The C-terminal third of human respiratory syncytial virus attachment (G) protein is partially resistant to protease digestion and is glycosylated in a cell-type-specific manner

Regina García-Beato1 and José A. Melero1

Centro Nacional de Biología Fundamental, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Majadahonda, 28220 Madrid, Spain1

Author for correspondence: José Melero. Fax +34 91 509 7919. e-mail jmelero{at}isciii.es


   Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
The soluble form of the human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) attachment protein (Gs) was purified from the supernatant of infected cell cultures by immunoaffinity chromatography. Digestion of Gs with proteases and Western blot analysis identified two fragments that were partially resistant to protease degradation. Reactivity with diagnostic monoclonal antibodies located these two fragments in the primary structure of the G molecule. The large fragment spanned the C-terminal third of the G protein whereas the small fragment represented the N-terminal half of the large fragment. Purification of Gs from infected cells (either HEp-2 or M6) followed by protease digestion located host-cell-dependent glycosylation of the G protein in the unique part of the large protease-resistant fragment. The use of HRSV mutants encoding truncated G proteins allowed us to place some of the host-cell-dependent glycosylation differences in a small segment of the G protein. Interestingly, cell-specific glycosylations in the C-terminal half of the large protease-resistant fragment influenced the expression of certain epitopes located in its N-terminal half. These results bear important implications for the three-dimensional structure of the G glycoprotein.


   Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) is classified within the genus Pneumovirus of the family Paramyxoviridae (reviewed in Collins et al., 1996 ). As with other members of the family, HRSV has two major surface glycoproteins (G and F) that play important roles in the initial stages of the infectious cycle. The G protein mediates attachment of the virus to an as yet unidentified cell surface receptor and the F protein promotes fusion of the viral and cellular membranes, allowing entry of the virus ribonucleoprotein into the cell cytoplasm. The F protein, in addition, promotes fusion of infected-cell membranes with those of adjacent cells leading to formation of characteristic syncytia.

The G protein (as with other paramyxovirus attachment proteins) is a type II glycoprotein with a single hydrophobic region near the N-terminal end that serves as both signal peptide and membrane anchor. However, the G protein has a number of genetic, chemical and structural characteristics that are unique among paramyxovirus attachment proteins and, indeed, among the receptor-binding proteins of any other virus. The protein precursor, 292–299 amino acids in length (depending on the virus strain) (Sullender et al., 1991 ; Martínez et al., 1999 ) migrates in SDS–PAGE as a 32 kDa polypeptide, whereas the mature G protein migrates as a wide band of 80–90 kDa. Much of this apparent size difference is due to extensive glycosylation of the polypeptide backbone during maturation which increases the protein mass but also affects its interaction with SDS. The majority of the potential glycosylation sites are clustered in two regions of the G protein ectodomain, with amino acid compositions similar to that of mucins produced by epithelial cells (Wertz et al., 1985 ). The mucin-like regions are highly variable among HRSV isolates (Cane et al., 1991 ; Sullender et al., 1991 ) and they flank a central conserved segment of the G protein ectodomain – including a cluster of four cysteines – that has been proposed as the receptor binding site (Johnson et al., 1987 ). A soluble/secreted form of the G protein (Gs) (Hendrick et al., 1988 ) is generated by initiation of translation at an alternative in-frame AUG codon located in the middle of the hydrophobic transmembrane region (Roberts et al., 1994 ). Gs shares structural characteristics with the membrane-anchor form of G, such as extensive glycosylation and reactivity with all the anti-G monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) identified so far. Gs has been associated with pulmonary eosinophilia following HRSV challenge of BALB/c mice sensitized to the attachment protein (Bembridge et al., 1998 ).

HRSV isolates are classified into two antigenic groups by their reactivity with MAbs (Anderson et al., 1985 ; Mufson et al., 1985 ). The G protein shows the highest degree of genetic and antigenic variation among HRSV gene products of viruses from both antigenic groups (Johnson et al., 1987 ). Within each group, the G protein also shows the highest degree of antigenic and genetic diversity (García et al., 1994 ; Cane & Pringle, 1995 ). Three types of epitopes, recognized by MAbs, have been identified in the G protein: (i) conserved epitopes, shared by all human isolates, (ii) group-specific epitopes, shared by viruses of the same antigenic group and (iii) strain-specific or variable epitopes, present only in a subset of viruses of the same antigenic group (Martínez et al., 1997 ). Epitopes of the first two types are located in the central conserved segment of the G molecule whereas the strain-specific epitopes are restricted almost exclusively to the variable C-terminal third (reviewed in Melero et al., 1997 ). Interestingly, all the epitopes identified so far in the G protein do not seem to require the native protein conformation for antibody binding (i.e. all anti-G MAbs react with the G protein band in Western blots).

