![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 31, 23417-23420, August 4, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
§,
,
,
¶
From the
Institut de Génétique
Moléculaire de Montpellier, IFR24, CNRS-UMR5535 and
Université Montpellier II, 1919 Rte de Mende, F-34293 Montpellier
Cedex 05, ** LVRTG, INSERM U412, Ecole Normale Supérieure
de Lyon, 46 allée d'Italie, 69367 Lyon Cedex 07, and
¶ Institut Cochin de Génétique Moléculaire, 22 Rue Méchain, 75014 Paris, France
Received for publication, December 13, 1999, and in revised form, June 7, 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Murine leukemia viruses (MuLV) and
human T-cell leukemia viruses (HTLV) are phylogenetically highly
divergent retroviruses with distinct envelope fusion properties. The
MuLV envelope glycoprotein surface unit (SU) comprises a
receptor-binding domain followed by a proline-rich region which
modulates envelope conformational changes and fusogenicity. In
contrast, the receptor-binding domain and SU organization of HTLV are
undefined. Here, we describe an HTLV/MuLV envelope chimera in which the
receptor-binding domain and proline-rich region of the ecotropic MuLV
were replaced with the potentially corresponding domains of the HTLV-1
SU. This chimeric HTLV/MuLV envelope was processed, specifically
interfered with HTLV-1 envelope-mediated fusion, and similar to MuLV
envelopes, required cleavage of its cytoplasmic tail to exert
significant fusogenic properties. Furthermore, the HTLV domain defined
here broadened ecotropic MuLV envelope-induced fusion to human and simian cell lines.
Murine leukemia viruses
(MuLV)1 are simple C-type
oncoretroviruses whose genetic organization differ significantly
from that of complex retroviruses, such as the human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) and the human T-cell leukemia virus (HTLV), by the lack of
accessory and regulatory genes in addition to the gag,
pol, and env genes. Each functional retroviral
envelope glycoprotein is expressed as a precursor that is cleaved into
two associated components, a surface subunit (SU), implicated in
receptor recognition, and a transmembrane subunit (TM), which harbors a
fusion peptide (1). Current understanding of envelope-mediated fusion
suggests that receptor recognition by the SU induces conformational
changes that unmask fusion determinants in the TM. MuLV envelopes have weak fusogenic abilities when expressed at the cell surface (fusion "from within") and stronger fusogenic ability in the context of the
viral particle (fusion "from without"). The increased fusogenicity of the MuLV envelopes in virions has been associated with viral protease cleavage of the cytoplasmic TM carboxyl terminus, known as the
R-peptide, which occurs late during or after virion assembly (2,
3). Concerning the SU, a common organization in three major domains has
been described for all MuLV: (i) the amino terminus comprising two
variable regions, VRA and VRB, which define receptor binding
specificity (4); (ii) a proline-rich region, which regulates
post-receptor binding changes in conformation and fusion ability of the
envelope (5, 6); and (iii) the carboxyl terminus, thought to interact
with the TM subunit. Also, the three MuLV envelope receptors identified
so far are multiple-membrane-spanning proteins (7-11).
In contrast to MuLV, HTLV envelope is highly fusogenic in cell-to-cell
fusion assays, measuring fusion from within, whereas cell-free virions
are reported to be poorly infectious (12-15). Moreover, when
expressed at the cell surface, the HTLV envelope induces rapid, rampant
syncitia formation with a broad range of cell lines, suggesting that
the yet unidentified HTLV receptor(s) is a highly conserved and
ubiquitous molecule. However, neither the receptor-binding domain nor a
particular organization has been reported for the HTLV SU.
Here, we describe conserved determinants in the SU of the two envelopes
based on a novel amino acid alignment. Using this alignment, we derived
an HTLV/ecotropic MuLV envelope chimera that presented a fusogenic
range extended to human and simian cell lines while exhibiting the
general fusion characteristics of MuLV envelopes.
