD) (13, 14). Fourth, the only other
functionally defined IFN-induced GTPase is Mx, an IFN-
ß-induced 70
to 80-kDa molecule with potent antiviral activity against a set of
negative strand RNA viruses (15). We therefore examined
whether TGTP transfection conferred a virus-resistant phenotype using
the negative strand RNA virus, vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV). We
obtained evidence that forced expression of TGTP conferred an antiviral
state for the negative strand RNA virus, VSV, but not the DNA virus,
Herpes. Thus TGTP functions as a new mediator of innate
antiviral immunity and may thereby implicate other members of the
aforementioned family of GTPases in viral defense.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B34 is a mouse IgG1 mAb generated against TGTP-GST fusion
protein as described below and is specific for TGTP. XMG 1.2 is a
neutralizing anti-IFN-
Ab (16) and 145-2C11 is a
mAb specific for CD3
(17). Composite
anti-IFN-
ß was obtained from Research Diagnostics
(Flanders, NJ).
Cell culture and IFN
L cells were cultured in Iscoves modified MEM (I medium) (Life
Technologies, Burlington, Ont., Canada) supplemented with 10% FCS; I
medium was used for all tissue culture. TGTP was induced in cultured
cells by supplementing medium with IFNs. Commercial supplies of IFN-
(ICN, Montreal, Que., Canada) and IFN-
(PharMingen, Mississauga,
Ont., Canada) were used as well as IFN-
-containing supernatants (SN)
from Con A-stimulated spleen cells (Con A SN) generated in house. The
TGTP-inducing activity of Con A SN was blocked by the
IFN-
-neutralizing Ab XMG1.2 (data not shown) and was thus considered
to be mediated entirely by IFN-
present in the supernatant.
Generation of B34 mAb
Mice were immunized with TGTP-GST in Titremax (Cedarlane, Hornby, Ontario, Canada) on day 0 in both hind footpads, boosted with Ag in PBS on days 4, 8, and 12, and lymphocytes from popliteal, inguinal, and paraortic lymph nodes were fused lymphocytes with the non-Ig-producing myeloma cell line, AG865.3, on day 13. After fusion, cells were incubated overnight, harvested, and cultured with I medium, including 10% FCS and 1x hypoxanthine/aminopterin/thymidine in half-area plates 100 µl/well. Wells were scored for single colonies after 1 wk and transferred to 24-well plates in 1x hypoxanthine/thymidine (HT) medium. Supernatants were screened by their capacity to detect TGTP-GST in ELISA assays, and reactivity of putative clones was subsequently confirmed by Western blotting. The B34 Ab was able to detect TGTP by Western blotting and could also be used to quantitatively immunoprecipitate TGTP from cell lysates.
Western blotting
Blots were generated and probed using standard methods. Briefly
cells were washed in PBS and lysed at
5 x 107/ml on
ice in buffer containing 20 mM Tris 7.5, 0.15 M NaCl, 0.5% Triton
X-100, 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 µg/ml leupeptin, and 174 µg/ml
PMSF. Lysates were mixed by rotation for 30 min at 4°C and spun 20
min at 4°C at top speed in an Eppendorf centrifuge. The supernatant
was collected and combined with Laemmli sample buffer and loaded into
minigels (BioRad, Richmond, CA) with a 4% stacking gel and 10%
resolving gel. Resolved proteins were transferred to PVDF (Millipore,
Nepean, Ont., Canada) membrane that was subsequently blocked with 5%
BSA in TBS (8.76 g NaCl + 6.06 g Tris base (pH 8.0) per
liter). Blots were probed with B34 diluted in TBS containing 0.5% BSA
and 0.5% Tween 80 (Fisher, Nepean, Ont., Canada) for 60 min. Blots
were washed, bound B34 was detected with goat-anti-mouse-Ig-HRP
(Southern Biotech, Birmingham, AL), washed, and developed with enhanced
chemiluminescence reagent (Amersham, Oakville, Ont., Canada) for
autoradiography with Hyperfilm (Amersham) according to the
manufacturers instructions.