Given the extensive glycosylation of the mature G protein, it is not surprising that carbohydrates influence both virus infectivity and antigenicity of the G glycoprotein (Lambert, 1988 ; Palomo et al., 1991 ). Moreover, cell-type specific glycosylation of G influences its electrophoretic mobility and its reactivity with sugar-specific reagents and MAbs directed against strain-specific epitopes (García-Beato et al., 1996 ). In contrast, the conserved and group-specific epitopes of G are unaffected by host-specific glycosylation, in agreement with their location in the central conserved segment of the G ectodomain which is essentially devoid of potential glycosylation sites.

In order to gain further insights into the structure of the G glycoprotein, we have purified Gs from supernatants of HRSV-infected cells and have subjected it to different protease treatments. The results obtained indicate that the G protein C-terminal third is partially resistant to protease digestion and that it is glycosylated in a cell-dependent manner that influences the expression of certain epitopes located in this region of the molecule.


   Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
{blacksquare} Cells and viruses.
The Long strain (isolated in Baltimore, MD, USA, in 1956) and the Mon/3/88 strain (isolated in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1988) of HRSV were plaque-purified and grown routinely in HEp-2 cells as described (García-Barreno et al., 1988 ). HEp-2 (epithelial carcinoma of larynx; Moore et al., 1955 ) and M6 cells (epithelial colon carcinoma; García-Beato et al., 1996 ) were grown in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium supplemented with 10% foetal calf serum and antibiotics. Other HRSV mutants used in this study have been described previously (Rueda et al., 1991 ).

{blacksquare} Antibodies.
MAbs raised against the G proteins of either Long or Mon/3/88 viruses have been described (García-Barreno et al., 1989 ; Martínez et al., 1997 ). They were used either individually or as a pool of antibodies that included the following: 021/1G, 021/19G, 63G, 68G and 78G. Rabbit hyperimmune anti-HRSV serum raised against purified Long virus has been described previously (Palomo et al., 1991 ).

{blacksquare} Purification of Gs.
Either HEp-2 or M6 cells growing in 100 mm Petri dishes were infected with the viruses indicated in the figure legends, as previously described (García-Beato et al., 1996 ). One of the dishes was labelled with 100 µCi [3H]glucosamine, from 24 h post-infection until harvesting, and radioactivity was monitored during the purification process. When cytopathic effect was maximal (48 h post-infection), cell supernatants were harvested, pooled and cleared of cell debris by centrifugation at 3000 g for 5 min. Then, the supernatants were ultracentrifuged at 65000 g for 3 h at 4 °C to remove virus particles and precipitated with ammonium sulfate at 65% saturation. The pellet was dissolved in buffer A (20 mM Tris–HCl pH 7·5, 0·5 M NaCl) and dialysed against a large excess of the same buffer.

Equal amounts of purified MAbs 021/1G and 021/21G (Martínez et al., 1997 ) were covalently bound to CNBr-activated Sepharose as specified in the manufacturer’s instructions. The cell supernatants, processed as indicated above, were passed through the immunoaffinity column which was then washed extensively with buffer A. The retained material was eluted with a buffer containing 0·1 M glycine pH 2·5, 0·2 M NaCl and 0·2% octylglycoside and neutralized immediately after elution with saturated Tris. Elution was followed by radioactivity counts and the presence of Gs in the fractions was evaluated by ELISA. Positive fractions were pooled together and ELISA using specific MAbs was used to rule out the presence of other HRSV proteins (particularly F protein).

{blacksquare} Protease digestion and Western blot.
Different amounts of Gs protein, purified as indicated before, were subjected to SDS–PAGE, electrotransferred to Hybond PVDF membranes and blotted with the pool of anti-G MAbs as previously described (García-Beato et al., 1996 ), except that the chemoluminescence substrate ECL (Amersham) was used. The lowest amount of Gs that generated a visible band in the blot was incubated with proteases as indicated in the figure legends. After digestion, an excess of SDS–PAGE sample buffer was added and, after boiling, the samples were resolved by electrophoresis and visualized by Western blot. Cell extracts of infected cells were made up in buffer containing 10 mM Tris–HCl pH 7·6, 140 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 1% Triton X-100 and 1% sodium deoxycholate and analysed by SDS–PAGE and Western blot in a similar manner.


   Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Purification of Gs and protease digestion
Gs was purified by immunoaffinity chromatography from the supernatant of HRSV-infected HEp-2 cells as indicated in Methods. Since the G protein is not stained effectively by Coomassie blue or any other protein dye, we used a given amount of purified Gs – enough to generate a visible band in our Western blots – for digestion with different proteases. Treatment of Gs with fixed amounts of either proline-specific endoprotease (PSE) or trypsin (TRY) generated a fragment of about 50 kDa that reacted with a pool of anti-G MAbs (Fig. 1, lanes 2 and 3). Similarly, digestion of Gs with papain (PAP), bromelain (BRO) or Staphylococcus aureus V8 protease (V8) generated a 50 kDa fragment but, in addition, a 35 kDa fragment that reacted with the MAb pool (Fig. 1, lanes 4–9). The amount of the 35 kDa fragment increased with higher amounts of V8 protease (lanes 6–9) at the expense of the 50 kDa fragment. Eventually, the 35 kDa fragment was the only protease-resistant product remaining after digestion of Gs with 10 µg of V8 protease (lane 9). These results suggested that the 50 kDa fragment might be an intermediate product prior to formation of the 35 kDa fragment during protease treatment. Reduction of Gs with {beta}-mercaptoethanol before V8 digestion did not influence the outcome of results (shown only for 1 µg of protease; compare lanes 8 and 10 of Fig. 1).



View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Protease digestion of purified Gs. The soluble form of the G protein (Gs) was purified from the supernatant of HEp-2 cells infected with Long virus, as described in Methods. Purified Gs was either untreated (lane 1) or digested with the following proteases: proline-specific endoprotease (PSE) (lane 2), trypsin (TRY) (lane 3), papain (PAP) (lane 4), bromelain (BRO) (lane 5) or Staphylococcus aureus V8 protease (V8) (lanes 6–10). Conditions for protease digestions were as follows. Trypsin-bound agarose, 1·2 mU for 1 h at 30 °C in 0·01 M sodium phosphate buffer, pH 8·0. Buffer B (10 mM Tris–HCl pH 8·0, 100 mM NaCl and 1 mM EDTA) was used for incubation with the following proteases: PSE, 10 µg for 1 h at 37 °C; PAP, 0·1 µg for 1 h at 37 °C; BRO, 0·1 µg for 1 h at 37 °C; V8 protease, the amounts indicated (from 0·01–10 µg) for 1 h at 37 °C. In lane 10, purified Gs was treated with 5% {beta}-mercaptoethanol and boiled before being digested with 1 µg of V8 protease. Proteins were separated by SDS–PAGE and visualized with a pool of anti-G MAbs as indicated in Methods.

 
The results in Fig. 1 identified two fragments (50 and 35 kDa) in purified Gs that were partially resistant to digestion with different proteases. Since the pool of MAbs used in the Western blot recognized non-conformational epitopes located in the second half of the G protein ectodomain, we used a hyperimmune antiserum, raised against purified Long virus, to test whether other Gs fragments were identified in Western blots (Fig. 2). Again, two fragments of 50 and 35 kDa – with the same mobilities as those recognized by the MAb pool – were visualized with the polyclonal antiserum after digestion of Gs with 1 µg of V8 protease. No other Gs fragments were detected with the anti-HRSV serum. The blurred shapes of the Gs, 50 kDa and 35 kDa bands in Figs 1 and 2 are indicative of their glycosylated states.



View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Reactivity of Gs fragments with anti-HRSV serum. Purified Gs was either untreated (-) or digested with 1 µg of V8 protease (+) as indicated in the legend to Fig. 1. Proteins were separated by SDS–PAGE and visualized by Western blot with either a pool of anti-G MAbs or an antiserum raised against purified Long virus (diluted 1:1000 in PBS).

 
Location of protease-resistant fragments in the G protein primary structure
Since N-terminal sequencing of the protease-resistant fragments was technically impossible, we used previously characterized MAbs (Melero et al., 1997 ) to locate the fragments in the G protein primary structure. Representative examples of Western blots obtained with MAbs directed against the G glycoprotein of the Long strain are shown in Fig. 3(A). Antibodies such as 64G, 59G and 78G, whose epitopes are located near the C-terminal end of the G polypeptide (Rueda et al., 1995 ), reacted with the 50 kDa fragment but not with the 35 kDa fragment. This small fragment, however, reacted with antibodies such as 68G whose epitope maps in the middle of the C-terminal third of the G polypeptide (Fig. 3B).



