Interaction between potyvirus helper component-proteinase and capsid protein in infected plants

Geneviève Roudet-Tavert1, Sylvie German-Retana1, Thierry Delaunay1, Brigitte Delécollea,1, Thierry Candresse1 and Olivier Le Gall1

Virologie Végétale, UMR GDPP, Institut de Biologie Végétale Moléculaire, INRA, BP 81, 33883 Villenave d’Ornon Cedex, France1

Author for correspondence: Geneviève Roudet-Tavert. Fax +33 557 122 384. e-mail groudet{at}bordeaux.inra.fr


   Abstract
Top
Abstract
Main text
References
 
Monoclonal antibodies were raised against helper component-proteinase (HcPro) purified from plants infected with the potyvirus Lettuce mosaic virus (LMV). These antibodies were used in a two-site triple antibody sandwich ELISA assay together with polyclonal antibodies directed against purified virions. An interaction between HcPro and the viral coat protein (CP) was demonstrated in extracts of LMV-infected leaves, as well as for two other potyviruses, Plum pox virus and Potato virus Y. The CP–HcPro interaction was not abolished in LMV derivatives with an HcPro GFP N-terminal fusion, or with a deletion from the CP of the amino acids involved in aphid transmission. Electron microscopy indicated that HcPro probably does not interact with the CP in the form of assembled virions or virus-like particles. Together, these results suggest that the interaction detected between CP and HcPro might be involved in a process of the potyvirus cycle different from aphid transmission.


   Main text
Top
Abstract
Main text
References
 
Potyviruses are the most numerous and economically devastating plant viruses (Shukla et al., 1994 ). Their single-stranded genomic RNA, encapsidated in flexuous virions 800 nm long, contains about 10000 nucleotides and encodes a polyprotein processed by three proteinases to yield the mature viral proteins (for a review see Revers et al., 1997 ). The involvement of all potyviral proteins has been shown at one stage or another of the virus cycle (Klein et al., 1994 ). One of them, helper component-proteinase (HcPro), is especially important in this respect because it is a multifunctional protein involved in a number of processes of the virus cycle (Maia et al., 1996 ; Revers et al., 1999 ).

In addition to the proteinase activity responsible for its own C-terminal processing (Carrington et al., 1989 ), HcPro is involved in genome amplification (Klein et al., 1994 ), short- and long-distance movement (Kasschau et al., 1997 ; Rojas et al., 1997 ; Kasschau & Carrington, 2001 ) and aphid transmission (Huet et al., 1994 ). In addition, HcPro has been described as a pathogenicity determinant (Revers et al., 1999 ; Redondo et al., 2001 ), and also responsible for the synergism observed in mixed infections involving a potyvirus (Vance et al., 1995 ). Some of these properties at least could be related to the ability of HcPro to suppress plant defence responses based on gene silencing (Anandalakshmi et al., 1998 ; Brigneti et al., 1998 ; Kasschau & Carrington, 1998 , 2001 ).

HcPro acts coordinately with the capsid protein (CP) for several of these functions: aphid transmission (Blanc et al., 1997 ) and also, less expectedly, virus movement (Rojas et al., 1997 ). This opens the possibility that these proteins are engaged in a direct interaction. Indeed, such an interaction, demonstrated by in vitro overlay assay (Blanc et al., 1997 ; Peng et al., 1998 ; Manoussopoulos et al., 2000 ), was correlated with aphid transmission (Blanc et al., 1997 ). Biological analysis of mutants of Potato virus A also produced indirect evidence for an interaction (Andrejeva et al., 1999 ). However, the CP–HcPro interaction has never been demonstrated in vivo, even using the yeast two-hybrid system (Guo et al., 2001 ; J. Walter, personal communication). Here we report the detection of an interaction in planta between HcPro and CP of Lettuce mosaic virus (LMV) and of two other potyviruses, and discuss its implication for biological processes in which HcPro and CP are engaged.