Northern blots
Northern blots were prepared as described previously (1). Cyclohexamide was used at 50 µg/ml to prevent protein synthesis.
GST fusion protein cloning, purification, and analysis
TGTP was digested with the restriction enzyme NcoI
that cleaves just 5' of the initiating ATG codon and again at 145 bp
after the polyadenylation signal of the TGTP cDNA. The NcoI
fragment was blunt ended with Klenow and ligated to the
BamHI linearized, blunt ended, and dephosphorylated pGEX-KT
vector (American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA). Transformants
of DH5
were selected that had incorporated TGTP insertions in
either + or - orientations for preparation of fusion protein
from bacterial lysates. Bacteria were grown in Luria Bertani broth
supplemented with ampicillin to OD600 0.8 to 1.0. IPTG was
added to 100 µM and the culture shifted to 26°C for 6 to 10 h.
Bacteria were then pelleted and lysed on ice for 30 min in lysis buffer
(50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 1 µg/ml
aprotinin, 1 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 mM PMSF, 1 mg/ml lysozyme, and 100
µg/ml DNase I). The lysate was clarified by ultracentrifugation for
45 min (50,000 x g), aliquoted, and frozen at
-70°C. Fusion protein was purified with glutathione Sepharose 4B
(Pharmacia, Baie dUrfe, Que., Canada) according to the
manufacturers instructions. Briefly, glutathione Sepharose slurry was
washed three times in wash buffer (bacterial lysis buffer containing
0.1% Triton and lacking lysozyme and DNase I). Glutathione Sepharose
was incubated with 10 volumes of lysate for 60 min with constant gentle
mixing. After adsorption, the beads were gently spun and washed three
times. Beads were rinsed one to two times with 75 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 150
mM NaCl, and 0.1% Triton (HNT) and could be stored for short periods
on ice in HNT including 10% glycerol. GST and TGTP-GST proteins were
eluted from glutathione Sepharose with 10 mM reduced glutathione
(Sigma, Mississauga, Ont., Canada) in 75 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl,
5 mM DTT, and 0.1% Triton X-100 for 20 min with constant mixing and
then separated from the Sepharose by centrifugation. GST and TGTP-GST
were subsequently quantitated by gel electrophoresis against purified
albumin control reagents, resuspended to 2 mg/ml, and titrated into the
GTPase reaction in MKH buffer, including trace
[
-32P]GTP and 150 mM cold GTP in MKH buffer (20 mM
HEPES, pH 7.4, 50 mM KCl, and 4 mM MgCl2). Five microliters
of packed beads were then resuspended in reaction buffer (MKH).
Hexokinase (Sigma) in the presence of glucose served as a control for
the enzymatic hydrolysis of GTP. The GTPase reaction was conducted at
room temperature for 30 min. Longer incubations did not yield greater
GTP hydrolysis. Hydrolysis was evaluated by TLC on TLC plates
(Aldrich, Milwaukee, WI) in 1 M
KH2PO4 buffer (pH 3.4) and autoradiography.
Transfections
L cells were seeded with 5 x 105/well (6-well plates) or 105/well (24-well plates) and cultured overnight. Lipofectamine (Life Technologies) transfections were conducted according to the manufacturers instructions. Unless otherwise indicated, three milligrams of DNA per 100 µl OPTI-MEM (Life Technologies) were mixed with 14 µl Lipofectamine/100 µl OPTI-MEM for 30 min. Opti-MEM was then added to a final volume of 1 ml and lipid DNA mixtures were added to subconfluent L cell cultures, 1 ml/well of a six-well tissue culture plate, or 200 µl/well of 24-well plates, and incubated 2 to 3 h at 37°C. The lipid-DNA solution was then discarded and I medium with 10% FCS was added for 24 h unless otherwise indicated. For transient expression, cells were assessed by Western blot. To isolate stable transfectants, Geneticin (Life Technologies) was added to the culture (900 µg/ml) until all untransfected control cells were killed. Cultures were then allowed to recover for 2 to 3 days and cloned at 0.7 cells/well or by colony, picking by hand 4 to 5 days later.