Construction of the HTLV/MuLV Envelope Chimera--
Introduction
of a BsrGI site into both parental envelope genes, which
maintained their wild-type amino acid sequence, was performed by
polymerase chain reaction mutagenesis using the following oligonucleotides in which the created restriction sites are indicated in italics and the nucleotide substitutions underlined:
AGGTTACTAAATCTtgtacaGGGAGCT (sense BsrGI F-MuLV);
AGCTCCCtgtacaAGATTTAGTAACCT (antisense BsrGI F-MuLV);
CTGACCCTtgtacaGTTAACCCTA (sense BsrGI
HTLV-1); TAGGGTTAACtgtacaAGGGTCA (antisense
BsrGI HTLV-1). Expression vectors for the HTLV and MuLV
envelope have been described previously (16, 17). The
HTLV-1/Friend-MuLV SU chimera HHproFc reported here was constructed in
a pGEM-based plasmid and subsequently subcloned into the parental
Friend-MuLV envelope expression vector, pCEL/F, at the SphI
and BglII sites. The pCEL/HHproFc Cell Lines and Fusion Assay--
The following primate and
murine cell lines were used in this study: COS (African green monkey
kidney cells), HeLa (human cervical carcinoma cells), Dunni (murine,
Mus dunni tail fibroblasts), NIH3T3 (murine
fibroblasts), and 293 (human fetal kidney cells). Cells used for the
fusion assay were stable transfectants of either a
Envelope-mediated fusion was quantified essentially as described (16,
17) with a few modifications. In this assay, the HIV-1 LTR-driven
expression of Envelope Expression and Maturation--
24 h prior to
transfection, 1-5 × 106 HeLa, Cos, 293, NIH3T3, and
Dunni cells were seeded/10-cm culture dish. Cell extracts were
collected 24 and 48 h post-transfection in cell lysis
buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl,
0.1% SDS, 1.0% Nonidet P-40, 0.5% deoxycholate with 2 mg/ml
leupeptin, 2 mg/ml aprotinin, and 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride protease inhibitor mix) and subjected to electrophoresis on
SDS-10% acrylamide gels followed by transfer onto nitrocellulose
(Protran; Schleicher & Schuell). Western blots were blocked in
PBS containing 10% powder milk and probed with a 1:1000
dilution of goat anti-Rauscher leukemia virus gp69/70 polyclonal
antibody (Quality Biotech Inc.) in PBS containing 0.5%
polyoxyethylenesorbitanmonolaurate (Tween 20) and 5% powder milk with
a 1:200 dilution of mouse anti-HTLV-1 gp46/61 monoclonal antibody 1C11
(Epitope). After each respective incubation with the appropriate
primary antibody, the immunoblots were washed three times with
PBS/Tween 20 and probed with the corresponding horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated immunoglobulins raised against the species of
each primary antibody, washed three times with PBS/Tween 20, and
detected using an enhanced chemiluminescence kit (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech). No differences in expression levels and precursor
cleavage were observed between the 24- and 48-h time points or between
the different cell lines transfected.
Envelope Interference Fusion Assay--
24 h prior to
transfection, 5 × 104 HeLaCD4LTRLacZ and
NIH3T3(TK Homologous Determinants between the SU of the HTLV and MuLV
Envelopes--
We previously described a conserved SU determinant,
comprising the amino acid residues CWLCL, among C- and D-type
oncoretroviruses (21). A similar motif, comprising the amino acid
residues CIVCI, is located at an equivalent position in the HTLV-1
envelope SU. We used parameters in the Clustal program of the Megalign
alignment software package (DNAStar) that favored the alignment of the
regions containing the CIVCI and CWLCL sequences without regard to an SU/TM cleavage site alignment. This alignment revealed a striking homology between a RLLNLVQ motif in the Friend-MuLV SU, located immediately downstream of the Friend-MuLV proline-rich region (Fig.
1A), and a KLLTLVQ sequence in
the HTLV-1 SU. Furthermore, the latter motif was located at an
equivalent distance from the SU/TM cleavage site and immediately
downstream of a potential proline-rich region of the HTLV SU. These
homologies compelled us to test whether the HTLV SU amino terminus
could functionally replace that of the Friend-MuLV envelope.