View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Location of Gs fragments in the G protein sequence. (A) Gs was purified from the culture medium of HEp-2 cells infected with either the Long or Mon/3/88 HRSV strains as indicated in Methods. The purified protein was digested with the indicated amounts of V8 protease and tested in Western blot with the anti-G MAbs indicated. (B) Diagram of the G protein primary structure, denoting the transmembrane region (thick line) and the cysteine residues (•) of the protein ectodomain. The arrows indicate the location of amino acid residues that are changed in escape mutants selected with the indicated antibodies (reviewed in Melero et al., 1997 ). Epitope 63G was located between residues 204 and 209 by reactivity with a set of 13-mer peptides containing single residue deletions (García-Barreno et al., 1992 ). Shown below are the scheme of the Gs protein and the location of the protease-resistant fragments, determined by reactivity with MAbs.

 
Since some of the anti-G antibodies are strain-specific, we purified the Gs protein from supernatants of HEp-2 cells infected with the Mon/3/88 HRSV strain and digested it with three different amounts of the V8 protease (Fig. 3A). The protease-resistant fragments (homologous to those of the Long strain) were tested with a panel of anti-G antibodies raised against Mon/3/88 (Martínez et al., 1997 ). Antibodies such as 021/1G, which recognizes epitopes located in the central conserved cysteine-rich region, did not react with any of the protease-resistant fragments. In a similar manner, antibodies that recognize either conserved or group-specific epitopes did not react with the protease-resistant fragments of the Long strain (not shown). In contrast, antibody 021/7G reacted with the 50 kDa fragment and antibody 021/9G reacted with both the 50 and 35 kDa fragments of Gs from Mon/3/88 virus.

Fig. 3(B) shows a diagram of the G protein primary structure and the location of the epitopes recognized by MAbs that were tested for reactivity with the 50 and 35 kDa Gs fragments. The location of epitopes in the G protein sequence is based mainly on the identification of amino acid changes in escape mutants selected with anti-G MAbs (reviewed in Melero et al., 1997 ). From the results obtained, it is concluded that the large fragment (50 kDa) spans from epitope 63G (amino acids 204–209) to the C-terminal end of the G polypeptide. The 35 kDa fragment, however, starts at the same position but ends after epitopes 021/9G and 021/16G (amino acid 244). Thus, the entire C-terminal third of the G protein shows partial resistance to protease digestion and, within that region, the segment spanning amino acids 204–244 is particularly resistance to protease degradation. It should be stressed that our methodology did not allow precise delineation of the fragment limits since only some of the amino acids determining most epitopes are known and the number of epitopes tested did not cover the entire G protein sequence. Resistance to protease digestion could not be related to absence of potential cutting sites, which were distributed more or less uniformly throughout the G protein sequence (data not shown).

Comparison of protease-resistant fragments of Gs obtained from HEp-2 and M6 cells
We have shown previously that the G protein glycosylation pattern is determined by the host-cell machinery, as detected by reactivity with lectins and carbohydrate-specific antibodies (García-Beato et al., 1996 ). For instance, HRSV infection of M6 cells – a highly differentiated mucin-producing epithelial cell line derived from colon carcinoma – generated a G protein band of lower electrophoretic mobility than HEp-2 cells. In addition, the reactivity of either M6- or HEp-2-derived G proteins with sugar-specific reagents was different. Since the C-terminal end of the G protein has multiple potential glycosylation sites, we decided to explore the host-cell influence upon G protein sensitivity to protease digestion.

Gs (Long strain form) was purified from the supernatant of either HRSV-infected HEp-2 or M6 cells and subjected to partial digestion with S. aureus V8 protease (Fig. 4). Whereas similar 35 kDa fragments were identified after digestion of the Gs obtained from either cell line, there was a substantial size difference in the large fragment (50 kDa for Gs from HEp-2 and 70 kDa from M6 cells). Reactivity of the Gs fragments with diagnostic MAbs indicated that the M6-derived 35 and 70 kDa fragments were equivalent to the 35 and 50 kDa fragments derived from HEp-2 cells, respectively (not shown). Thus, the size difference between the 50 and 70 kDa fragments was attributed to host-cell-specific glycosylations (see later under Discussion).