VSV/herpes challenges
Stocks of VSV Indiana (generously supplied by Dr. Gregor Ried and Dr. Wilf Jeffries; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada) and herpes simplex strain IF (HSV) (generously provided by Dr. Frank Tufaro; University of British Columbia) were diluted in PBS + 1% FCS and applied to monolayers of control L cells and transfectants for 60 min at room temperature. After infection, the diluted solutions of virus were discarded and replaced with 2 ml of either I medium with 2% FCS and 0.9% agarose at 45°C for VSV, or I medium with 2% FCS and 0.1% human IgG fraction II (ICN, Montreal, Canada) for HSV. Plates were incubated for 1 or 3 days, respectively, when plaque formation was evaluated with 0.1% neutral red staining solution in I medium containing 2% FCS) for 2 h at 37°C.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|

TGTP was previously shown to be induced by TCR cross-linking in
thymocytes. This induction was both rapid, RNA expression occurring
within 2.5 h of stimulation, and intense. The tempo of induction
and the apparent T cell-restricted distribution of TGTP in ex vivo
tissue suggested that TGTP was an early response gene of T cell
activation (1). Lafuse et al. cloned TGTP (designated
Mg21) independently from a cDNA library generated from IFN-
-treated
macrophages (2). Their data together with the IFN-
inducibility reported for other TGTP relatives IRG-47 (3)
and LRG-47 (4) led to a reexamination of inducibility of
TGTP in T cells by IFN-
. TGTP induction by IFN-
and anti-TCR
Ab 2C11 were compared in thymocytes and lymph node cells as shown in
Figure 1
. As noted previously, TGTP
expression was low/undetectable in cultured thymocytes (1)
but was induced in thymocytes exposed to anti-TCR Ab 2C11. TGTP was
also efficiently induced in lymph node cells exposed to 2C11. When
IFN-
was substituted for 2C11 in the culture, TGTP was also
efficiently induced. When neutralizing anti-IFN-
Ab XMG-1.2 was
included in the thymocyte cultures exposed to either 2C11 or IFN-
,
TGTP induction was blocked. This pattern of inhibition was observed for
lymph node cells as well, but the effects of XMG-1.2 were less
pronounced. Thus neutralizing Ab to IFN-
prevented the TGTP
induction in thymocytes induced by anti-TCR Ab. These results
demonstrated that in thymocytes TGTP protein was indeed inducible with
IFN-
and, moreover, that the induction of TGTP protein by TCR
cross-linking was mediated by extracellular IFN-
produced during the
24-h culture period. Since TGTP RNA was rapidly induced in thymocytes
within the 0- to 2.5-h window after TCR cross-linking (1),
and since this induction was mediated by IFN-
(Fig. 1
),
IFN-
-induced expression of TGTP must have been rapid indeed. To
examine whether TGTP displayed the properties of an IE gene we examined
whether the transcriptional induction of TGTP RNA by IFN-
utilized
preformed transcription factors that could function independent of
protein synthesis as had been reported for TGTP expression in
macrophages by Lafuse et al. (2). As shown in Figure 2
, Northern blotting of RNA from
thymocytes treated in the presence or absence of the protein synthesis
inhibitor cyclohexamide confirmed that the induction of TGTP RNA by
anti-TCR Ab required protein synthesis whereas TGTP induction by
IFN-
did not. These results confirmed that TGTP is an IE gene of
IFN-
in T cells. IFN-
was able to induce TGTP in all cell lines
examined to date, including L cells, fibroblasts (primary embryonic,
National Institutes of Health 3T3), LPS-stimulated B cell blasts, T
cells, macrophages and macrophage cell lines (J774, P388D1, RAW 264.7),
and P815 mastocytoma (data not shown).
|
|
Despite the presence of the GTP nucleotide-binding motifs in the
predicted amino acid sequence of all members of the aforementioned
IFN-
-induced gene family, the GTPase activity of these molecules has
been confirmed for only IGTP (5). To evaluate whether TGTP
displayed GTPase activity, the full length cDNA was subcloned into the
expression vector pGEX-KT so as to generate a TGTP-GST fusion protein.