The fusion of a polyhistidine tag to the N terminus of LMV-E HcPro was engineered in an infectious cDNA (Yang et al., 1998 ). His-tagged HcPro from lettuce plants infected with this cDNA was purified to near-homogeneity by affinity chromatography on nickel-containing resins (Blanc et al., 1997 ), and used to produce anti-HcPro mouse monoclonal antibodies. Two monoclonal antibodies, 3C5-10 and 2G10-13, were selected and tested further by Western blot assays for their specificity and polyvalence (data not shown). For all LMV isolates analysed, both antibodies reacted with a single protein of about 50 kDa, in agreement with the calculated molecular mass of LMV HcPro; no reaction with any other protein, including the 31 kDa CP, could be detected (data not shown). Both monoclonal antibodies also reacted with the HcPro of Potato virus Y (PVY). In addition, 3C5-10 reacted with lower molecular mass material specifically present in extracts of plants infected with Plum pox virus (PPV) and presumably representing degraded forms of PPV HcPro. Neither of the monoclonal antibodies reacted with HcPro of Pea seed-borne mosaic virus (data not shown). 3C5-10 was used for further experiments unless otherwise stated.

Three recombinant forms of LMV-0, with various alterations engineered at the N terminus of their HcPro (German-Retana et al., 2000 ; S. German-Retana, unpublished), were tested by Western blot using 3C5-10 (Fig. 1). Two of these recombinant viruses carried a GFP marker gene fused to the N terminus of HcPro either with (LMV-0-GFPclvHC) or without (LMV-0-GFPHC) an engineered NIa cleavage site added between the two proteins (S. German-Retana, unpublished). The third LMV-0 derivative had GFP fused to a truncated form of HcPro lacking the first 102 amino acids of its N terminus (LMV-0-GFP{Delta}HC). In each extract, 3C5-10 reacted with a single protein with a size as expected for the respective engineered forms of HcPro (Fig. 1), confirming its specificity; in particular, no cross-reaction was detected with the 31 kDa CP. These results also indicate that 3C5-10 recognition does not target a site within the first 102 amino acids of HcPro, and also that it is not abolished by the presence of GFP fused to the N terminus of intact or truncated HcPro. Antibody 3C5-10 was also used to successfully detect HcPro in immunoprints (Fakhfakh et al., 2001 ; Krause-Sakate et al., 2002 ) or double-antibody-sandwich (DAS) ELISA (Clark & Adams, 1977 ) prepared with infected lettuce, as well as in Western blots after heterologous expression in Escherichia coli, showing that recognition was not sensitive to eukaryotic post-translational modifications (data not shown).



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Western blot detection of various natural or recombinant LMV isolates in infected lettuce leaf extracts using anti-HcPro monoclonal antibody 3C5-10. 1, LMV-0; 2, LMV-0-GFPclvHC; 3, LMV-0-GFPHC; 4, LMV-0-GFP{Delta}HC; 5, non-inoculated plant extract. The positions of protein molecular mass markers (Benchmark, Bio-Rad) are indicated on the left, and those of every form of HcPro on the right, with their predicted molecular mass given in parentheses. See text for a description of the structure of the recombinant LMV isolates used.

 
A two-site triple-antibody-sandwich (2S-TAS) ELISA using 3C5-10 and polyclonal rabbit antibodies raised against LMV virions (anti-CP), provided by Hervé Lot (INRA-Avignon, France), was performed on extracts of lettuce systemically infected with LMV-0. Briefly, infected leaves were homogenized in a mortar in the presence of 3 vols per weight unit of sample buffer (PBS containing 0·05% Tween and 2% PVP), and the extract was clarified by low speed centrifugation before being placed in the antibody-coated microtitre plates. Either 3C5-10 (2 µg/ml; similar results were obtained with 1 µg/ml) or anti-CP (1 µg/ml) were used as the primary or as the secondary antibody and revealed by adding goat anti-mouse or anti-rabbit antibodies conjugated with alkaline phosphatase (Jackson ImmunoResearch). The chromogenic reaction was performed at room temperature with p-nitrophenyl phosphate (Sigma) as the substrate. All other experimental conditions were performed as described for DAS-ELISA (Clark & Adams, 1977 ). DAS-ELISA was routinely performed on the same extracts using anti-CP antibodies and conjugate in order to evaluate the relative virus concentrations.