Expression and Maturation of a MuLV Envelope Chimera with an HTLV
Amino Terminus--
HTLV/MuLV envelope chimeras wherein we replaced
the entire MuLV SU with that of HTLV (16, 17) or wherein the exchange border was located between the (K/R)LL(T/N)LVQ and the
C(W/I)(L/V)C(L/I) motifs (data not shown) resulted in the translation
of envelope precursors that were not efficiently processed through the
endoplasmic reticulum. Others have also reported that substitution,
deletion, or insertion mutations within various subdomains of the SU of the HTLV envelope led to uncleaved and non-matured envelope
precursors (22, 23). Here, we constructed a new HTLV/MuLV envelope
chimera (Fig. 1B) in which the exchange border corresponded
to the newly introduced allelic BsrGI restriction site
encompassing the final leucine and valine amino acid residues 327 and
328 of Friend-MuLV SU and amino acid residues 213 and 214 of HTLV-1 SU
of the (K/R)LL(T/N)LVQ motif (Fig. 1A). In this
construction, we replaced the amino terminus of the Friend-MuLV SU,
including the receptor-binding domain and the proline-rich region, with
what we suspected to be the homologous SU domains in HTLV-1 (Fig.
1B). The resulting chimera, designated HHproFc, contained
the HTLV amino terminus, including the potential HTLV proline-rich
region, the Friend-MuLV SU carboxyl terminus, and the Friend-MuLV
TM.
Upon transfection, the HHproFc chimeric precursor and SU proteins
reacted with a monoclonal antibody, 1C11, raised against an HTLV-1
envelope SU synthetic peptide of amino acids 190-209 (24) (Fig.
2, lane 4) located within the
potential proline-rich region of the HTLV envelope. Precursor cleavage
was observed in both the chimeric and parental envelopes, although
cleavage appeared to occur more efficiently in the parental HTLV-1
(Fig. 2, lane 6) and Friend-MuLV (Fig. 2, lane 8)
than in the HHproFc chimera (Fig. 2, lane 4). Similar
results were obtained for all cell lines tested including human,
simian, mouse, and rat cells (data not shown).
Fusion Properties of the HHproFc Envelope Chimera Extended to
Primate Cells--
When testing the fusion ability of either the
parental ecotropic MuLV or the HHproFc chimeric envelope described
above, no detectable cell-to-cell fusion was observed, regardless of
the species origin of the target cell (Fig.
3, A, B, E, and
F). However, as described previously for amphotropic and
ecotropic Moloney MuLV (2, 3), fusion of mouse NIH3T3 cells was
detectable only after removal of the envelope inhibitory R-peptide,
located at the carboxyl terminus of the TM cytoplasmic domain (Fig.
3D). Therefore, we also tested the fusogenic ability of a
HHproFc Interference of HTLV-1 Envelope-mediated Fusion by the HHproFc
Envelope Chimera--
To assess whether the HTLV/MuLV envelope chimera
indeed interacted with the HTLV-1 receptor, we tested the ability of
the HHproFc chimera to interfere with HTLV-1 envelope-induced fusion. For this purpose, we tested fusion using NIH3T3(TK Here, we describe homologous motifs between the SU of the
Friend-MuLV and HTLV-1, two phylogenetically distant oncoretroviruses. Because the SU is considered to be the most variable region of related
retroviral envelopes and because this variability establishes the basis
for receptor recognition, our observation may provide important clues
concerning the nature of the elusive HTLV envelope receptor(s). Indeed,
the MuLV, feline leukemia virus (FeLV), Gibbon ape leukemia virus
(GALV), and D-type retrovirus envelope receptors identified thus far
belong to a family of multiple-membrane-spanning proteins (7-11, 25,
26), which includes solute transporters (8-10, 26). It is tempting,
therefore, to speculate that the HTLV receptor(s) may belong to this
family as well. Although the HTLV receptor remains to be identified,
our interference data suggest specific HTLV receptor recognition by the
chimeric SU (Table II). Further constructions providing a more precise
definition of the receptor-binding domain, proline-rich region, and
carboxyl terminus of the HTLV envelope will help in the production of
separate soluble domains.
In this report, we replaced the receptor-binding domain and
proline-rich region of the MuLV envelope SU with the potentially corresponding domains in the HTLV and postulated that such an HTLV/MuLV
SU chimera would broaden the receptor recognition properties of the
ecotropic MuLV envelope. Indeed, we observed that HHproFc required
R-peptide deletion for fusion with murine and primate cell lines,
including human HeLa (Fig. 3) and 293 cells (data not shown), similar
to the Friend-MuLV envelope, suggesting that this HTLV/MuLV SU chimera
combined the extended host range of HTLV with MuLV envelope fusion
characteristics. This envelope represents a novel tool for better
understanding the particularly highly fusiogenic properties of the HTLV
envelope and the search for the HTLV receptor(s).