Recombinant TGTP-GST fusion protein purified by glutathione Sepharose
chromatography from bacterial lysates was mixed with
[
-32P]GTP for 30 min. The reaction was then analyzed
by TLC to resolve GTP and the hydrolysis product, GDP. As shown in
Figure 3
, GTPase activity was observed
with the TGTP-GST fusion protein but not GST alone, confirming that
TGTP exhibits GTPase activity. The high purity of fusion protein
generated by glutathione Sepharose chromatography suggested that the
GTPase activity observed was intrinsic to TGTP and did not require the
additional activity of a GTPase-activating protein.
|

Although IFNs display some overlapping activities, results
obtained with mice lacking the capacity to respond to either IFN-
ß
or IFN-
indicate that IFN-
is primarily involved with defense
against bacterial and parasitic infections whereas IFN-
/ß is
primarily involved in the elimination of viral infections. Thus, it was
of interest to clarify whether TGTP was inducible by IFN-
alone or
also by type I IFNs. Initial experiments exemplified in Figure 4
indicated that IFN-
was a weak
inducer of TGTP in L cells; 103 antiviral units of IFN-
were required to induce levels of TGTP comparable with 1 U of IFN-
.
Similar differences in efficacy were observed for thymocytes and spleen
cells (data not shown). Given the apparent differences in potency of
IFN-
over IFN-
, and the possibility that high concentrations of
IFN-
might engage IFN-
signaling pathways (18),
these results suggested that TGTP was primarily an IFN-
response
gene and thus likely to be associated with bacterial clearance
mechanisms. However, after initial failures to isolate stable TGTP
transfectants, we began to investigate use of transient transfection by
lipofection and observed that lipofection of irrelevant plasmid DNA
efficiently induced TGTP in L cells.
|
, given the stromal tissue origin of L cells, and
the sources of IFN-
are generally considered to be T cells and NK
cells. To analyze the nature of this induction further, lipofected T
cells were washed to remove nonadsorbed lipid:DNA complexes and
cultured for 36 h. Supernatants from such cultures were able to
induce TGTP in previously untreated L cells demonstrating that a
soluble factor was produced by lipofected cells that could trigger TGTP
synthesis (data not shown). Furthermore, lipofected cultures displayed
elevated expression of class I MHC (data not shown). These results
suggested that IFN-
ß might mediate TGTP induction after
lipofection since type I IFNs are soluble factors and can induce class
I major histocompatibility Ags efficiently.
|
ß Abs, whereas
TGTP induction by IFN-
was not blocked. The relative contributions
and efficacy of IFN-
vs IFN-ß in stimulating TGTP induction upon
lipofection of L cells was not elucidated, but given the stromal origin
of L cells, we considered that the soluble factor induced by lipofected
DNA was likely to be IFN-ß. The data shown in Figure 5
in L cells. The induction of TGTP by
poly(I:C) was similarly dependent on the presence of lipid and the
induction was similarly blocked by anti-IFN-
ß (data not
shown). These results collectively demonstrated that under appropriate
conditions TGTP is produced at high levels in cells exposed to both
type I and type II IFNs. The capacity of endogenously produced
IFN-
ß to induce TGTP reinforced the possibility that TGTP might
participate in the response to type I IFNs, specifically in viral
defense. We therefore sought to determine whether cell lines
transfected with TGTP exhibited altered sensitivity to virus
challenge. Transfection of TGTP cDNA
The use of transient transfection as a strategy to evaluate
effects of TGTP expression on cell phenotype was complicated by the
concurrent induction of, and response to, IFN-
ß produced by
lipofected cells (described above). Initial efforts to isolate stable
TGTP transfectants failed. TGTP cDNA was cloned into the expression
vector pEF-BOS (19) and cotransfected with a
neor-containing vector at a ratio of 3:1 to 10:1
by lipofection into L cells. TGTP expression was assessed by Western
blotting cell lysates or by intracellular staining of TGTP and single
cell analysis by flow cytometry. Stable transfectants of TGTP were
difficult to obtain despite the fact that 1) pEF-BOS vector-directed
TGTP expression could be confirmed, and 2) stable transfectants of both
neo and ßGal vectors were isolated at high frequency. The vast
majority of clones that expressed significant levels of TGTP upon
primary screening after G418 selection and cloning lost expression of
TGTP. Those that did maintain significant expression long enough for
further analysis were unstable and lost TGTP expression over time. One
clone (clone 2) expressed relatively high levels of TGTP and was a
focus of further analysis. Subclones were isolated and were represented
by clones that expressed (e.g., 2.2+, 2.3+),
and those that did not express (e.g., 2.18-), TGTP. Clone
2.3+ was the highest and most stable TGTP expressor
isolated to date. As shown in Figure 6
,
the level of TGTP expressed by 2.3+ was substantially lower
than that observed in L cells treated with IFN-
. The expression of
TGTP in transfectants was a consequence of vector-driven transcription
and not an artifact of endogenous gene transcription stimulated by IFN
since coculture of the TGTP expressors with untransfected L cells
failed to induce expression of TGTP in the latter (data not shown).
