Cargando…
Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar
Two groups with three wild boars each were used: Group A (animals 1 to 3) served as the control, and Group B (animals 4 to 6) was postnatally persistently infected with the Cat01 strain of CSFV (primary virus). The animals, six weeks old and clinically healthy, were inoculated with the virulent stra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4768946/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26919741 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149469 |
_version_ | 1782418023228899328 |
---|---|
author | Muñoz-González, Sara Pérez-Simó, Marta Colom-Cadena, Andreu Cabezón, Oscar Bohórquez, José Alejandro Rosell, Rosa Pérez, Lester Josué Marco, Ignasi Lavín, Santiago Domingo, Mariano Ganges, Llilianne |
author_facet | Muñoz-González, Sara Pérez-Simó, Marta Colom-Cadena, Andreu Cabezón, Oscar Bohórquez, José Alejandro Rosell, Rosa Pérez, Lester Josué Marco, Ignasi Lavín, Santiago Domingo, Mariano Ganges, Llilianne |
author_sort | Muñoz-González, Sara |
collection | PubMed |
description | Two groups with three wild boars each were used: Group A (animals 1 to 3) served as the control, and Group B (animals 4 to 6) was postnatally persistently infected with the Cat01 strain of CSFV (primary virus). The animals, six weeks old and clinically healthy, were inoculated with the virulent strain Margarita (secondary virus). For exclusive detection of the Margarita strain, a specific qRT-PCR assay was designed, which proved not to have cross-reactivity with the Cat01 strain. The wild boars persistently infected with CSFV were protected from superinfection by the virulent CSFV Margarita strain, as evidenced by the absence of clinical signs and the absence of Margarita RNA detection in serum, swabs and tissue samples. Additionally, in PBMCs, a well-known target for CSFV viral replication, only the primary infecting virus RNA (Cat01 strain) could be detected, even after the isolation in ST cells, demonstrating SIE at the tissue level in vivo. Furthermore, the data analysis of the Margarita qRT-PCR, by means of calculated ΔCt values, supported that PBMCs from persistently infected animals were substantially protected from superinfection after in vitro inoculation with the Margarita virus strain, while this virus was able to infect naive PBMCs efficiently. In parallel, IFN-α values were undetectable in the sera from animals in Group B after inoculation with the CSFV Margarita strain. Furthermore, these animals were unable to elicit adaptive humoral (no E2-specific or neutralising antibodies) or cellular immune responses (in terms of IFN-γ-producing cells) after inoculation with the second virus. Finally, a sequence analysis could not detect CSFV Margarita RNA in the samples tested from Group B. Our results suggested that the SIE phenomenon might be involved in the evolution and phylogeny of the virus, as well as in CSFV control by vaccination. To the best of our knowledge, this study was one of the first showing efficient suppression of superinfection in animals, especially in the absence of IFN-α, which might be associated with the lack of innate immune mechanisms. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4768946 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47689462016-03-09 Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar Muñoz-González, Sara Pérez-Simó, Marta Colom-Cadena, Andreu Cabezón, Oscar Bohórquez, José Alejandro Rosell, Rosa Pérez, Lester Josué Marco, Ignasi Lavín, Santiago Domingo, Mariano Ganges, Llilianne PLoS One Research Article Two groups with three wild boars each were used: Group A (animals 1 to 3) served as the control, and Group B (animals 4 to 6) was postnatally persistently infected with the Cat01 strain of CSFV (primary virus). The animals, six weeks old and clinically healthy, were inoculated with the virulent strain Margarita (secondary virus). For exclusive detection of the Margarita strain, a specific qRT-PCR assay was designed, which proved not to have cross-reactivity with the Cat01 strain. The wild boars persistently infected with CSFV were protected from superinfection by the virulent CSFV Margarita strain, as evidenced by the absence of clinical signs and the absence of Margarita RNA detection in serum, swabs and tissue samples. Additionally, in PBMCs, a well-known target for CSFV viral replication, only the primary infecting virus RNA (Cat01 strain) could be detected, even after the isolation in ST cells, demonstrating SIE at the tissue level in vivo. Furthermore, the data analysis of the Margarita qRT-PCR, by means of calculated ΔCt values, supported that PBMCs from persistently infected animals were substantially protected from superinfection after in vitro inoculation with the Margarita virus strain, while this virus was able to infect naive PBMCs efficiently. In parallel, IFN-α values were undetectable in the sera from animals in Group B after inoculation with the CSFV Margarita strain. Furthermore, these animals were unable to elicit adaptive humoral (no E2-specific or neutralising antibodies) or cellular immune responses (in terms of IFN-γ-producing cells) after inoculation with the second virus. Finally, a sequence analysis could not detect CSFV Margarita RNA in the samples tested from Group B. Our results suggested that the SIE phenomenon might be involved in the evolution and phylogeny of the virus, as well as in CSFV control by vaccination. To the best of our knowledge, this study was one of the first showing efficient suppression of superinfection in animals, especially in the absence of IFN-α, which might be associated with the lack of innate immune mechanisms. Public Library of Science 2016-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4768946/ /pubmed/26919741 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149469 Text en © 2016 Muñoz-González et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Muñoz-González, Sara Pérez-Simó, Marta Colom-Cadena, Andreu Cabezón, Oscar Bohórquez, José Alejandro Rosell, Rosa Pérez, Lester Josué Marco, Ignasi Lavín, Santiago Domingo, Mariano Ganges, Llilianne Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title | Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title_full | Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title_fullStr | Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title_full_unstemmed | Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title_short | Classical Swine Fever Virus vs. Classical Swine Fever Virus: The Superinfection Exclusion Phenomenon in Experimentally Infected Wild Boar |
title_sort | classical swine fever virus vs. classical swine fever virus: the superinfection exclusion phenomenon in experimentally infected wild boar |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4768946/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26919741 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149469 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT munozgonzalezsara classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT perezsimomarta classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT colomcadenaandreu classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT cabezonoscar classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT bohorquezjosealejandro classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT rosellrosa classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT perezlesterjosue classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT marcoignasi classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT lavinsantiago classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT domingomariano classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar AT gangesllilianne classicalswinefevervirusvsclassicalswinefevervirusthesuperinfectionexclusionphenomenoninexperimentallyinfectedwildboar |