Phylogenetic analysis and phenotypic characterisatics of two Tibet EV-C96 strains.
Cell sensitivity
Enterovirus C96
Phylogenetic analysis
Recombinant
Journal
Virology journal
ISSN: 1743-422X
Titre abrégé: Virol J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101231645
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 03 2019
29 03 2019
Historique:
received:
05
07
2018
accepted:
22
03
2019
entrez:
30
3
2019
pubmed:
30
3
2019
medline:
22
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Enterovirus C96 (EV-C96) is a newly named type of enterovirus belonging to species C, and the prototype strain (BAN00-10488) was firstly isolated in 2000 from a stool specimen of a patient with acute flaccid paralysis in Bangladesh. In this study, we report the genomic and phenotypic characteristics of two EV-C96 strains isolated from individuals from the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Human rhabdomyosarcoma (RD), human laryngeal epidermoid carcinoma (HEp-2), and human cervical cancer (Hela) cells were infected with the Tibet EV-C96 strains, and enterovirus RNA in the cell culture was detected with a real time RT-PCR-based enterovirus screening method. The temperature sensitivity of Tibet EV-C96 strains were assayed on a monolayer of RD cells in 24-well plates. Full-length genome sequencing was performed by a 'primer-walking' strategy, and the evolutionary history of EV-C96 was studied by maximum likelihood analysis. Strain 2005-T49 grew in all three kinds of cells, and it was not temperature sensitive. In contrast, none of the three cells produced CPE for strain 2012-94H. Phylogenetic analysis of the two Tibetan viruses, other EV-C96 strains, and EV-C prototypes showed that EV-C96 strains were grouped into three clusters (Cluster1-3) based on their VP1 sequences, which may represent three genotypes. Phylogenetic trees based on the P2 and P3 regions highlighted the difference between Chinese EV-C96 strains and the EV-C96 prototype strain BAN-10488. All Chinese strains formed a cluster separate from BAN-10488, which clustered with CV-A1/CV-A22/CV-A19. There is genetic variability between EV-C96 strains which suggest that at least few genetic lineages co-exist and there has been some degree of circulation in different geographical regions for some time. Some recombination events must have occurred during EV-C96 evolution as EV-C96 isolates cluster with different EV-C prototype strains in phylogenetic trees in different genomic regions. However, recombination does not seem to have occurred frequently as EV-C96 isolates from different years and locations appear to cluster together in all genomic regions analysed. These findings expand the understanding of the characterization of EV-C96 and are meaningful for the surveillance of the virus.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Enterovirus C96 (EV-C96) is a newly named type of enterovirus belonging to species C, and the prototype strain (BAN00-10488) was firstly isolated in 2000 from a stool specimen of a patient with acute flaccid paralysis in Bangladesh. In this study, we report the genomic and phenotypic characteristics of two EV-C96 strains isolated from individuals from the Tibet Autonomous Region of China.
METHODS
Human rhabdomyosarcoma (RD), human laryngeal epidermoid carcinoma (HEp-2), and human cervical cancer (Hela) cells were infected with the Tibet EV-C96 strains, and enterovirus RNA in the cell culture was detected with a real time RT-PCR-based enterovirus screening method. The temperature sensitivity of Tibet EV-C96 strains were assayed on a monolayer of RD cells in 24-well plates. Full-length genome sequencing was performed by a 'primer-walking' strategy, and the evolutionary history of EV-C96 was studied by maximum likelihood analysis.
RESULTS
Strain 2005-T49 grew in all three kinds of cells, and it was not temperature sensitive. In contrast, none of the three cells produced CPE for strain 2012-94H. Phylogenetic analysis of the two Tibetan viruses, other EV-C96 strains, and EV-C prototypes showed that EV-C96 strains were grouped into three clusters (Cluster1-3) based on their VP1 sequences, which may represent three genotypes. Phylogenetic trees based on the P2 and P3 regions highlighted the difference between Chinese EV-C96 strains and the EV-C96 prototype strain BAN-10488. All Chinese strains formed a cluster separate from BAN-10488, which clustered with CV-A1/CV-A22/CV-A19.