|
The initial investigation of antiviral activity of TGTP was partly
motivated by the previous precedent, Mx. Mx proteins of Mus
musculus (Mx1) and Homo sapiens (MxA) have been
identified as IFN-
ß-induced GTPases shown to possess intrinsic
antiviral activity against certain negative strand RNA viruses such as
influenza and VSV (15, 20, 21). To evaluate the potential
role of TGTP in viral defense, TGTP transfectants were challenged with
either the negative strand RNA virus, VSV, or the DNA virus, HSV.
Plaque formation was scored after 1 or 3 days, respectively, according
to standard methodology. When TGTP transfectants were challenged with
VSV and HSV, as shown in Figure 7
, clone
2.2+ and 2.3+ displayed a VSVr
HSVs-sensitive phenotype, whereas clone 2.18-
and untransfected L cells supported plaque formation by both viruses.
Other transfectants of TGTP-pEF-BOS expressing lower levels of TGTP
were more susceptible to plaque formation by VSV. TGTP expression
levels on 2.2+ and 2.3+ diminished with time in
culture and the reduction in TGTP expression was paralleled by an
increase in VSV susceptibility (data not shown). The correlation
between relatively high TGTP expression and VSVr was
reproduced in two additional independent clones. VSVr
properties were not observed among TGTP- or
TGTPlow clones analyzed. Finally, the expression of
relatively high levels of TGTP, although still lower than that observed
after IFN-
treatment, was also associated with a reduced growth rate
that was most evident as cells reached confluence. Since a small
proportion of L cell clones not expressing TGTP displayed similar low
growth rate, the significance of this observation is presently
unresolved.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The mechanism of TGTPs activity against VSV has not been evaluated
experimentally. As TGTP expression declined with time in culture,
plaque formation in L cell transfectants became progressively more
pronounced. The apparent instability of TGTP expression together with
the reduced growth rate of TGTP high expressors may be relevant to the
VSVr phenotype as most known antiviral mechanisms have the
capacity to inhibit protein synthesis. However, it could be argued that
the expression of TGTP, or indeed of any transfected gene, might
adversely affect cell homeostasis with concomitant deleterious effects
that might in turn nonspecifically interfere with VSV replication or
cell growth. Several arguments can be made against the possibility that
the VSV inhibition observed was a consequence of nonspecific effects of
TGTP protein "toxicity." First, levels of TGTP expressed in
"stable" transfectants were in all cases substantially lower than
that observed in IFN-treated cells. Thus, the levels of expression
directed by pEF-BOS were not likely to be "toxic" for reasons of
nonphysiologic excess production. Second, there appears to be a level
of specificity in the influence of TGTP insofar as HSV replication was
not observably affected in 2.3+ transfectants that were
resistant to VSV. One might have expected that a "toxic"
perturbation in cell integrity engendered by TGTP expression would
interfere with HSV and VSV equally. Finally, there is precedent that
IFN-
ß
-induced activities can impede both cell growth
(22) and viral replication, including the action of PKR
(12) and 2-5A/RNase systems (23, 24).
Furthermore, these antiviral agents also have a degree of viral
specificity as they can display greater inhibitory activity against
some viruses more than others (13, 25, 26).