View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Protease-resistant fragments of Gs obtained from either HRSV Long strain-infected HEp-2 or M6 cells. Gs was purified from culture supernatants by immunoaffinity chromatography and digested with V8 protease. The Gs fragments were separated by SDS–PAGE and visualized with a pool of anti-G MAbs as described in the legend to Fig. 1.

 
To locate more precisely the glycosylation differences between the large protease-resistant fragments of Gs obtained from either HEp-2 or M6 cells, we used two previously described mutants of the Long strain (Rueda et al., 1991 ). Mutant R74/1/1, selected for resistance to antibody 74G, has a premature termination codon that shortens the G protein by 11 amino acids. Mutant R27/8/3, selected with antibody 27G, has a termination codon that eliminates the last 42 amino acids of the G polypeptide. These two mutants were used to infect HEp-2 or M6 cells and their Gs proteins were digested with V8 protease (Fig. 5A). The two Gs mutant proteins generated fragments of 35 kDa, similar to those of Long, when obtained from either cell type. However, the large V8-resistant fragments of the two mutants migrated faster than the large fragment of Long, reflecting their C-terminal truncations and the previously assigned limits of that fragment in the G protein sequence. When the sizes of the large Gs fragments from HEp-2 and M6 cells were compared, differences in mobility were observed even with the mutant that generated the shortest Gs (R27/8/3).



View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Gs fragments of Long strain escape mutants with premature termination codons. (A) Gs was purified from the culture supernatants of either HEp-2 or M6 cells infected with Long, R74/1/1 or R27/8/3 HRSV. The protein was either untreated or digested with V8 protease before being tested in a Western blot with a pool of anti-G MAbs. (B) Diagrams of the G protein primary structure of Long, R74/1/1 and R27/8/3 viruses, denoting the potential sites of O- (|) and N-glycosylation ({blacktriangledown}). The number of amino acids lost in the G proteins of R74/1/1 and R27/8/3 escape mutants is indicated on the right. Other symbols are as in Fig. 3. The C-terminal end of the large protease-resistant fragment of the different viruses is indicated with different frames. The segment corresponding to the unique part of the large protease-resistant fragment of R27/8/3 Gs protein is expanded at the bottom.

 
Considering the location of epitopes included in the 35 kDa fragment and the truncation of Gs in mutant R27/8/3, it is possible to ascribe some of the host-specific glycosylation differences of the large protease-resistant fragments to the segment spanning amino acids 244–257 (Fig. 5B). These limits are determined by the location of epitopes 021/9G and 021/16G, included in the 35 kDa fragment, and the location of the premature stop codon in the G protein of R27/8/3 virus. In that segment there are five potential sites for O- and two for N-linked carbohydrates. We do not know yet whether there is an alternative use of those sites in the two cell lines or whether different carbohydrate side-chains are added in HEp-2 and M6 at the same glycosylation sites of the G molecule.

Host cell influence on expression of epitope 63G
Epitope 63G was mapped previously in the G protein primary structure by the reactivity of antibody 63G with certain frame-shift mutants of the HRSV G glycoprotein (García-Barreno et al., 1990 ) and with a set of synthetic peptides (García-Barreno et al., 1992 ). Amino acids 204–209 were found to be essential for antibody binding.

Since antibody 63G reacted with the unglycosylated G protein precursor (Palomo et al., 1991 ) and with synthetic peptides, it was thought that epitope 63G was determined by a linear sequence of consecutive amino acids in the G protein primary structure. However, we found that expression of epitope 63G in the mature protein was influenced by cell-type-specific glycosylation of the G molecule (García-Beato et al., 1996 ). For instance, as shown in Fig. 6, antibody 63G reacted with the mature G protein from extracts of infected HEp-2 extracts but did not react with the equivalent protein from M6 cells, although both proteins reacted with a pool of anti-G antibodies. The 70 kDa protease-resistant fragment of Gs from M6 cells did not react with antibody 63G (reflecting the changes observed in the full-length protein) although the equivalent 50 kDa fragment of Gs from HEp-2 cells reacted normally and both fragments reacted with the MAbs pool. Unexpectedly, the 35 kDa fragment from either cell type reacted with antibody 63G to the same extent (Fig. 6), although this fragment is included in the large protease-resistant fragment. This result indicated that M6-specific modifications of the 70 kDa fragment, located outside the 35 kDa fragment, influenced the expression of epitope 63G, shared by the N-terminal end of both fragments (Fig. 3B).