Extracts of infected plants produced a positive signal with either anti-CP DAS-ELISA, or a combination of either polarity of anti-CP and 3C5-10 or 2G10-13 in the 2S-TAS-ELISA assay (Table 1 and data not shown). A signal was always obtained but its intensity varied depending on particular plants and experiments (Table 1A vs Table 1B for instance). No significant signal was observed if any one of the steps of the assay was omitted (Table 1B), or if extracts of non-infected plants were used (Table 1A). No signal was detected when monoclonal antibodies raised against another LMV non-structural protein, VPg, or if polyclonal antibodies against virions of another potyvirus, PPV, or against an unrelated virus, Grapevine chrome mosaic virus (genus Nepovirus), were used in place of 3C5-10 (data not shown). 2S-TAS-ELISA gave a positive signal in plants at least 6 days and up to 60 days after inoculation (data not shown). Altogether, our results suggest the presence, in infected plant extracts, of a complex involving CP and HcPro.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Interaction between CP and HcPro assessed by 2S-TAS-ELISA using the 3C5-10 anti-HcPro monoclonal antibody and anti-CP polyclonal antibodies

 
In order to evaluate the general value of this observation, two other isolates of LMV (LMV-E and LMV-AF199) were similarly assayed and produced similar results (data not shown). Similar results were also obtained when two other potyviruses, PPV (strains PPV-M, PPV-D and PPV-NAT) and PVY (strain PVY-Fr), were assayed using specific antibodies prepared against their virions and the LMV HcPro-specific monoclonal antibody 3C5-10 (Table 1C). However, in contrast to the results obtained with LMV, a signal was detected only when 3C5-10 was used as the primary antibody. The basis for this difference in behaviour is unclear at the moment.

Two-site TAS-ELISA thus proved a reliable assay to reveal an in planta interaction between HcPro and CP in the case of the three potyviruses tested. The assay was then used in an attempt to further characterize the CP–HcPro complex, using various forms of genetically engineered LMV. Specifically, experiments were carried out using LMV-0-GFPHC and another LMV-0 derivative lacking the DAG triplet in the N-terminal region of the CP (LMV-0{Delta}DAG; S. German-Retana, unpublished). The effect of these modifications on virus accumulation was undetectable in a anti-CP-based DAS-ELISA (Fig. 2).



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. CP–HcPro interaction in wild-type or mutant forms of LMV-0. Extracts of ten independent plants (two separate experiments involving five plants each) inoculated with various derivatives of LMV-0 were subjected to 2S-TAS-ELISA and DAS-ELISA. Individual 2S-TAS-ELISA A405 values (y-ordinate), illustrating the interaction strength, were plotted against those obtained in anti-CP DAS-ELISA (x-ordinate), illustrating the virus concentration in each individual extract. A, 3C5-10 was used as the primary antibody and anti-CP as the secondary antibody; B, anti-CP was used as the primary antibody and 3C5-10 as the secondary antibody. The extracts analysed were from plants inoculated with LMV-0 (diamonds), LMV-0-GFPHC (squares) or LMV-0{Delta}DAG (circles). Non-inoculated plants (not illustrated) yielded A405 values ranging from -0·013 to 0·019 in DAS-ELISA (average -0·001), from 0·016 to 0·088 (average 0·059) in 2S-TAS-ELISA using 3C5-10 as the primary antibody and from -0·009 to 0·022 (average 0·008) in 2S-TAS-ELISA using anti-CP as the primary antibody; in no case did these ranges overlap with those from inoculated plants.