The inhibitory activities of IFN against VSV are numerous; IFNs are known to block VSV at multiple levels including transcription, translation, and late stages of virus assembly/release (13, 25). The molecular basis of IFN-induced antiviral activities in general are thought to include PKR, 2-5A/RNase L, double-stranded RNA-specific adenosine deaminase (dsRAD), and Mx. PKR is a protein kinase activated by dsRNA that phosphorylates eIF2, thereby inhibiting translation and protein synthesis (12). 2-5A activity is similarly activated by dsRNA and generates poly(A) oligonucleotides that stimulate mRNA degradation by activating RNAse L and thus inhibits protein synthesis (27). dsRAD is also type I/II IFN inducible (14) and may interfere with viral replication via conversion of adenosine to inosine in dsRNA leading to untranslatable messages that are targeted by inosine-specific RNAses (28). In summary, although expression of TGTP in transfected L cells might disturb homeostasis, thereby nonspecifically inhibiting cell growth, and, secondarily, VSV replication, there is precedent for antiviral systems whose actions directly interfere with cellular protein synthesis, which can inhibit cellular growth, and whose actions have a degree of viral specificity.
Mx is not known to exhibit antiproliferative activity or to be
regulated directly by dsRNA but is expressed in response to
IFN-
ß induced by dsRNA. The antiviral activity of the
IFN-induced Mx (15) is also restricted to a subset of
negative strand RNA viruses and may be relevant to the antiviral action
of TGTP. Mxs precise mechanism of antiviral action is unresolved
despite a decade of investigation since its initial
cloning/transfection (20), but is thought to block viral
RNA synthesis through association with viral RNA polymerase
(15). Mx may therefore stand apart from the aforementioned
antiviral mechanisms in that its specificity for a viral product may
preserve the host cell protein synthetic machinery. Murine Mx, Mx1, is
induced only by type I IFNs and interferes with a relatively narrow
range of viruses, including influenza (20), Thogoto, and
Dhori viruses (29). In contrast to TGTP, which is induced
by IFN in cell lines of diverse mouse origin, murine Mx1 is absent in
most common laboratory mouse strains (20).
The human version of Mx, MxA, is induced primarily by type I IFN, but
also by IFN-
. MxA interferes with a larger set of negative strand
RNA viruses including influenza (21, 30), VSV
(21), Hantaan, Lacrosse, Rift Valley fever, Sandfly, human
papilloma, Thogoto, and measles viruses (31). MxB is also
expressed in humans (32) and is related to MxA although
its antiviral action has not yet been established. What makes Mx
antiviral function more enigmatic is its genetic relationship with
dynamin and Vps1 (33) that appear to serve housekeeping
roles in endocytosis (34, 35) and yeast vacuole protein
transport (36), respectively. Because of the genetic
relationships between Mx, dynamin, and Vps1 we examined the subcellular
distribution of TGTP to determine whether it would colocalize to either
endosomal or lysosomal compartments. We observed that TGTP is
distributed in a punctate cytoplasmic pattern and on perinuclear
vesicular structures, but neither of these structures colocalized with
either the endocytic pathway (Texas red-conjugated OVA, 4 h) or
the lysosomal compartment (lysosomal glycoprotein-specific lectin from
Datura stramonium (lgp-FITC conjugate) (37))
(data not shown). Like MxA, TGTP and IGTP are cytoplasmic and exhibit
readily detectable GTPase activity in vitro (15). MxA is
localized in the cytoplasm whereas murine Mx1 is localized in the
nucleus. Thus the Mx gene family contains substantial diversity of
function including both antiviral action and housekeeping roles. It
will be of interest to see whether other GTPase family members, LRG-47,
IRG-47, and IGTP, share common antiviral activity and to identify the
relevant TGTP-associated subcellular compartments.
