Are depicted in figure 1A and B. Two days after cotransfection

Are depicted in figure 1A and B. Two days after cotransfection of this construct together with rev and tat expression plasmids into HEK293T cells cytoplasmic RNA was Oltipraz site extracted and analyzed by RT-PCR. Fragments corresponding to singly-spliced and fully-spliced RNAs were detectable (figure 1C). The unspliced RNA was not detected in these experiments because short elongation times were used to specifically detect the spliced transcripts. Sequencing of the obtained fragments verified the expected fusion of SD1 with SA5 for the singly-spliced RNA and an additional splicing process between SD4 and SA7 in the fully-spliced RNA (data not shown). These also represent the predominant splicing events for the wild type virus leading to its env1 and nef2 transcripts [2]. The intron between SD1 and SA5 was removed from VHgenomic to generate the vector VHenv encoding the singly-spliced RNA of VHgenomic as an unspliced transcript (figure 1B). The VHnef vector contains an additional deletion of the intron between SD4 and SA7. Thus, it encodes the fully-spliced RNA of VHgenomic as an unspliced transcript (figure 1B). After cotransfection of VHenv or VHnef in combination with rev and tat expression plasmids RT-PCR of cytoplasmic RNA detected transcripts of the expected lengths (figure 1D). Sequence analyses of the amplicons further confirmed that the expected transcripts were indeed expressed (figure 1C and D and data not shown).presence of Rev. In addition, similar protein processing patterns and budding efficiencies could be demonstrated (figure 2A and [12,13,18]). The infectious titers of supernatants harvested two days after transfection were determined on HEK293 cells by quantifying the number of GFP positive cells two days after infection (figure 2B). The lentiviral vector VHgenomic showed ^ a mean titer of 7.76105 GFU/ml very similar to the parental vector VH ([13] and data not shown). Omitting Rev reduced the titer 37-fold. Although transcripts expressed from VHenv and VHnef lack the intron between SD1 and SA5 and therefore the 39 part of the encapsidation signal they do contain all elements necessary for a successful RT reaction (primer binding site, 59 and 39 R region, central polypurine tract) and integration (wild type 59 and 39 ends after RT reaction). Consequently, two days after ^ ^ infection a mean titer of 3.36104 and 1.26104 GFU/ml in the presence of Rev could be detected for VHenv and VHnef, respectively (figure 2B). The infectious titer of VHenv was 6-fold reduced in the absence of Rev indicating that Rev is important for the production of infectious particles with VHenv. As expected, Rev did not influence the titer of VHnef lacking the RRE. An alternative explanation for the gfp expression observed could be pseudotransduction of GFP protein or mRNA. This is unlikely because GFP fluorescence mediated by this phenomenon peaks at approximately 12 hours after infection and is hardly detectable after 48 hours [19?1]. Whether the detected titer reflects gfp expression from integrated or unintegrated lentiviral vector DNA is unknown. Thus, VHenv and VHnef encoded transcripts could be packaged, reverse transcribed and transferred to target cells, although the vector titers were approximately 25 to 65-fold lower than those obtained for VHgenomic.Encapsidation efficienciesIn order to analyze the influence of Rev on encapsidation of different lentiviral vector RNAs we extracted cytoplasmic and Solvent Yellow 14 site virion-associated RNA after cotransfection of HEK29.Are depicted in figure 1A and B. Two days after cotransfection of this construct together with rev and tat expression plasmids into HEK293T cells cytoplasmic RNA was extracted and analyzed by RT-PCR. Fragments corresponding to singly-spliced and fully-spliced RNAs were detectable (figure 1C). The unspliced RNA was not detected in these experiments because short elongation times were used to specifically detect the spliced transcripts. Sequencing of the obtained fragments verified the expected fusion of SD1 with SA5 for the singly-spliced RNA and an additional splicing process between SD4 and SA7 in the fully-spliced RNA (data not shown). These also represent the predominant splicing events for the wild type virus leading to its env1 and nef2 transcripts [2]. The intron between SD1 and SA5 was removed from VHgenomic to generate the vector VHenv encoding the singly-spliced RNA of VHgenomic as an unspliced transcript (figure 1B). The VHnef vector contains an additional deletion of the intron between SD4 and SA7. Thus, it encodes the fully-spliced RNA of VHgenomic as an unspliced transcript (figure 1B). After cotransfection of VHenv or VHnef in combination with rev and tat expression plasmids RT-PCR of cytoplasmic RNA detected transcripts of the expected lengths (figure 1D). Sequence analyses of the amplicons further confirmed that the expected transcripts were indeed expressed (figure 1C and D and data not shown).presence of Rev. In addition, similar protein processing patterns and budding efficiencies could be demonstrated (figure 2A and [12,13,18]). The infectious titers of supernatants harvested two days after transfection were determined on HEK293 cells by quantifying the number of GFP positive cells two days after infection (figure 2B). The lentiviral vector VHgenomic showed ^ a mean titer of 7.76105 GFU/ml very similar to the parental vector VH ([13] and data not shown). Omitting Rev reduced the titer 37-fold. Although transcripts expressed from VHenv and VHnef lack the intron between SD1 and SA5 and therefore the 39 part of the encapsidation signal they do contain all elements necessary for a successful RT reaction (primer binding site, 59 and 39 R region, central polypurine tract) and integration (wild type 59 and 39 ends after RT reaction). Consequently, two days after ^ ^ infection a mean titer of 3.36104 and 1.26104 GFU/ml in the presence of Rev could be detected for VHenv and VHnef, respectively (figure 2B). The infectious titer of VHenv was 6-fold reduced in the absence of Rev indicating that Rev is important for the production of infectious particles with VHenv. As expected, Rev did not influence the titer of VHnef lacking the RRE. An alternative explanation for the gfp expression observed could be pseudotransduction of GFP protein or mRNA. This is unlikely because GFP fluorescence mediated by this phenomenon peaks at approximately 12 hours after infection and is hardly detectable after 48 hours [19?1]. Whether the detected titer reflects gfp expression from integrated or unintegrated lentiviral vector DNA is unknown. Thus, VHenv and VHnef encoded transcripts could be packaged, reverse transcribed and transferred to target cells, although the vector titers were approximately 25 to 65-fold lower than those obtained for VHgenomic.Encapsidation efficienciesIn order to analyze the influence of Rev on encapsidation of different lentiviral vector RNAs we extracted cytoplasmic and virion-associated RNA after cotransfection of HEK29.

Leave a Reply