View larger version (58K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. Expression of epitope 63G in the Gs fragments. Extracts of either HEp-2 or M6 cells infected with Long virus were prepared and tested by Western blot with a pool of anti-G MAbs or with antibody 63G, as indicated. Gs was purified from culture supernatants and digested with V8 protease before being tested by Western blot with either the pool of MAbs or antibody 63G.

 
Treatment of HRSV-infected cells with tunicamycin inhibits the addition of N-linked carbohydrates to the G protein without affecting O-linked glycosylations (Lambert, 1988 ). When either HEp-2 or M6 cells infected with Long virus were treated with tunicamycin a slight reduction of the G protein electrophoretic mobility was observed (Fig. 7). Moreover, expression of epitope 63G was inhibited in the G protein of M6-infected cells treated with tunicamycin, as occurred in the untreated M6 cells. Thus, M6-cell-specific O-linked glycosylation is sufficient to mask the expression of that epitope.



View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7. Effect of tunicamycin on Gs glycosylation. HEp-2 and M6 cell cultures were infected with Long virus. Where indicated, tunicamycin (TN) was added to the culture medium (10 µg/ml), starting 2 h post-infection until harvesting. Extracts were made and the G protein was visualized after Western blot with either a pool of anti-G MAbs or antibody 63G.

 

   Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
The results presented here identified two fragments of the soluble form of HRSV G protein that are partially resistant to protease digestion. Reactivity of those fragments with MAbs indicated that the large fragment spanned the C-terminal third of the G polypeptide. The small fragment, which was resistant to higher protease concentrations, included approximately the N-terminal half of the large fragment. Since protease cutting-sites are evenly distributed throughout the length of the G protein, our results suggest that a bizarre local conformation of its C-terminal third limited accessibility to proteases used in this study. It is conceivable that this local conformation is determined, at least in part, by the abundant carbohydrate side-chains predicted in that part of the molecule and it is apparently maintained after reduction of the two disulphide bonds between the four cysteines of the G protein ectodomain (Langedijk et al., 1996 ).

The dose effect of V8 digestion (Fig. 1) suggested that the large protease-resistant fragment of Gs is an intermediate in the formation of the small fragment, the latter being more resistant to the protease. However, it cannot be formally excluded that both fragments were generated from different subpopulations of Gs. It is also possible that the size differences between the 50 and 70 kDa fragments of Gs derived from HEp-2 and M6 cells, respectively, were determined by differences in the cutting sites of the enzyme in these two proteins. Nevertheless, we favour the idea that the large protease-resistant fragment is an intermediate in the formation of the small fragment and that the 70 kDa fragment is equivalent to the 50 kDa fragment, for the following reasons.

(1) The amount of the small fragment increased with greater amounts of protease at the expense of the large fragment (only shown for the Gs obtained from HEp-2 cells in Fig. 1).

(2) There is no evidence for different subpopulations of Gs. In fact the results in Fig. 6 argue against that possibility. Thus, epitope 63G is not expressed in either the full-length Gs protein or the 70 kDa fragment obtained from M6 cells, yet it is expressed in the 35 kDa fragment derived from those cells. Were the 70 and 35 kDa fragments derived from different Gs subpopulations, epitope 63G should have been detected in the full-length form of its Gs precursor and this was not the case. We interpret the results in Fig. 6 to indicate that epitope 63G is masked in the Gs protein and in the 70 kDa fragment from M6 cells but that further fragmentation unmasks this epitope in the 35 kDa fragment.

(3) The effect of premature termination codons on the sizes of the 50 and 70 kDa fragments lend support to the notion that both fragments shared their C-terminal ends with Gs. The N-terminal end of the 50 kDa fragment was delineated by its reactivity with antibody 63G and its lack of reactivity with antibody 021/18G (see Fig. 3B). Since the 70 kDa fragment did not react with antibody 63G (see above), its N-terminal end could only be defined between the epitopes 021/18G and 68G. However, since the 35 kDa fragment derived from it reacted with 63G, it is likely that the 70 and 50 kDa fragments shared their N termini (or that they are very closely located in the Gs sequence) and that their size differences reflect host-cell-specific glycosylations.