The capacity of other molecules, such as the bacterial product LPS, to
induce TGTP expression could provide insight into TGTP function. LPS
was shown to induce both LRG-47 (4) and IGTP
(5). In contrast, LPS not only failed to induce TGTP/Mg21,
but blocked TGTP/Mg21 mRNA induction in peritoneal macrophages assessed
6 h after treatment with IFN-
(2). The failure of
LPS to induce TGTP/Mg21 in macrophages was unexpected insofar as
previous work has shown that LPS can induce type I IFN in macrophages
(38) and fibroblasts (39), and we have shown
here that IFN-
ß can induce TGTP in L cells. The failure of LPS to
induce TGTP/Mg21 in macrophages (2) and B cells (our
unpublished observations) may suggest that its function is less heavily
associated with the response to bacterial pathogens. Alternatively, it
is also possible that LPS might up-regulate TGTP/Mg21 at a later time
point than that seen for either IGTP (3 h) or LRG-47 (48 h).
We have shown that TGTP is induced under conditions in which cells are
stimulated to produce either IFN-
(anti-TCR-stimulated T cells)
or IFN-
ß (L cells lipofected with plasmid DNA or the RNA analogue
poly(I:C). The induction of TGTP in L cells by plasmid DNA or the RNA
analogue poly(I:C) required both lipid and nucleic acid, may be
perceived as a viral infection, and was mediated by endogenously
produced IFN-
ß. IFN-
ß is induced primarily by viral infection
and, to a lesser degree, by products of bacteria and parasites
(40). Although able to induce some mediators of parasitic
defense such as indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO), IFN-
ß is most
effective at inhibition of viral infection (40). IFN
induction with bacterial DNA or poly(I:C) has been previously
documented, but the mechanism by which plasmid DNA or poly(I:C) induces
IFN is unresolved. Hypomethylated CpG motifs in bacterial DNA appear to
be required for either accessing the cytoplasm and/or direct activation
of signaling cascades that ultimately promote IFN transcription
(41). Whatever the sensor and signaling process, detection
of nucleic acids results in transcriptional activation of IFN-
ß in
macrophages and dendritic cells (41, 42) or IFN-
in NK
cells, CD4+ T cells, and B cells (41, 43, 44).
The capacity of lipofection to deliver plasmid DNA and/or poly(I:C) and
induce IFN-
ß in L cells demonstrates that this response pathway is
available in nonphagocytic, nonhemopoeitic cell lineages. Thus, of the
family of IFN-induced GTPases described above, LRG-47 (4)
and TGTP/Mg21 are confirmed IFN-
ß
response genes. Among the
30+ functional categories of genes regulated by IFN,
those that respond to IFN-
ß
include those involved in Ag
presentation (class I MHC, ß2-microglobulin, chaperone),
cell death (Fas/FasL, TNFRI/II), inhibition of protein synthesis (IDO,
tryptophanyl tRNA synthetase), adhesion (integrins, intercellular
adhesion molecule, vascular cell adhesion molecule), as well as direct
antiviral actions (PKR, 2-5A synthetase, dsRAD, MxA) (10).
Our data suggest that TGTP be included in the latter group.
One aspect of TGTP induction that remains unaccounted for relates to
its function as an IE gene of IFN-
. The substantial IFN-
-induced
IE expression of TGTP reported here and by Lafuse et al.
(2) suggest a prominent role of TGTP in the response to
IFN-
. The results with type I vs type II IFN knockout mice suggest
that there exists a division of labor between these IFN species;
IFN-
ß generally governs resistance to viral challenge whereas
IFN-
generally governs resistance to bacterial and parasitic
infection (9). How to accommodate the IE response to
IFN-
and the putative antiviral activity of TGTP, given the apparent
division of labor among the IFNs, is not readily obvious. In this
context, it is quite possible that the inhibitory activity of TGTP on
VSV plaque formation reflects more general anticellular TGTP function
that HSV has managed to circumvent. That some viruses (e.g., vaccinia,
Theiler) display significantly greater replicative success in IFN-
knockout mice relative to wild-type mice illustrates that IFN-
can
contribute significantly to viral defense. Further enhancement of virus
susceptibility (e.g., vaccinia) in mice deficient in response to
IFN-
ß
vs IFN-
ß alone demonstrates nonoverlapping effects
of these IFNs in viral defense (9) and may provide a
rational explanation for efficient induction of TGTP by IFN-
.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
2 Current address: Biomedical Research Center, 2222 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T-1Z3. E-mail address: ![]()
3 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Hung-Sia Teh, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of British Columbia, 6174 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z3. E-mail address: ![]()
4 Abbreviations used in this paper: IE, immediate-early; VSV, vesicular stomatitis virus; SN, supernatant; HSV, herpes simplex virus; poly(I:C), polyinosinic polycytidilic acid; IDO, indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase; PKR, double-standed RNA-dependent protein kinase; dsRAD, double-stranded RNA-specific adenosine deaminase. ![]()
Received for publication February 25, 1998. Accepted for publication April 30, 1998.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-induced in mouse peritoneal macrophages and encodes a putative GTP-binding protein. J. Leukocyte Biol. 57:477.[Abstract]
receptor. Science 259:1742.