 
When 3C5-10 was used as the primary antibody, the HcPro interaction was not significantly different in intensity for LMV-0{Delta}DAG and wild-type LMV-0 (Fig. 2A). However, the use of anti-CP as the primary antibody resulted in a weaker but still significant signal for LMV-0{Delta}DAG (Fig. 2B). Although we have no explanation for the observation that this difference in signal intensity was only observed for this particular con struct, it suggests an involvement of the DAG triplet in the interaction, as described in an in vitro approach for another potyvirus (Blanc et al., 1997 ). However, this requirement does not seem to be absolute because the interaction signal was not completely abolished.

In contrast, the CP–HcPro interaction was only slightly attenuated in LMV-0-GFPHC (Fig. 2), suggesting that the presence of exogenous sequences at the N terminus of HcPro only marginally affects the ability of HcPro to interact with CP. Interaction was also observed in the case of a similar construct obtained from the LMV-E isolate, LMV-E-GFPHC (data not shown).

The 2S-TAS-ELISA scheme was transferred to an immunosorbent electron microscopy (ISEM) format in an attempt to visualize any structure that could be related to the CP–HcPro interaction. The same extraction buffer and protocol as for 2S-TAS-ELISA were used, and a control 2S-TAS-ELISA assay was performed in parallel to the ISEM experiments. Anti-CP very efficiently trapped LMV virions, which could be further decorated using the same antibody (Fig. 3A). However, no decoration of the virus particles was apparent when 3C5-10 was used as the secondary antibody (Fig. 3B). Conversely, when 3C5-10 was used as the primary antibody, the density of virus particles per surface unit was not distinguishable from the background obtained when omitting the deposition of a primary antibody (data not shown). Although it is clearly possible that the structure leading to the 2S-TAS-ELISA signal is unstable at the surface of electron microscopy grids, these results suggest that the CP–HcPro interaction does not take place in virus-like structures. The absence of decoration of virions by 3C5-10 would be compatible with a scattered or localized repartition of HcPro subunits at the surface of virions, but then virus particles should have been trapped by 3C5-10 when it was used as the primary antibody. Thus, the CP–HcPro interaction is probably materialized in another structure. The data currently available do not allow us to establish whether this alternative structure consists of monomers, oligomers, or polymers of CP and HcPro.



View larger version (127K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Electron microscope observation of LMV-0 particles trapped with anti-CP. (A) anti-CP as the secondary antibody; (B) 3C5-10 as the secondary antibody.

 
In conclusion, the results presented here provide evidence for a direct physical interaction between CP and HcPro in extracts of plants infected with LMV, but also with two other potyviruses tested. Thus, this phenomenon probably reflects a general property of potyviruses, rather than a specificity of the LMV–lettuce system. 2S-TAS-ELISA is simple, reliable and at least partially quantitative, and thus provides a useful tool to study this interaction directly in plant extracts, especially when coupled with the use of genetically engineered viruses.

The CP–HcPro interaction we report could be involved in aphid transmission, like the one shown in vitro (Blanc et al., 1997 ). Alternatively, but not exclusively, this interaction could be related to other biological functions of HcPro and CP. The residual level of interaction after deletion of the DAG triplet in the CP N terminus argues for the second hypothesis because this triplet is necessary for aphid transmission in several potyviruses (Atreya et al., 1991 ; Blanc et al., 1997 ). This is also supported by the detection of an interaction in LMV-E-GFPHC, a mutant in which GFP is fused to the N terminus of the HcPro, which was previously shown to have lost aphid transmissibility (German-Retana et al., 2000 ). Lastly, we also detected an interaction in plants infected with the aphid non-transmissible PPV-NAT, which has a natural deletion of 15 amino acids, including the DAG triplet in the N terminus of the CP (Maiss et al., 1989 ) (Table 1C). Altogether, these data are compatible with a relationship between the CP–HcPro interaction and a biological trait other than aphid transmission, such as short- and/or long-distance virus movement in the plant. More investigations are needed, however, in order to understand how CP and HcPro interact with each other, and the biological role of this interaction in the potyvirus cycle.