CONCLUSIONS
There is genetic variability between EV-C96 strains which suggest that at least few genetic lineages co-exist and there has been some degree of circulation in different geographical regions for some time. Some recombination events must have occurred during EV-C96 evolution as EV-C96 isolates cluster with different EV-C prototype strains in phylogenetic trees in different genomic regions. However, recombination does not seem to have occurred frequently as EV-C96 isolates from different years and locations appear to cluster together in all genomic regions analysed. These findings expand the understanding of the characterization of EV-C96 and are meaningful for the surveillance of the virus.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30922336
doi: 10.1186/s12985-019-1151-7
pii: 10.1186/s12985-019-1151-7
pmc: PMC6439968
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA, Viral
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
40Références
Virus Genes. 2015 Apr;50(2):177-88
pubmed: 25537948
J Gen Virol. 2013 Sep;94(Pt 9):2017-2028
pubmed: 23804569
J Gen Virol. 2002 Jul;83(Pt 7):1721-1728
pubmed: 12075091
J Virol. 2005 Oct;79(20):12650-7
pubmed: 16188967
J Gen Virol. 2012 Nov;93(Pt 11):2357-2362
pubmed: 22894922
J Virol. 1999 Jan;73(1):152-60
pubmed: 9847317
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e55480
pubmed: 23383202
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 18;8(4):e61451
pubmed: 23637836
Arch Virol. 2014 Feb;159(2):359-64
pubmed: 24013237
J Gen Virol. 2009 Jul;90(Pt 7):1713-1723
pubmed: 19264596
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 30;9(1):e86877
pubmed: 24497989
N Engl J Med. 2013 Nov 21;369(21):1981-90
pubmed: 24256377
RNA. 1995 Dec;1(10):985-1000
pubmed: 8595564
Virus Genes. 2011 Jun;42(3):323-30
pubmed: 21318238
J Virol. 1994 Jul;68(7):4384-91
pubmed: 8207812
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 24;9(1):e86883
pubmed: 24475191
Sci Rep. 2016 Sep 19;6:33595
pubmed: 27642136
J Gen Virol. 2013 Sep;94(Pt 9):1995-2004
pubmed: 23761409
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2016 Sep 21;5(9):e104
pubmed: 27651091
Microbiol Rev. 1996 Sep;60(3):499-511
pubmed: 8840784
J Gen Virol. 2005 May;86(Pt 5):1391-1401
pubmed: 15831951
Sci Rep. 2017 Feb 23;7:43080
pubmed: 28230168
Virus Res. 1992 Aug;24(3):277-96
pubmed: 1329370
Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Mar 1;25(5):925-32
pubmed: 9023100
Arch Virol. 2009;154(7):1157-61
pubmed: 19526351
J Gen Virol. 2006 Jan;87(Pt 1):119-28
pubmed: 16361424
Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 25;5:17291
pubmed: 26603565
J Gen Virol. 2007 Sep;88(Pt 9):2520-6
pubmed: 17698662
J Virol. 1999 Mar;73(3):1941-8
pubmed: 9971773
J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Mar;38(3):1170-4
pubmed: 10699015
J Med Virol. 2008 Apr;80(4):670-9
pubmed: 18297723
Nat Methods. 2017 Jun;14(6):587-589
pubmed: 28481363
Mol Biol Evol. 2016 Jul;33(7):1870-4
pubmed: 27004904
J Virol. 1994 Dec;68(12):8089-101
pubmed: 7966599
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 10;9(4):e94579
pubmed: 24722726
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 02;9(4):e93737
pubmed: 24695547
Virol J. 2010 Jun 25;7:138
pubmed: 20579343
Methods Mol Biol. 2016;1387:213-26
pubmed: 26983736
RNA. 1998 May;4(5):520-9
pubmed: 9582094
PLoS Pathog. 2015 Nov 12;11(11):e1005266
pubmed: 26562151
Virus Genes. 2012 Oct;45(2):207-17
pubmed: 22743820
J Clin Microbiol. 1999 May;37(5):1288-93
pubmed: 10203472