The results in Fig. 7 suggest that O-linked carbohydrates are sufficient to maintain differences in the reactivity of Gs from HEp-2 or M6 cells with antibody 63G. It is feasible that this type of carbohydrate also influences the glycosylation differences between the 50 and 70 kDa fragments, some of which were mapped to a small segment of the G protein ectodomain by using HRSV mutants with premature termination codons (Fig. 5). It was, however, surprising that no host-derived differences were observed between the small protease-resistant fragments of Gs obtained from either HRSV-infected HEp-2 or M6 cells, despite having multiple O- and N-linked potential glycosylation sites (Fig. 5). Thus, different segments of the same molecule seem to be differentially modified by host-cell-specific glycosylation machineries. Further refinement of this analysis should identify signals and/or local structures that determine the use of potential glycosylation sites in proteins expressed in different cell types.

We proposed a model of the G protein three-dimensional structure (Melero et al., 1997 ) that accounts for the experimental results presented here. The C-terminal third of G was modelled as a segment folded in two halves to indicate its partial resistance to protease digestion and, within it, the particular resistance to proteases of its N-terminal half. The expression of epitope 63G in Gs and its protease-resistant fragments suggests that certain interactions might exist between the two halves in which the C-terminal third of Gs was subdivided. It is interesting to note that reactivity of certain human convalescent sera with the 35 kDa of Gs obtained from HEp-2 cells was also masked in the 50 kDa fragment (Palomo et al., 1999 ), arguing again in favour of interactions between the two halves of that G protein region. These results should be kept in mind when analysing the specificity of anti-G antibodies.


   Acknowledgments
 
We thank B. García-Barreno, J. Ortín and C. Palomo for critical reading of the manuscript. This work was funded in part by grants PM96-0025 from Dirección General de Enseñanza Superior, 98/1086 from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias and BIO4-CT960637-4 from the European Union.


   References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Anderson, L. J., Heirholzer, J. C., Tson, C., Hendry, R. M., Fernie, B. N., Stone, Y. & McIntosh, K. (1985). Antigenic characterization of respiratory syncytial virus strains with monoclonal antibodies. Journal of Infectious Diseases 151, 626-633.[Medline]

Bembridge, G. P., García-Beato, R., López, J. A., Melero, J. A. & Taylor, G. (1998). Subcellular site of expression and route of vaccination influence pulmonary eosinophilia following respiratory syncytial virus challenge in BALB/c mice sensitized to the attachment G protein. Journal of Immunology 161, 2473-2480.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Cane, P. A. & Pringle, C. R. (1995). Evolution of subgroup A respiratory syncytial virus: evidence for progressive accumulation of amino acid changes in the attachment protein. Journal of Virology 69, 2918-2925.[Abstract]

Cane, P. A., Matthews, D. A. & Pringle, C. R. (1991). Identification of variable domains of the attachment (G) protein of subgroup A respiratory syncytial viruses. Journal of General Virology 72, 2091-2096.[Abstract]

Collins, P. L., McIntosh, K. & Chanock, R. M. (1996). Respiratory syncytial virus. In Fields Virology, pp. 1313-1351. Edited by B. N. Fields, D. M. Knipe & P. M. Howley. Philadelphia: Lippincott–Raven.

García, O., Martín, M., Dopazo, J., Arbiza, J., Frabasile, S., Russi, J., Hortal, M., Perez-Breña, P., Martínez, I., García-Barreno, B. & Melero, J. A. (1994). Evolutionary pattern of human respiratory syncytial virus (subgroup A): cocirculating lineages and correlation of genetic and antigenic changes in the G glycoprotein. Journal of Virology 68, 5448-5459.[Abstract]

García-Barreno, B., Jorcano, J. L., Aukenbauer, T., López-Galíndez, C. & Melero, J. A. (1988). Participation of cytoskeletal intermediate filaments in the infectious cycle of human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Virus Research 9, 307-322.[Medline]

García-Barreno, B., Palomo, C., Peñas, C., Delgado, T., Perez-Breña, P. & Melero, J. A. (1989). Marked differences in the antigenic structure of human respiratory syncytial virus F and G glycoproteins. Journal of Virology 63, 925-932.[Medline]

García-Barreno, B., Portela, A., Delgado, T., López, J. A. & Melero, J. A. (1990). Frame shift mutations as a novel mechanism for the generation of neutralisation resistant mutants of human respiratory syncytial virus. EMBO Journal 12, 4181-4187.[Abstract]

García-Barreno, B., Delgado, T., Akerlind-Stopner, B., Norrby, E. & Melero, J. A. (1992). Location of the epitope recognized by monoclonal antibody 63G on the primary structure of human respiratory syncytial virus G glycoprotein and the ability of synthetic peptides containing this epitope to induce neutralizing antibodies. Journal of General Virology 73, 2625-2630.[Abstract]