   Acknowledgments
 
We thank Drs Michel Ravelonandro (INRA Bordeaux) and Benoit Moury (INRA Avignon) for their help in PPV and PVY extract analyses, Dr Hervé Lot (INRA Avignon, France) for providing the anti-CP antibodies, Dr Martin Drücker (INRA, St Christol-les-Alès) for providing the preparation of pure HcPro used for mouse immunization, Thierry Mauduit for taking care of the plants in the greenhouse, and Kathryn Mayo for help with the English of the manuscript. This work was partially supported by EPR Aquitaine no. 20000307004.


   Footnotes
 
a Present address: Pathologie Végétale, INRA St Maurice, BP 94, 84143 Montfavet Cedex, France.


   References
Top
Abstract
Main text
References
 
Anandalakshmi, R., Pruss, G. J., Ge, X., Marathe, R., Mallory, A. C., Smith, T. H. & Vance, V. B. (1998). A viral suppressor of gene silencing in plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 95, 13079-13084.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Andrejeva, J., Puurand, U., Merits, A., Rabenstein, F., Jarvekulg, L. & Valkonen, J. P. (1999). Potyvirus helper component-proteinase and coat protein (CP) have coordinated functions in virus–host interactions and the same CP motif affects virus transmission and accumulation. Journal of General Virology 80, 1133-1139.[Abstract]

Atreya, P. L., Atreya, C. D. & Pirone, T. P. (1991). Amino acid substitutions in the coat protein result in loss of insect transmissibility of a plant virus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 88, 7887-7897.[Abstract]

Blanc, S., Lopez-Moya, J. J., Wang, R., Garcia-Lampasona, S., Thornbury, D. W. & Pirone, T. P. (1997). A specific interaction between coat protein and helper component correlates with aphid transmission of a potyvirus. Virology 231, 141-147.[Medline]

Brigneti, G., Voinnet, O., Li, W. X., Ji, L. H., Ding, S. W. & Baulcombe, D. C. (1998). Viral pathogenicity determinants are suppressors of transgene silencing in Nicotiana benthamiana. EMBO Journal 17, 6739-6746.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Carrington, J. C., Cary, S. M., Parks, T. D. & Dougherty, W. G. (1989). A second proteinase encoded by a plant potyvirus genome. EMBO Journal 8, 365-370.[Abstract]

Clark, M. F. & Adams, A. N. (1977). Characteristics of the microplate method of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of plant viruses. Journal of General Virology 34, 475-483.[Abstract]

Fakhfakh, H., Le Gall, O., Candresse, T. & Marrakchi, M. (2001). Analysis of the variability of Tunisian isolates of Lettuce mosaic potyvirus (LMV) using biological and molecular properties. Journal of Plant Pathology 83, 3-11.

German-Retana, S., Candresse, T., Alias, E., Delbos, R. & Le Gall, O. (2000). Effects of GFP or GUS tagging on the accumulation and pathogenicity of a resistance breaking LMV isolate in susceptible and resistant lettuce cultivars. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 13, 316-324.

Guo, D., Rajamaki, M. L., Saarma, M. & Valkonen, J. P. (2001). Towards a protein interaction map of potyviruses: protein interaction matrixes of two potyviruses based on the yeast two-hybrid system. Journal of General Virology 82, 935-939.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Huet, H., Gal-On, A., Meir, E., Lecoq, H. & Raccah, B. (1994). Mutations in the helper component protease gene of zucchini yellow mosaic virus affect its ability to mediate aphid transmissibility. Journal of General Virology 75, 1407-1414.[Abstract]

Kasschau, K. D. & Carrington, J. C. (1998). A counter-defensive strategy of plant viruses: suppression of posttranscriptional gene silencing. Cell 95, 461-470.[Medline]

Kasschau, K. D. & Carrington, J. C. (2001). Long-distance movement and replication maintenance functions correlate with silencing suppression activity of potyviral HC-Pro. Virology 285, 71-81.[Medline]

Kasschau, K. D., Cronin, S. & Carrington, J. C. (1997). Genome amplification and long-distance movement functions associated with the central domain of tobacco etch potyvirus helper component-proteinase. Virology 228, 251-262.[Medline]

Kerlan, C. & Dunez, J. (1979). Différenciation biologique et sérologique de souches du virus de la Sharka. Annals of Phytopathology 11, 241-251.