genes. Science 259:1739.
. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 15:749.[Medline]
and
interferons. Virology 210:508.[Medline]
interferon receptor and for signalling. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:2048.[Abstract]
and interferon
. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:7673.
, IFN-
, MxA, and IFN regulatory factor 1 genes in influenza A virus-infected human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. J. Immunol. 154:2764.[Abstract]
interferon induce transcription of beta interferon mRNA and interferon secretion in murine macrophages. J. Virol. 1989:2785.
. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:2879.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
F. Arakura, S. Hida, E. Ichikawa, C. Yajima, S. Nakajima, T. Saida, and S. Taki Genetic Control Directed toward Spontaneous IFN-{alpha}/IFN-beta Responses and Downstream IFN-{gamma} Expression Influences the Pathogenesis of a Murine Psoriasis-Like Skin Disease J. Immunol., September 1, 2007; 179(5): 3249 - 3257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Mastronardi, F. Whelan, O. A. Yildiz, J. Hannestad, D. Elashoff, S. M. McCann, J. Licinio, and M.-L. Wong Caspase 1 deficiency reduces inflammation-induced brain transcription PNAS, April 24, 2007; 104(17): 7205 - 7210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. E. Baranzini, C. C. A. Bernard, and J. R. Oksenberg Modular Transcriptional Activity Characterizes the Initiation and Progression of Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis J. Immunol., June 1, 2005; 174(11): 7412 - 7422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Rempel, L. A. Quina, P. K. Blakely-Gonzales, M. J. Buchmeier, and D. L. Gruol Viral Induction of Central Nervous System Innate Immune Responses J. Virol., April 1, 2005; 79(7): 4369 - 4381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Martens, K. Sabel, R. Lange, R. Uthaiah, E. Wolf, and J. C. Howard Mechanisms Regulating the Positioning of Mouse p47 Resistance GTPases LRG-47 and IIGP1 on Cellular Membranes: Retargeting to Plasma Membrane Induced by Phagocytosis J. Immunol., August 15, 2004; 173(4): 2594 - 2606. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Wieland, R. Thimme, R. H. Purcell, and F. V. Chisari Genomic analysis of the host response to hepatitis B virus infection PNAS, April 27, 2004; 101(17): 6669 - 6674. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Robek, B. S. Boyd, S. F. Wieland, and F. V. Chisari Signal transduction pathways that inhibit hepatitis B virus replication PNAS, February 10, 2004; 101(6): 1743 - 1747. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. A. Lieberman, M. Banica, S. L. Reiner, and C. A. Hunter STAT1 Plays a Critical Role in the Regulation of Antimicrobial Effector Mechanisms, but Not in the Development of Th1-Type Responses during Toxoplasmosis J. Immunol., January 1, 2004; 172(1): 457 - 463. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. M. Zhang, J. Yuan, P. Cheung, H. Luo, B. Yanagawa, D. Chau, N. Stephan-Tozy, B. W. Wong, J. Zhang, J. E. Wilson, et al. Overexpression of Interferon-{gamma}-inducible GTPase Inhibits Coxsackievirus B3-induced Apoptosis through the Activation of the Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase/Akt Pathway and Inhibition of Viral Replication J. Biol. Chem., August 29, 2003; 278(35): 33011 - 33019. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||