Identification and characterization of host factor interactions with cis-acting elements of rubella virus RNA
We have analyzed the function of cis-acting elements of rubella virus RNA and the components which interact with these elements in viral RNA replication. We demonstrated that the 5′- and 3′-terminal sequences from RV RNA promote translation and negative- strand RNA synthesis of chimeric chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) RNAs. These sequences have a potential to form stem-loop (SL) structures and bind cellular proteins specifically in RNA gel-shift and UV cross-linking assays. The 5’ end binding proteins were identified to be Ro/SSA-associated antigens by virtue of being recognized in an RNA complex by an autoimmune patient serum with Ro antigen type specificity. Purification and sequence analysis of the 3’ end binding protein revealed that it is a homologue of human calreticulin. The role of host proteins in RV replication is discussed.
KeywordsRubella Virus Primer Extension Product Conserve Sequence Element Chimeric RNAs Adenovirus Major Late Promoter
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Cooper LZ, Buimovici-Klein E (1985) Rubella. In: Fields BN, Knipe DM, Chanock RM, Melnick JL, Roizman B, Shope RE (eds) Virology. Raven Press, New York, pp 1005–1020Google Scholar
- 7.Michalak M, Milner RE, Burns K, Opas M (1992) Calreticulin. Biochem J 285: 681–692Google Scholar
- 13.Pogue GP, Cao X-Q, Singh NK, Nakhasi HL (1993) 5’ sequences of Rubella virus RNA stimulate translation of chimeric RNAs and specifically interact with host- encoded proteins. J Virol 67 (in press)Google Scholar
- 14.Singh NK, Rouault TA, Liu T-Y, Nakhasi HL (1993) Purification and characterization of rubella virus 3’(+) SL RNA-binding host protein (in preparation)Google Scholar
- 15.Strauss JH, Kuhn RJ, Niesters HGM, Strauss E (1990) Functions of the 5’-terminal and 3’-terminal sequences of the Sindbis virus genome in replication. In: Brinton MA, Heinz FX (eds) New aspects of positive-strand RNA viruses. Am Soc Micro, Washington, pp 61–66Google Scholar