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
R construction was
derived from HHproFc and the F
R envelope. The latter was derived by
introducing a stop codon immediately upstream of the first R-peptide
codon of the parental Friend-MuLV envelope gene. All mutated regions
were sequenced using an ABI Prism sequencer.
-galactosidase
gene (LacZ) under the control of the HIV-1 long terminal
repeat (LTR) (CosLTRLacZ and HeLaCD4LTRLacZ), which has Tat-dependent expression, or cell lines
constitutively expressing the Tat protein of HIV-1 (Cos-Tat, Hela-Tat,
NIH-Tat, Dunni-Tat) as described previously (16-18).
-galactosidase is transactivated by the Tat protein
upon fusion of envelope-expressing cells with receptor-bearing
indicator cells. Envelope genes were transfected into the cell lines
described above using polyethyleneimine (25-kDa, water-free; Sigma
catalog no. 40,872-7) as described (19). 24 h prior to
transfection, 5 × 104 cells were seeded per 35-mm
well on six-well plates (Nunc) in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
(Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (Life
Technologies, Inc.), 2 mM L-glutamine, and
penicillin-streptomycin. For all cell lines tested, transfections were
performed with an amine nitrogen:phosphate nmol ratio of 10:1, wherein
1 µl of the 10 mM polyethyleneimine solution, pH 7.0, containing 10 nmol of amine nitrogen, and 1 µg of the envelope gene-containing pCEL expression vectors, were estimated to comprise 3 nmol of phosphate. Between 0.5 and 2.0 µg of
envelope-expressing plasmid were transfected, and 24 h
post-transfection, 105 indicator cells (the Tat expressing
cell lines) were cocultivated with the envelope-presenting cells for 36 to 48 h. Cell-to-cell fusion was measured following fixation with
0.5% (weight/volume) glutaraldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline
(PBS), washed with PBS, and stained by incubation in a
5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-
-D-galactopyranoside solution
as described previously (16, 17). Blue syncitia, indicating fusion
between the envelope-presenting and Tat-containing indicator cells,
were counted regardless of the number of nuclei per syncitia. All data
represent the results of at least three independent experiments, with
each envelope-to-cell combination performed in duplicate. Statistical
analysis was performed using the Student t test. All
p values of comparisons considered to be significantly
different in this report were p < 0.04.
)Tat cells were seeded in separate 35-mm wells.
The latter cells, initially selected from NIH3T3 cells to not express
the thymidine kinase gene (20), stably expressed the Tat protein upon
transduction with a Tat expression vector as described previously (16,
18). Two µg of the HHproFc chimera or the Friend-MuLV envelope gene and 3 µg of the F
R MuLV or the HTLV-1 envelope genes were
transfected, as described above, into the HeLaCD4LTRLacZ cells and
NIH3T3(TK
)Tat cells, respectively. To test envelope
interference to fusion, 48 h post-transfection, the interfering
envelope-presenting HeLaCD4LTRLacZ cells were detached with 0.5%
(weight/volume) trypsin in PBS and cocultivated for 24 h with the
challenging envelope-presenting NIH3T3(TK
)Tat cells.
Cell-to-cell fusion was measured as described above, and envelope
interference was measured by the decreased number of blue foci.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
SU chimera construction based on novel
alignment of HTLV and MuLV envelope SU. A, the aligned
(R/K)LL(N/T)LVQ and C(W/I)(L/V)C(L/I) determinants of the parental
Friend-MuLV (F) and HTLV-1 (H) envelopes are
shown in boldface with their respective position
numbers. Numbering of amino acids begins from the first
signal peptide methionine. The nucleotide mutated to introduce a unique
BsrGI restriction site is underlined in both
envelopes at codons 327/328 and 213/214 of the MuLV and HTLV envelope,
respectively. The SU receptor-binding domain (RBD) and
proline-rich region (pro) of Friend-MuLV are indicated.