García-Beato, R., Martínez, I., Francí, C., Real, F. X., García-Barreno, B. & Melero, J. A. (1996). Host cell effect upon glycosylation and antigenicity of human respiratory syncytial virus G glycoprotein. Virology 221, 301-309.[Medline]

Hendrick, D. A., McIntosh, K. & Patterson, J. L. (1988). Further characterization of the soluble form of the G protein of respiratory syncytial virus. Journal of Virology 62, 2228-2233.[Medline]

Johnson, P. R., Spriggs, P. R., Olmsted, R. A. & Collins, P. L. (1987). The G glycoprotein of human respiratory syncytial viruses of subgroups A and B: extensive sequence divergence between antigenically related proteins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 84, 5625-5629.[Abstract]

Lambert, D. M. (1988). Role of oligosaccharides in the structure and function of respiratory syncytial virus glycoproteins. Virology 130, 204-214.

Langedijk, J. P. M., Schaaper, W. M. M., Meloen, R. H. & van Oirschot, J. T. (1996). Proposed three-dimensional model for the attachment protein G of respiratory syncytial virus. Journal of General Virology 77, 1249-1257.[Abstract]

Martínez, I., Dopazo, J. & Melero, J. A. (1997). Antigenic structure of the human respiratory syncytial virus G glycoprotein and relevance of hypermutation events for the generation of antigenic variants. Journal of General Virology 78, 2419-2429.[Abstract]

Martínez, I., Valdés, O., Delfraro, A., Arbiza, J., Russi, J. & Melero, J. A. (1999). Evolutionary pattern of the G glycoprotein of human respiratory syncytial viruses from antigenic group B: the use of alternative termination codons and lineage diversification. Journal of General Virology 80, 125-130.[Abstract]

Melero, J. A., García-Barreno, B., Martínez, I., Pringle, C. R. & Cane, P. A. (1997). Antigenic structure, evolution and immunobiology of human respiratory syncytial virus attachment (G) protein. Journal of General Virology 78, 2411-2418.[Free Full Text]

Moore, A. E., Sabachewsky, L. & Toolan, M. W. (1955). Culture characteristics of four permanent lines of human cancer cells. Cancer Research 15, 598-602.

Mufson, M. A., Örvell, C., Rafnar, B. & Norrby, E. (1985). Two distinct subtypes of human respiratory syncytial virus. Journal of General Virology 66, 2111-2124.[Abstract]

Palomo, C., García-Barreno, B., Peñas, C. & Melero, J. A. (1991). The G protein of human respiratory syncytial virus: significance of carbohydrate side-chains and the C-terminal end to its antigenicity. Journal of General Virology 72, 669-675.[Abstract]

Palomo, C., Cane, P. A. & Melero, J. A. (1999). Evaluation of the antibody specificities of human convalescent sera against the attachment (G) protein of human respiratory syncytial virus: influence of strain variation and carbohydrate side-chains. Journal of Medical Virology (in press).

Roberts, S. R., Lichtenstein, D., Ball, L. A. & Wertz, G. W. (1994). The membrane-associated and secreted forms of the respiratory syncytial virus attachment glycoprotein G are synthesized from alternative initiation codons. Journal of Virology 68, 4538-4546.[Abstract]

Rueda, P., Delgado, T., Portela, A., Melero, J. A. & García-Barreno, B. (1991). Premature stop codons in the G glycoprotein of human respiratory syncytial viruses resistant to neutralization by monoclonal antibodies. Journal of Virology 65, 3374-3378.[Medline]

Rueda, P., Palomo, C., García-Barreno, B. & Melero, J. A. (1995). The three C-terminal residues of human respiratory syncytial virus G glycoprotein (Long strain) are essential for integrity of multiple epitopes distinguishable by antiidiotypic antibodies. Viral Immunology 8, 37-46.[Medline]

Sullender, W. M., Mufson, M. A., Anderson, L. J. & Wertz, G. W. (1991). Genetic diversity of the attachment protein of subgroup B respiratory syncytial virus. Journal of Virology 65, 5425-5434.[Medline]

Wertz, G. W., Collins, P. L., Huang, Y., Gruber, C., Levine, S. & Ball, L. A. (1985). Nucleotide sequence of the G protein of human respiratory syncytial virus reveals an unusual type of viral membrane. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 82, 4075-4079.[Abstract]

Received 8 September 1999; accepted 1 December 1999.