Advertisement

Endocytosis pp 399-404 | Cite as

On the Role of Endocytosis in the Entry of Animal Viruses

  • Mark Marsh
  • Annegret Pelchen-Matthews
Conference paper
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 62)

Abstract

In the last ten years an understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in the entry of animal viruses has begun to emerge. It is now clear that many enveloped (viruses containing a lipid/protein membrane) and non-enveloped (viruses containing a protein shell) viruses need to be exposed to acidic pH for effective entry into a cell (Table 1). These so-called pH-dependent viruses rely on endocytosis for their delivery to acidic endocytic organelles and their penetration can be blocked by reagents, such as weak bases and carboxylic ionophores, that neutralise the pH in cytoplasmic organelles (see Marsh and Helenius 1989). However, a number of other viruses, both enveloped and non-enveloped, are not affected by weak bases or ionophores and it appears that pH is not an important factor in their entry (Choppin and Scheid 1980; McClure et al. 1988; 1990). Consequently these ‘pH-independent’ viruses can potentially penetrate the host cell at the plasma membrane and/or from acidic endocytic organelles.

Keywords

West Nile Virus Chinese Hamster Ovary Cell Envelop Virus Mouse Mammary Tumour Virus Productive Infection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen KB (1983) Leupeptin inhibits retrovirus infection in mouse fibroblasts. J. Virol. 48: 765–769PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Choppin PW and Scheid A (1980) The role of viral glycoproteins in adsorption, penetration and pathogenicity of virus. Rev. Infect. Dis. 2: 40–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Helenius A, Marsh M and White J (1982) Inhibition of Semliki Forest virus penetration by lysosomotropic weak bases. J. gen. Virol. 58: 47–61.Google Scholar
  4. Helenius A, Morien B, Fries E, Simons K, Robinson P, Schirrmacher V, Terhorst C and Strominger JL (1978) Human (HLA-A and HLA-B) and murine (H-2K and H-2D) histocompatibility antigens are cell surface receptors for Semliki Forest virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 75: 3846–3850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Froshauer S, Kartenbeck J and Helenius A (1988) Alphavirus RNA replication occurs on the cytoplasmic surface of endosomes and lysosomes. J. Cell Biol. 107: 2075–2086.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Marsh M and Helenius A (1989) Virus entry into animal cells. Advances in Virus Res. 36: 107–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Marsh M and Helenius A (1980) Adsorptive endocytosis of Semliki Forest virus. J. Mol. Biol. 142: 439–454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. McClure MO, Marsh M and Weiss RA (1988) Human immunodeficiency virus infection of CD4-bearing cells occurs by a pH-independent mechanism. EMBO J. 7: 513–518.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. McClure MO, Sommerfelt MA, Marsh M and Weiss RA (1990) The pH independence of mammalian retrovirus infection. J. gen. Virol. 71: 767–773.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mizzen L, Daya M and Andersen R (1987) The role of protease dependent cell membrane fusion in persistent and lytic infections of murine hepatitis virus. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 48: 175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Reid PA and Watts C (1990) Cycling of cell-surface MHC glycoproteins through primaquine-sensitive intracellular compartments. Nature 346: 655–667.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Marsh
    • 1
  • Annegret Pelchen-Matthews
    • 1
  1. 1.Chester Beatty LaboratoriesInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK

Personalised recommendations