C-term., carboxyl terminus. B, schematic
representation of the HTLV/MuLV envelope chimera, HHproFc, wherein the
SU receptor-binding domain and proline-rich region of the Friend-MuLV
is replaced with the predicted corresponding SU amino terminus of
HTLV-1. The newly introduced BsrGI restriction site
(tg-taca) is indicated by an
arrow.

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Expression and cleavage of the HTLV/MuLV SU
chimera. Western blot of HeLa total cell lysates 48 h
post-transfection with irrelevant plasmid DNA (Mock),
chimeric HHproFc (HH), HHproFc
R
(HH
R), and parental HTLV and MuLV envelope
expression vectors. The left panel shows a Western blot
probed with the anti-HTLV SUgp46 monoclonal antibody (mAb)
1C11, and the right panel shows a duplicate blot probed with
the anti-MuLV SUgp70 polyclonal antibody. Migration of uncleaved
envelope precursor (Pr) and cleaved SU are indicated in
kilodaltons for both parental HTLV and F-MuLV. Symbol keys
are shown next to each identified envelope precursor.
R construct, corresponding to the HHproFc chimeric envelope
lacking the R-peptide. Whereas neither the parental nor the
R-peptide-less forms of the ecotropic Friend-MuLV envelope induced
fusion with simian and human cells (Table
I and Fig. 3, A and
C), the HHproFc
R envelope was fusiogenic toward mouse
cell lines as well as human and simian cell lines (Table I and Fig. 3,
G and H). It is noteworthy that the parental
Friend-MuLV envelope was slightly fusogenic for the mouse Dunni cells
in the presence of the R-peptide, whereas deletion of this peptide in
HHproFc appeared to be necessary to detect fusion even on this cell
line (Table I). Furthermore, despite its extended range of target
cells, the HHproFc
R envelope remained significantly less syncitial
than the parental HTLV-1 envelope (Table I and Fig. 3 (compare
panels G and H with I and J)).

View larger version (95K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Fusion of murine and primate cells by the
R-peptide-less HTLV/ecotropic-MuLV envelope chimera. Dark
areas in panels D, G, H, I, and J
reveal syncitia caused by fusion between HeLaCD4LTRLacZ
envelope-presenting cells and either human (HeLa) or murine
(NIH3T3) indicator cells expressing Tat. The
ecotropic Friend-MuLV envelope did not induce fusion with either HeLa
(A) or NIH3T3 cells (B), whereas the
R-peptide-less form (F
R) triggered fusion with
NIH3T3 cells (D) but not with HeLa cells (C),
which do not harbor a functional ecotropic receptor. The chimeric
HHproFc in its native form did not induce fusion with any of the cell
lines tested, as shown here for HeLa (E) and NIH3T3 cells
(F), whereas HHproFc
R induced fusion with all cell lines
tested including HeLa (G) and NIH3T3 (H) cells
shown here. All cell lines tested were fusogenic with the HTLV envelope
as shown here for HeLa (I) and NIH3T3 cells
(J).
Fusion-inducing capacities of F-MuLV, HTLV-1, and HHproFc
envelopes, with or without the R-peptide
)Tat
cells because these cells presented smaller fusion foci with the HTLV-1
envelopes than any other cells tested (not shown). Using this system,
we observed that the HHproFc chimeric envelope specifically inhibited
HTLV-1 envelope-mediated fusion by more than 10-fold (Table
II).
Specific interference of HTLV-1 envelope-mediated fusion by HHproFc
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank J.-L. Battini, C. Dumas, G. Labesse,
M. Mougel, and Pierre Sonigo for helpful and insightful discussions,
A. D. Miller for kindly providing the NIH3T3(TK
)
cell line, and Y. Boublik for deriving the
R subclone of
Friend-MuLV.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by successive grants (to M. S.) from the CNRS (ATIPE virology program), the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (Jeune Équipe program), the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (ARC 4066), the Association Française contre les Myopathies (AFM 6889), and the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche contre le SIDA (ANRS 99003).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§ Supported by an award from the Philippe Foundation and an ANRS graduate student fellowship.
Present address: Unité INRA/ENVA de
Génétique Moléculaire et Cellulaire,
Génétique Virale, 94704 Maisons-Alfort Cedex, France.