Klein, P. G., Klein, R. R., Rodriguez-Cerezo, E., Hunt, A. G. & Shaw, J. G. (1994). Mutational analysis of the tobacco vein mottling virus genome. Virology 204, 759-769.[Medline]

Krause-Sakate, R., Le Gall, O., Fakhfakh, H., Peypelut, M., Marrakchi, M., Varveri, C., Pavan, M. A., Souche, S., Lot, H., Zerbini, F. M. & Candresse, T. (2002). Molecular characterization of Lettuce mosaic virus field isolates reveals the emergence and spread of a resistance-breaking strain, LMV-Most. Phytopathology.

Maia, I. G., Haenni, A.-L. & Bernardi, F. (1996). Potyviral HC-Pro: a multifunctional protein. Journal of General Virology 77, 1335-1341.[Medline]

Maiss, E., Timpe, U., Brisske, A., Jelkmann, W., Casper, R., Himmler, G., Mattanovich, D. & Katinger, H. W. D. (1989). The nucleotide sequence of plum pox virus RNA. Journal of General Virology 70, 513-524.[Abstract]

Manoussopoulos, I. N., Maiss, E. & Tsagris, M. (2000). Native electrophoresis and Western blot analysis (NEWeB): a method for characterization of different forms of potyvirus particles and similar nucleoprotein complexes in extracts of infected plant tissues. Journal of General Virology 81, 2295-2298.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Peng, Y., Kadoury, D., Gal-On, A., Huet, H., Wang, Y. & Raccah, B. (1998). Mutations in the HC-Pro gene of zucchini yellow mosaic potyvirus: effects on aphid transmission and binding to purified virions. Journal of General Virology 79, 897-904.[Abstract]

Redondo, E., Krause-Sakate, R., Yang, S. J., Lot, H., Le Gall, O. & Candresse, T. (2001). Lettuce mosaic virus (LMV) pathogenicity determinants in susceptible and tolerant lettuce varieties map to different regions of the viral genome. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 14, 804-810.

Revers, F., Yang, S. J., Walter, J., Souche, S., Lot, H., Le Gall, O., Candresse, T. & Dunez, J. (1997). Comparison of the complete nucleotide sequences of two isolates of Lettuce mosaic virus differing in their biological properties. Virus Research 47, 167-177.[Medline]

Revers, F., Le Gall, O., Candresse, T. & Maule, A. J. (1999). New advances in understanding the molecular biology of plant/potyvirus interactions. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 12, 367-376.

Rojas, M. R., Zerbini, F. M., Allison, R. F., Gilbertson, R. L. & Lucas, W. J. (1997). Capsid protein and helper component-proteinase function as potyvirus cell-to-cell movement proteins. Virology 237, 283-295.[Medline]

Shukla, D. D., Ward, C. W. & Brunt, A. A. (1994). The Potyviridae. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

Vance, V. B., Berger, P. H., Carrington, J. C., Hunt, A. G. & Shi, X. M. (1995). 5' proximal potyviral sequences mediate potato virus X/potyviral synergistic disease in transgenic tobacco. Virology 206, 583-590.[Medline]

Yang, S. J., Revers, F., Souche, S., Lot, H., Le Gall, O., Candresse, T. & Dunez, J. (1998). Construction of full-length cDNA clones of Lettuce mosaic virus (LMV) and the effects of intron-insertion on their viability in Escherichia coli and on their infectivity to plants. Archives of Virology 143, 2443-2451.[Medline]

Received 19 November 2001; accepted 6 February 2002.