Supported by the Institut National de la Santé et de la
Recherche Médicale. To whom correspondence should be addressed: Institut de Génétique Moléculaire de Montpellier
(IGMM), CNRS-UMR5535, 1919 Rte. de Mende, F-34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France. Tel.: +33-467-613-640; Fax: +33-467-040-231; E-mail:
sitbon@jones.igm.cnrs-mop.fr.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 12, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.C901002199
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are:
MuLV, murine
leukemia virus;
F-MuLV, Friend-MuLV;
HTLV, human T-cell leukemia
virus;
SU, envelope surface unit;
HIV, human immunodeficiency virus;
TM, envelope transmembrane unit;
LacZ,
-galactosidase
gene;
LTR, long terminal repeat;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Hunter, E., and Swanstrom, R. (1990) Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 157, 187-253 |
| 2. | Ragheb, J. A., and Anderson, W. F. (1994) J. Virol. 68, 3220-3231 |
| 3. | Rein, A., Mirro, J., Haynes, J. G., Ernst, S. M., and Nagashima, K. (1994) J. Virol. 68, 1773-1781 |
| 4. | Battini, J. L., Heard, J. M., and Danos, O. (1992) J. Virol. 66, 1468-1475 |
| 5. | Andersen, K. B. (1994) J. Virol. 68, 3175-3182 |
| 6. | Lavillette, D., Maurice, M., Roche, C., Russell, S. J., Sitbon, M., and Cosset, F. L. (1998) J. Virol. 72, 9955-9965 |
| 7. | Albritton, L. M., Tseng, L., Scadden, D., and Cunningham, J. M. (1989) Cell 57, 659-666 |
| 8. | Kim, J. W., Closs, E. I., Albritton, L. M., and Cunningham, J. M. (1991) Nature 352, 725-728 |
| 9. | Wang, H., Kavanaugh, M. P., North, R. A., and Kabat, D. (1991) Nature 352, 729-731 |
| 10. | Kavanaugh, M. P., Miller, D. G., Zhang, W., Law, W., Kozak, S. L., Kabat, D., and Miller, A. D. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 7071-7075 |
| 11. | Battini, J. L., Rasko, J. E., and Miller, A. D. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 1385-1390 |
| 12. | Zhao, T. M., Robinson, M. A., Bowers, F. S., and Kindt, T. J. (1995) J. Virol. 69, 2024-2030 |
| 13. | Derse, D., Mikovits, J., Polianova, M., Felber, B. K., and Ruscetti, F. (1995) J. Virol. 69, 1907-1912 |
| 14. | Sutton, R. E., and Littman, D. R. (1996) J. Virol. 70, 7322-7326 |
| 15. | Delamarre, L., Rosenberg, A. R., Pique, C., Pham, D., and Dokhelar, M. C. (1997) J. Virol. 71, 259-266 |
| 16. | Denesvre, C., Sonigo, P., Corbin, A., Ellerbrok, H., and Sitbon, M. (1995) J. Virol. 69, 4149-4157 |
| 17. | Denesvre, C., Carrington, C., Corbin, A., Takeuchi, Y., Cosset, F. L., Schulz, T., Sitbon, M., and Sonigo, P. (1996) J. Virol. 70, 4380-4386 |
| 18. | Dragic, T., Charneau, P., Clavel, F., and Alizon, M. (1992) J. Virol. 66, 4794-4802 |
| 19. | Boussif, O., Lezoualc'h, F., Zanta, M. A., Mergny, M. D., Scherman, D., Demeneix, B., and Behr, J. P. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 7297-7301 |
| 20. | Wei, C. M., Gibson, M., Spear, P. G., and Scolnick, E. M. (1981) J. Virol. 39, 935-944 |
| 21. | Sitbon, M., d'Auriol, L., Ellerbrok, H., Andre, C., Nishio, J., Perryman, S., Pozo, F., Hayes, S. F., Wehrly, K., Tambourin, P., Galibert, F., and Chesebro, B. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 88, 5932-5936 |
| 22. | Pique, C., Tursz, T., and Dokhelar, M. C. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 4243-4248 |
| 23. | Delamarre, L., Pique, C., Pham, D., Tursz, T., and Dokhelar, M. C. (1994) J. Virol. 68, 3544-3549 |
| 24. | Palker, T. J., Tanner, M. E., Scearce, R. M., Streilein, R. D., Clark, M. E., and Haynes, B. F. (1989) J. Immunol. 142, 971-978 |
| 25. | van Zeijl, M., Johann, S. V., Closs, E., Cunningham, J., Eddy, R., Shows, T. B., and O'Hara, B. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 1168-1172 |
| 26. | Rasko, J. E., Battini, J. L., Gottschalk, R. J., Mazo, I., and Miller, A. D. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 2129-2134 |
| 27. | Lander, M. R., and Chattopadhyay, S. K. (1984) J. Virol. 52, 695-698 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Li, S. Zhang, M. Kronqvist, M. Wallin, M. Ekstrom, D. Derse, and H. Garoff Intersubunit Disulfide Isomerization Controls Membrane Fusion of Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Env J. Virol., July 15, 2008; 82(14): 7135 - 7143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Lavanya, S. Kinet, A. Montel-Hagen, C. Mongellaz, J.-L. Battini, M. Sitbon, and N. Taylor Cell Surface Expression of the Bovine Leukemia Virus-Binding Receptor on B and T Lymphocytes Is Induced by Receptor Engagement J. Immunol., July 15, 2008; 181(2): 891 - 898. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Swainson, S. Kinet, C. Mongellaz, M. Sourisseau, T. Henriques, and N. Taylor IL-7-induced proliferation of recent thymic emigrants requires activation of the PI3K pathway Blood, February 1, 2007; 109(3): 1034 - 1042. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. S. Jones, K. Fugo, C. Petrow-Sadowski, Y. Huang, D. C. Bertolette, I. Lisinski, S. W. Cushman, S. Jacobson, and F. W. Ruscetti Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Type 1 (HTLV-1) and HTLV-2 Use Different Receptor Complexes To Enter T Cells. J. Virol., September 1, 2006; 80(17): 8291 - 8302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Swainson, S. Kinet, N. Manel, J.-L. Battini, M. Sitbon, and N. Taylor Glucose transporter 1 expression identifies a population of cycling CD4+CD8+ human thymocytes with high CXCR4-induced chemotaxis PNAS, September 6, 2005; 102(36): 12867 - 12872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Manel, J.-L. Battini, and M. Sitbon Human T Cell Leukemia Virus Envelope Binding and Virus Entry Are Mediated by Distinct Domains of the Glucose Transporter GLUT1 J. Biol. Chem., August 12, 2005; 280(32): 29025 - 29029. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. K. Coskun and R. E. Sutton Expression of Glucose Transporter 1 Confers Susceptibility to Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Envelope-Mediated Fusion J. Virol., April 1, 2005; 79(7): 4150 - 4158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Zhang, J. C. Rassa, M. E. deObaldia, L. M. Albritton, and S. R. Ross Identification of the Receptor Binding Domain of the Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus Envelope Protein J. Virol., October 1, 2003; 77(19): 10468 - 10478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Manel, S. Kinet, J.-L. Battini, F. J. Kim, N. Taylor, and M. Sitbon The HTLV receptor is an early T-cell activation marker whose expression requires de novo protein synthesis Blood, March 1, 2003; 101(5): 1913 - 1918. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. J. Kim, N. Manel, Y. Boublik, J.-L. Battini, and M. Sitbon Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Type 1 Envelope-Mediated Syncytium Formation Can Be Activated in Resistant Mammalian Cell Lines by a Carboxy-Terminal Truncation of the Envelope Cytoplasmic Domain J. Virol., December 20, 2002; 77(2): 963 - 969. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. S. Jones, M. Nath, C. Petrow-Sadowski, A. C. Baines, M. Dambach, Y. Huang, and F. W. Ruscetti Similar Regulation of Cell Surface Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Type 1 (HTLV-1) Surface Binding Proteins in Cells Highly and Poorly Transduced by HTLV-1-Pseudotyped Virions J. Virol., November 13, 2002; 76(24): 12723 - 12734. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Benit, P. Dessen, and T. Heidmann Identification, Phylogeny, and Evolution of Retroviral Elements Based on Their Envelope Genes J. Virol., December 1, 2001; 75(23): 11709 - 11719. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |