Jiexiong Xie1, Isaura Christiaens1, Bo Yang1, Wander Van Breedam2, Tingting Cui1, Hans J Nauwynck1. 1. Laboratory of Virology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium. 2. Unit for Medical Biotechnology, Medical Biotechnology Center, VIB, Technologiepark 927, B-9052 Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
In recent years, several entry mediators have been characterized for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Porcine sialoadhesin [pSn, also known as sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-type lectin (Siglec-1)] and porcine CD163 (pCD163) have been identified as the most important host entry mediators that can fully coordinate PRRSV infection into macrophages. However, recent isolates have not only shown a tropism for sialoadhesin-positive cells, but also for sialoadhesin-negative cells. This observation might be partly explained by the existence of additional receptors that can support PRRSV binding and entry. In the search for new receptors, recently identified porcine Siglecs (Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10), members of the same family as sialoadhesin, were cloned and characterized. Only Siglec-10 was able to significantly improve PRRSV infection and production in a CD163-transfected cell line. Compared with sialoadhesin, Siglec-10 performed equally effectively as a receptor for PRRSV type 2 strain MN-184, but it was less capable of supporting infection with PRRSV type 1 strain LV (Lelystad virus). Siglec-10 was demonstrated to be involved in the endocytosis of PRRSV, confirming the important role of Siglec-10 in the entry process of PRRSV. In conclusion, it can be stated that PRRSV may use several Siglecs to enter macrophages, which may explain the strain differences in the pathogenesis.
In recent years, several entry mediators have been characterized for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Porcinesialoadhesin [pSn, also known as sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-type lectin (Siglec-1)] and porcineCD163 (pCD163) have been identified as the most important host entry mediators that can fully coordinate PRRSVinfection into macrophages. However, recent isolates have not only shown a tropism for sialoadhesin-positive cells, but also for sialoadhesin-negative cells. This observation might be partly explained by the existence of additional receptors that can support PRRSV binding and entry. In the search for new receptors, recently identified porcine Siglecs (Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10), members of the same family as sialoadhesin, were cloned and characterized. Only Siglec-10 was able to significantly improve PRRSVinfection and production in a CD163-transfected cell line. Compared with sialoadhesin, Siglec-10 performed equally effectively as a receptor for PRRSV type 2 strain MN-184, but it was less capable of supporting infection with PRRSV type 1 strain LV (Lelystad virus). Siglec-10 was demonstrated to be involved in the endocytosis of PRRSV, confirming the important role of Siglec-10 in the entry process of PRRSV. In conclusion, it can be stated that PRRSV may use several Siglecs to enter macrophages, which may explain the strain differences in the pathogenesis.
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is one of the most economically
devastating diseases in the pig industry [1].
The disease is associated with respiratory disorders in piglets and reproductive
problems in sows. PRRS virus (PRRSV), the etiology of PRRS, is a single-stranded
enveloped RNA virus belonging to the order Nidovirales, family
Arteriviridae and genus Arterivirus [2]. Currently, two types of PRRSV have been
reported, the European type (known as type 1) and the North American type (known as
type 2), with huge genetic variability between and within each genotype [3, 4].PRRSV has a narrow cell tropism for cells both in vivo and
in vitro. Differentiated macrophages are the main target cells,
with specific entry mediators determining whether cells are permissive to PRRSVinfection. Up till now, several receptors such as heparan sulfate, porcinesialoadhesin (pSn), CD163, CD151, vimentin and DC-SIGN, have been identified as
entry mediators for PRRSV [5-7].
The interaction of heparan sulfate with the GP5/M protein complex mediates the
binding of the virus [8]. pSn, also known as
porcinesialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-type lectin-1 (Siglec-1) is associated
with attachment and internalization in a sialic acid-dependent manner [6, 9]. PorcineCD163 (pCD163) interacts with
GP2a and/or GP4 to mediate disassembly and genome release [10, 11]. pSn and CD163 have been identified as the most
important host receptors that facilitate the infection of PRRSV into alveolar
macrophages [5, 6, 12]. However, recent
research has reported that the expression of Siglec-1 in pigs is not required for
infection with the PRRSV North American strain KS-06 [13]. Meanwhile, research from our laboratory has shown that
different isolates exhibit variable cell tropism. Certain emerging isolates, such as
Lena from Belarus (type 1, subtype 3, 2006, accession number: JF802085), 13V091
(type 1, subtype 1, 2013, accession number: KT159248) from Belgium and MN-184 from
the USA (type 2, 2002, accession number: DQ176019) have not only shown a strong
tropism for sialoadhesin-positive macrophages, but also for sialoadhesin-negative
macrophages. This observation suggests that additional receptors that can replace
the role of Siglec-1 as the receptor enabling PRRSV replication exist [14, 15].At present, two primary groups of Siglecs have been identified in humans. One group
comprising Siglec-1, CD22 (Siglec-2), myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG; Siglec-4)
and Siglec-15, are relatively well conserved in mammals. The other group, known as
the CD33-related Siglecs, consists of CD33 (Siglec-3), Siglec-5 to -13, Siglec-14
and Siglec-16. The CD33-related group is evolving rapidly and exhibits differences
in composition between mammalian species [16,
17]. In humans, CD33-related Siglecs interact with several sialylated
pathogens, such as Campylobacter jejuni, Neisseria meningitides,
group B streptococcus, Trypanosoma cruzi and human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) [18, 19]. Siglec-7 has been
reported to interact with the gp120 of HIV-1 and to facilitate the infection of
CD4+ T cells and macrophages [19]. However, up till now few of the Siglecs have been identified in
pigs. Recently, Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 were cloned and characterized in
pigs [20-22]. Since Siglec-1
does not seem to be the only receptor for PRRSV, and the Siglecs reported in humans
are frequently used as receptors for various pathogens, we investigated the
functions of the already characterized porcine Siglecs and aimed to identify Siglecs
that may have similar functions to Siglec-1.
Results
Amino acid sequence, structure and expression analysis of Siglecs
To better understand Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10, their amino acid sequences
were deduced and their structure was predicted with I-TASSER and by PyMOL V6.6.
As expected, all Siglecs showed a similar structure to Siglec-1, which includes
one V-type and different numbers of C2-type Ig-like domains, a transmembrane
domain and a cytoplasmic tail. As shown in Fig.
1(a), Siglec-1 has 16 C2-type Ig-like domains, whereas Siglec-3 has
only one C2-type Ig-like domain, and Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 have three C2-type
Ig-like domains. The V-type Ig domain is indicated in white, the signal peptide
is indicated in yellow and the sialic acid-binding site is indicated in red. The
V-type Ig domains of the Siglecs shared a high amino acid homology, as shown in
Fig. 1(c). The conserved sites are
coloured in red. The predicted sialic acid-binding sites, indicated with a star,
were well conserved among these Siglecs. The sequence of the Siglecs obtained in
this study showed a high amino acid similarity with the Siglec-3 (accession
number: AK237787), Siglec-5 (accession number: AK345769) and Siglec-10
(accession number: AK344974) sequences reported previously by Alvarez et
al. [20] and [22] (ranging from 99.2–100 %)
(Fig. 1b).
Fig. 1.
Amino acid sequence and structure analysis of Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5 and Siglec-10. (a) Spatial structure of Siglec-1,3, Siglec-5
and Siglec-10. Protein structure was predicted by I-TASSER (http://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/I-TASSER/) and
analysed by PyMOL (version 6.6). The yellow portion represents the
signal peptide; the white portion represents the V-type Ig domain; and
the red dots are the predicted sialic acid-binding site. Different
numbers of C-set domains are shown just under the V-type Ig domain. The
surface of the predicted sialic acid-binding sites was expanded and the
numbers represent the amino acid position of the predicted sialic
acid-binding sites. (b) Amino acid sequence homology analysis. The
homology of the full-length Siglecs obtained in this study was compared
with the sequences that have been reported using MegAlign (DNAstar).
Highlighted numbers represent the similarity between the Siglecs
obtained in this study with the reported ones. (c) Amino acid comparison
of V-type Ig domain. The V-type Ig amino acid sequences of Siglec-1, -3,
-5 and -10 were compared using CLC sequence viewer (version 6.8.1). The
predicted sialic acid-binding site is indicated with an asterisk.
Amino acid sequence and structure analysis of Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5 and Siglec-10. (a) Spatial structure of Siglec-1,3, Siglec-5
and Siglec-10. Protein structure was predicted by I-TASSER (http://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/I-TASSER/) and
analysed by PyMOL (version 6.6). The yellow portion represents the
signal peptide; the white portion represents the V-type Ig domain; and
the red dots are the predicted sialic acid-binding site. Different
numbers of C-set domains are shown just under the V-type Ig domain. The
surface of the predicted sialic acid-binding sites was expanded and the
numbers represent the amino acid position of the predicted sialic
acid-binding sites. (b) Amino acid sequence homology analysis. The
homology of the full-length Siglecs obtained in this study was compared
with the sequences that have been reported using MegAlign (DNAstar).
Highlighted numbers represent the similarity between the Siglecs
obtained in this study with the reported ones. (c) Amino acid comparison
of V-type Ig domain. The V-type Ig amino acid sequences of Siglec-1, -3,
-5 and -10 were compared using CLC sequence viewer (version 6.8.1). The
predicted sialic acid-binding site is indicated with an asterisk.After the successful construction of the porcineSiglec-3-, Siglec-5- and
Siglec-10-encoding plasmids, the expression of the Siglecs was examined using
immunofluorescence staining and Western blot. PK-15 cells were transfected with
the Siglec-encoding constructs. Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 were
successfully expressed both in the cytoplasm and at the surface of the cells
(Fig. 2a). To further verify the
correct expression of these Siglecs, a Western blot assay was performed. Based
on the amino acid sequence and the size of the tag, the estimated sizes of
Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 should be approximately 41 kD, 64 kD and 71 kD,
respectively. The obtained sizes for Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 were
approximately 60 kD, 120 kD and 95 kD, respectively, which is larger than the
predicted ones (Fig. 2b). To find out if
the discrepancy between the predicted sizes and the observed sizes was due to
post-translational modification(s) such as glycosylation, a deglycosylation
assay was performed. Cell lysates were treated with different glycosidases and
analysed by reducing SDS-PAGE and Western blot (Fig. 2b). Treatment of cell lysates with N-glycosidase F (PNGase F),
which removes all types of N-linked glycans, resulted in a single species for
each Siglec, whose size was in accordance with the predicted size. Treatment
with endoglycosidase H (Endo H), which removes high mannose and some hybrid
types of N-linked carbohydrates, resulted in two species for all Siglecs: a
larger EndoH-resistant form and a smaller EndoH-sensitive form. This implies
that the proteins were partly Golgi-processed and contained Endo H-resistant
complex oligosaccharides. Finally, cell lysates were treated with Vibrio
cholerae sialidase to remove sialic acids in the
α2–3, α2–6 or α2–8 configuration.
Sialidase treatment did not increase the electrophoretic mobility of the
proteins. The results of the sialidase treatments indicated that these proteins
carry both high mannose and complex type N-glycans capped with few or no sialic
acids.
Fig. 2.
Expression analysis of Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 using IFA and
Western blotting. (a) PK-15 cells were transfected with Siglec-3-,
Siglec-5- and Siglec-10-encoding vector. Twenty-four hours
post-transfection, the cells were fixed with 4 % PF and
permeabilized with Triton X-100 for cytoplasmic staining, or not
permeabilized for surface staining. IFA was performed using V5-specific
antibody (Siglec; green) and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). Scale
bar: 25 µm (b) Western blot identification. HEK-293T cells
were transfected with Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10. Twenty-four
hours post-transfection, the cells were collected and lysed with lysis
buffer. Afterwards, cellular lysates were treated or mock-treated with
sialidase, EndoH or PNGase F and analysed by SDS-PAGE and Western blot.
Primary antibody V5-specific mAb (GenScript; A00641) and secondary
peroxidase-labelled goat anti-mouse IgG antibodies (Dako) were used for
immunoblotting. For the detection of tubulin, an HRP-conjugated
anti-alpha tubulin monoclonal antibody (Abcam; ab40742) was used.
Expression analysis of Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 using IFA and
Western blotting. (a) PK-15 cells were transfected with Siglec-3-,
Siglec-5- and Siglec-10-encoding vector. Twenty-four hours
post-transfection, the cells were fixed with 4 % PF and
permeabilized with Triton X-100 for cytoplasmic staining, or not
permeabilized for surface staining. IFA was performed using V5-specific
antibody (Siglec; green) and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). Scale
bar: 25 µm (b) Western blot identification. HEK-293T cells
were transfected with Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10. Twenty-four
hours post-transfection, the cells were collected and lysed with lysis
buffer. Afterwards, cellular lysates were treated or mock-treated with
sialidase, EndoH or PNGase F and analysed by SDS-PAGE and Western blot.
Primary antibody V5-specific mAb (GenScript; A00641) and secondary
peroxidase-labelled goat anti-mouse IgG antibodies (Dako) were used for
immunoblotting. For the detection of tubulin, an HRP-conjugated
anti-alpha tubulin monoclonal antibody (Abcam; ab40742) was used.
Transfected cells expressing Siglec-10 exhibit red blood-binding capacity in
a sialic acid-dependent manner
The sialic acid-binding capacity of the different Siglecs was analysed using a
red blood cell binding assay. Only Siglec-1- and Siglec-10-transfected cells
showed binding of red blood cells, as depicted with black arrows in (Fig. 3). Siglec-1-expressing PK-15 cells that
were not treated with sialidase were still able to bind red blood cells,
although to a lesser extent than cells treated with sialidase. This indicates
the existence of cis-acting sialic acids for both Siglec-1 and Siglec-10 [23]. When red blood cells were treated with
sialidase, no binding was observed for any of these Siglecs (data not shown). In
conclusion, it can be stated that Siglec-1 and Siglec-10 are sialic acid-binding
lectins that show red blood cell-binding capability in a sialic acid-dependent
manner [21, 23].
Fig. 3.
Analysis of the sialic acid-binding capacity of Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 by red blood cell binding assay. PK-15 cells that
had been transiently transfected with the Siglec-1-, Siglec-3-,
Siglec-5- and Siglec-10-encoding vectors were pre-treated with sialidase
or mock-treated and incubated with human erythrocytes. Subsequently, the
cells were washed and erythrocyte binding was evaluated via light
microscopy. The black arrows indicate typical sialic acid-dependent
erythrocyte binding. Red blood cell binding was only observed on cells
expressing Siglec-1 and Siglec-10.
Analysis of the sialic acid-binding capacity of Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5 and Siglec-10 by red blood cell binding assay. PK-15 cells that
had been transiently transfected with the Siglec-1-, Siglec-3-,
Siglec-5- and Siglec-10-encoding vectors were pre-treated with sialidase
or mock-treated and incubated with human erythrocytes. Subsequently, the
cells were washed and erythrocyte binding was evaluated via light
microscopy. The black arrows indicate typical sialic acid-dependent
erythrocyte binding. Red blood cell binding was only observed on cells
expressing Siglec-1 and Siglec-10.
Siglec-10 can increase the infection and production of PRRSV in a
non-permissive cell line in combination with CD163
To further analyse the function of Siglec-10, the Siglec-encoding constructs were
co-transfected with CD163-encoding constructs. Forty-eight hours
post-transfection, cells were treated with sialidase or mock-treated and
inoculated with PRRSV [Lelystad virus (LV)] or PRRSVMN-184. Twenty-four hours
post-infection, the cells were fixed and stained for the PRRSV nucleocapsid
protein and the supernatants were collected for virus titration. As shown in
Fig. 4(a), more virus-positive cells
were observed in cells expressing Siglec-1 or Siglec-10 in combination with
CD163 than in cells that only expressed CD163. The expression of Siglec-3 and
Siglec-5 in combination with CD163 did not significantly increase infection
compared to cells that only expressed CD163. Similar results were found for
virus titration. Significantly higher virus production was observed in cells
expressing Siglec-1 and Siglec-10 together with CD163 compared with cells that
only expressed CD163 (Fig. 4b).
Neuraminidase treatment of Siglec-1- and Siglec-10-transfected cells
significantly increased virus production in the cells infected with MN-184 and
LV compared to the mock-treated group (P<0.01). Siglec-1 and
Siglec-10 also increased virus production in the untreated cells. This increase
was significant for MN-184 (P<0.01) but not for LV. These
results show that in combination with CD163, Siglec-10 is able to improve the
infection of PRRSV for both LV and MN-184, and this enhancement is more
pronounced for MN-184. Neuraminidase treatment of the target cells increased
infection considerably.
Fig. 4.
Virus production for the different transfected PK-15 cell groups
24 h after infection. PK-15 cells were transiently transfected
with a pCD163-encoding vector in combination with a Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5, Siglec-10 or control vector, and 48 h after
transfection the cells were treated or not treated with sialidase for
1 h and inoculated with PRRSV LV or MN-184 for 1 h.
Twenty-four hours post-infection, the cells were fixed and stained for
infection and expression of the different Siglecs and CD163. (a)
Immunofluorescence staining of infected cells with mAb 13E2 (against
PRRSV nucleocapsid protein; green) [26, 43] and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). The
absolute number of infected cells for each condition was determined and
displayed in the images as the mean ± SEM of three
independent experiments. Scale bar: 50 µm. (b) Expression
analysis of the different Siglecs using fluorescence microscopy. PK-15
cells were fixed, permeabilized and stained with V5-specific mAb (green)
and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). The absolute number of
transfected cells was determined for each condition and is displayed in
the images as the mean ± SEM of three independent experiments.
Scale bar: 50 µm. (c) To evaluate virus production, the
cell supernatants collected at 24 h p.i. were titrated and the
results are displayed in the graphs. The CD163/Siglec double-transfected
groups that were significantly different from the CD163
single-transfected group are represented as
*P<0.05;
**P<0.01 and
***P<0.001.
Virus production for the different transfected PK-15 cell groups
24 h after infection. PK-15 cells were transiently transfected
with a pCD163-encoding vector in combination with a Siglec-1, Siglec-3,
Siglec-5, Siglec-10 or control vector, and 48 h after
transfection the cells were treated or not treated with sialidase for
1 h and inoculated with PRRSVLV or MN-184 for 1 h.
Twenty-four hours post-infection, the cells were fixed and stained for
infection and expression of the different Siglecs and CD163. (a)
Immunofluorescence staining of infected cells with mAb 13E2 (against
PRRSV nucleocapsid protein; green) [26, 43] and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). The
absolute number of infected cells for each condition was determined and
displayed in the images as the mean ± SEM of three
independent experiments. Scale bar: 50 µm. (b) Expression
analysis of the different Siglecs using fluorescence microscopy. PK-15
cells were fixed, permeabilized and stained with V5-specific mAb (green)
and Hoechst 33 342 (nuclei; blue). The absolute number of
transfected cells was determined for each condition and is displayed in
the images as the mean ± SEM of three independent experiments.
Scale bar: 50 µm. (c) To evaluate virus production, the
cell supernatants collected at 24 h p.i. were titrated and the
results are displayed in the graphs. The CD163/Siglec double-transfected
groups that were significantly different from the CD163
single-transfected group are represented as
*P<0.05;
**P<0.01 and
***P<0.001.HumanSiglec-10 and other Siglec family members exhibit a higly conserved
predicted sialic acid-binding site. To further investigate the importance of the
Siglec-10sialic acid-binding activity, mutagenesis was performed. A mutation of
R at position 119 into E was introduced in the predicted sialic acid-binding
site, which gave rise to a mutant, Siglec-10R119E. The infection
assay with the mutant was performed in parallel with the non-mutated Siglec-10
as described above. As shown in Fig. 4(a,
c), the mutation resulted in decreased infection, with a comparable
infection rate and virus production to that seen in the control group (only
expressing CD163). These results provide further evidence that the sialic
acid-binding site in the N-terminal domain of Siglec-10 is critical for the
infection process.
PK-15 cells allow PRRSV attachment and internalization upon expression of
Siglec-10
Previously, it was shown that PK-15 cells allow PRRSV attachment and
internalization upon expression of pSn [8,
9]. To further analyse the specific function of Siglec-10 in the
infection process of PRRSV, a cell line expressing Siglec-10 was established.
Positive cell clones were further identified by IFA using antibodies against
both the V5-tag and Siglec-10. Clones that were 100 % positive against
both the V5 tag and Siglec-10 were selected (data not shown). Siglec-10 was
present in the cytoplasm and on the plasma membrane (Fig. 5a). The stably transfected cell line was used for the
binding and internalization assay. Upon the incubation of cells with viruses at
4 °C, an abundant number of virus particles were bound to the
surface of the cells. Upon incubation at 37 °C, large numbers of
virus particles were clustered both on the cell surface and inside the cytoplasm
(Fig. 5b). For normal PK-15 cells, only
a few virus particles could be observed on the surface of cells, possibly
because of the presence of heparan sulfate [8], and no internalization was observed. To quantify the
internalized particles and with that further prove the critical role of the
sialic acid-binding site, the internalization assay for transient transfected
PK-15 and CHO cells expressing wild-type Siglec-10 or the
Siglec-10R119E mutant were analysed and compared. A clear
staining for internalized virus particles was observed in both cell types (PK-15
and CHO) expressing wild-type Siglec-10, but for the non-transfected cells or
cells expressing Siglec-10R119E, only a few particles were detected
at the plasma membrane of the cells (Fig. 5c,
d). These results show that, similarly to Siglec-1, Siglec-10 is
important for the attachment and internalization of PRRSV 23].
Fig. 5.
Porcine Siglec-10 mediates the endocytosis of PRRSV. (a)
Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10 in stably transfected PK-15
S10+ cells. PK-15 S10+ cells were fixed with
4 % PF, and the cells were permeabilized (cytoplasmic staining)
or not permeablized (surface staining) with 0.1 % Triton X-100
and stained with 1G10 mAb against Siglec-10 (green) and Hoechst
33 342 (nuclei; blue). Scale bar: 25 µm. (b)
Attachment and internalization of PRRSV in PK-15 S10+ cells.
PK-15 expressing Siglec-10 or normal PK-15 cells were incubated with
purified PRRSV LV for 1 h at 4 °C or
37 °C, allowing binding and internalization, respectively.
After washing, the cells were fixed and stained with Hoechst
33 342 (nuclei; blue) and mAb 13E2 (PRRSV nucleocapsid protein;
green), and analysed by confocal microscopy. Scale bar:
25 µm (c) CHO and PK-15 cells were transiently transfected
with wild-type Siglec-10 or the Siglec-10R119E mutant, and a
virus internalization assay was performed 48 h post-transfection.
Double staining for Siglec-10/Siglec-10R119E (red) and
co-localized PRRSV particles (13E2; green) was performed and analysed by
confocal microscopy. Scale bar: 25 µm. (d) Quantification
of PRRSV internalization in CHO and PK-15 cells for three independent
experiments.
PorcineSiglec-10 mediates the endocytosis of PRRSV. (a)
Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10 in stably transfected PK-15
S10+ cells. PK-15 S10+ cells were fixed with
4 % PF, and the cells were permeabilized (cytoplasmic staining)
or not permeablized (surface staining) with 0.1 % Triton X-100
and stained with 1G10 mAb against Siglec-10 (green) and Hoechst
33 342 (nuclei; blue). Scale bar: 25 µm. (b)
Attachment and internalization of PRRSV in PK-15 S10+ cells.
PK-15 expressing Siglec-10 or normal PK-15 cells were incubated with
purified PRRSVLV for 1 h at 4 °C or
37 °C, allowing binding and internalization, respectively.
After washing, the cells were fixed and stained with Hoechst
33 342 (nuclei; blue) and mAb 13E2 (PRRSV nucleocapsid protein;
green), and analysed by confocal microscopy. Scale bar:
25 µm (c) CHO and PK-15 cells were transiently transfected
with wild-type Siglec-10 or the Siglec-10R119E mutant, and a
virus internalization assay was performed 48 h post-transfection.
Double staining for Siglec-10/Siglec-10R119E (red) and
co-localized PRRSV particles (13E2; green) was performed and analysed by
confocal microscopy. Scale bar: 25 µm. (d) Quantification
of PRRSV internalization in CHO and PK-15 cells for three independent
experiments.
Distribution of Siglec-10-positive cells in the porcine spleen
Two areas of the porcine spleen were analysed, the B cell (CD21+)-rich
area and the CD163-positive cell-rich area. Siglec-10 positive cells were mainly
located in the centre of B cell-rich areas (100 % of the CD21-positive
cells), but were also present in CD163+ cell-rich areas (16 %
of the CD163+ cells) (Fig. 6).
These results show that the majority of Siglec-10-positive cells in the spleen
are B cells, and that a subset of monocytes that are Siglec-10-positive also
exists.
Fig. 6.
Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10/CD21 double-positive cells and
Siglec-10/CD163 double-positive cells in tissue sections of the porcine
spleen. Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10 and CD21 or Siglec-10
and CD163 in tissue sections of the porcine spleen. Tissue samples were
sectioned (10 µm) and co-immunostained for Siglec-10
(green) and the markers CD21 (red) or CD163 (red). White dashed lines
indicate the border between the B cell-rich area and CD163-rich area.
White arrows show CD163+ Siglec-10+
double-positive cells. Scale bar: 25 µm.
Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10/CD21 double-positive cells and
Siglec-10/CD163 double-positive cells in tissue sections of the porcine
spleen. Immunofluorescence staining of Siglec-10 and CD21 or Siglec-10
and CD163 in tissue sections of the porcine spleen. Tissue samples were
sectioned (10 µm) and co-immunostained for Siglec-10
(green) and the markers CD21 (red) or CD163 (red). White dashed lines
indicate the border between the B cell-rich area and CD163-rich area.
White arrows show CD163+ Siglec-10+
double-positive cells. Scale bar: 25 µm.
Discussion
Sn and CD163 are two key entry mediators for PRRSV. However, recent studies in our
laboratory demonstrated that certain virus strains are able to infect Sn-negative
cells [14]. Sn belongs to the Siglec family,
containing members that are commonly used as receptors for various pathogens [19, 24, 25]. In this study, Siglec-10,
a new Sn-like receptor, was identified as an additional binding and entry receptor
for PRRSV. Siglec-10 was able to mediate the sialic acid-dependent binding of human
erythrocytes and functioned in a similar way to Siglec-1 during PRRSVinfection.
However, clear differences were observed between the two PRRSV strains LV (type 1)
and MN-184 (type 2).Much Siglec research has been performed in humans. All Siglecs are type-1 membrane
proteins that contain a Sia-binding, an amino-terminal V-set domain and varying
numbers of C2-set Ig-like domains. As shown in Fig.
1(a), the predicted structures for porcineSiglec-3, Siglec-5 and
Siglec-10 were quite similar. All of them showed only one V-set domain followed by
16, 1, 3 and 3 C2-type Ig domains for Siglec-1, Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10,
respectively (Fig. 1a). The V-set domain and
the adjacent C2-set domain contained a small number of invariant amino acid
residues, including an ‘essential’ arginine on the F β-strand,
as indicated in the structure with red dots and marked in the sequence alignment
with an asterisk (Fig. 1a, b). This site has
been predicted to be required for sialic acid binding in humans. In this study, the
estimated binding site of Siglec-10 was mutated for verification of the sialic acid
binding ability of Siglec-10. The sequences for Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10
obtained in our study were compared with those previously characterized by Alvarez
and Escalona [20-22]. A high
similarity was observed between the sequences, which demonstrates the high
conservation of these Siglecs among pigs.Siglecs are cell-surface proteins that bind sialic acids. In this study, both
Siglec-1 and Siglec-10 showed strong red blood cell binding, but only after
neuraminidase treatment. Most Siglecs are masked because of cis-interactions with
sialic acids expressed on the cell surface. Following treatment with sialidase,
Siglecs become unmasked, which allows them to interact with other ligands [16]. Binding was not observed in
Siglec-3-expressing PK-15 cells even after treatment, which is in accordance with
the studies by Alvarez and Escalona [20,
21]. For Siglec-5, only a few cells were detected that bound red blood
cells in the three repeats. This is in contrast with the report from Escalona, who
used purified protein for the porcine red blood cell binding assay [22]. Several factors might contribute to the
observed differences. Firstly, for the purified protein, more abundant protein may
be present for capturing the red blood cells, which may account for the higher
binding capacity. Secondly, different production cell types were used in the two
experiments, hence the expression and even the structure might be different, despite
the close similarity of the sequences. Thirdly, the red blood cells used were
different, which might also have contributed to the observed differences [22].Previous research showed that sialoadhesin and CD163 join forces during the entry of
PRRSV [7]. Because Siglec-1 is not necessary
for infection with certain PRRSV strains [13,
26], we tried to find other Siglecs (Siglec-3, Siglec-5 and Siglec-10)
that might have the same functionality as Siglec-1. Infection assays were performed
with a non-permissive cell line that expressed the recombinant receptors. PK-15
cells were transfected with a pCD163-encoding plasmid, alone or in combination with
a Siglec-1, Siglec-3, Siglec-5, Siglec-10 or Siglec-10R119E
mutant-encoding plasmid. After transfection, cells were treated or mock-treated with
sialidase and then inoculated with the PRRSV type 1 LV strain and the PRRSV type 2
MN-184 strain. As it has previously been shown that MN-184 shows a higher cell
tropism for Sn- cells [26], the
MN-184 strain was selected for the present study. The results showed that in
addition to Siglec-1, Siglec-10 significantly increases the infection for both virus
strains, although to a greater extent for MN-184. Based on the sequence analysis of
the amino-terminal V-set domain, Siglec-10 shares a relatively high similarity with
Siglec-1 [27].In the present study, a correlation was found between red blood cell binding and
PRRSV binding and infection. Indeed, the strong red blood cell binding of Siglec-1
and Siglec-10 coincided with improved PRRSVinfection, whereas the weak red blood
cell binding Siglec-5 showed only a minor increase in PRRSVinfection, and the
non-red blood cell binding Siglec-3 did not support PRRSV to any extent during
infection.PRRSV displays remarkable genetic, antigenic and clinical variability, resulting in
two distinct groups of strains within the same viral family: type 1 (European type)
and type 2 (American type) [3, 28].
Therefore, two strains, one of each type, were tested for their infectivity. Upon
inoculation with LV, the number of infected cells and the level of virus production
in cells expressing either Siglec-1 or Siglec-10 in combination with CD163 were
significantly higher than in cells expressing only CD163 or cells expressing
Siglec-3 or Siglec-5 in combination with CD163. Sialidase treatment of cells results
in the removal of sialic acids on the cell surface, which allows more abundant
binding of sialic acid-carrying particles such as human red blood cells and PRRSV.
The treatment resulted in higher infection, indicating that Siglec-10 mediates virus
entry in a sialic acid-dependent manner. With the MN-184 strain, a higher level of
infection was observed compared to LV. Both Siglec-1 and Siglec-10 were able to
improve the infection rate and virus production to almost the same level, regardless
of sialidase treatment. It has been stated that the LV strain has a strict cell
tropism for Sn+ macrophages [14,
29], whereas MN-184 and some other type 2 PRRSV strains are able to
infect Sn− cells [26]. In
addition to Sn, these viruses most likely use another binding and entry receptor.
Meanwhile, the most recent report from Yuste et al. [30] showed that PRRSV is able to replicate
efficiently in splenic CD163+ macrophages that express low levels of
Siglec-1 but high levels of Siglec-3 and Siglec-5. However, Siglec-3 and Siglec-5
did not seem to play a role in infection, which further confirmed our results
showing that the non-permissive cell line expressing Siglec-3 or Siglec-5 in
combination with CD163 did not improve virus infection and production. The results
of the present study suggest that Siglec-10 might be a new receptor candidate for
PRRSV binding/internalization, especially for type 2 viruses.As mentioned earlier, an ‘essential’ arginine residue in all the known
Siglecs is important for binding Sia-containing ligands. To further elucidate the
function of Siglec-10, a site-directed mutation was performed. The predicted sialic
acid-binding site aa 119 in the V-set domain was mutated from R to E. This resulted
in a loss of human red blood cell binding activity and the absence of increased
virus production. These results provide further evidence showing that the N terminal
sialic acid-binding site is essential for virus infection, which is similar to
Siglec-1 [31, 32]. Since sialoadhesin
requires the sialic acid-binding activity to mediate the attachment of PRRSV [32], and given the observations above, we
speculated that Siglec-10 might have a similar function during virus infection. A
cell line expressing Siglec-10 was established and the virus binding and
internalization assay was performed. The results showed that Siglec-10 was able to
bind and internalize virus particles. In contrast, the cells expressing mutant
Siglec-10R119E were unable to bind and internalize the virus.
Together, these results support the hypothesis that the sialic acid-binding site in
the N terminal of Siglec-10 is crucial for virus binding and internalization (Fig. 5).A previous study by Escalona et al. [21] showed that Siglec-10 was mainly expressed on B cells and also
showed weak expression on monocytes. To check for the presence of splenic
CD163+ macrophages expressing Siglec-10, double stainings for
CD21/Siglec-10 and CD163/Siglec-10 were performed in the spleen. As was shown in the
results, in the B cell-rich centre almost 100 % of the Siglec-10-positive
cells were found to be CD21-positive, confirming the results from the work by
Escalona et al. [21], in
which it was seen that Siglec-10 is mainly expressed on B cells. Furthermore, in the
CD163-positive area around 16 % of the CD163-positive cells co-expressed
Siglec-10 (Fig. 6). Inconsistent reports exist
regarding the expression of Siglec-10 in humans. Munday et al.
[27] reported low levels of Siglec-10
expression on humanCD19+ B lymphocytes and monocytes for a small subset
of CD16+ CD56- NK cells, and even lower levels on eosinophils.
In contrast, Whitney et al. [33] reported no expression on B cells, whereas the granulocytes were
Siglec-10-positive in humans [33]. The
reactivity of the antibody used and the presence of different splicing variants of
Siglec-10 might account for this variation. Based on the present study and a
previous study by Escalona et al. [21], it can be stated that in pigsporcineSiglec-10 is mainly expressed
on B cells and also on a minor subset of monocytes. The minor subset of monocytes
may be an important new replication target for PRRSV in vivo. In
addition, B-cells can be expected to act as a carrier for the virus in
vivo, given that Siglec-10 is able to bind and internalize PRRSV
particles. The absence of CD163 in B cells hampers PRRSV in infecting these cells.
Siglec-10/-G has also been reported to be an inhibitory receptor on B cells [34-36]. Inhibitory receptors are
known to influence various functions of immune cells, such as the regulation of
cellular signalling, cell-to-cell interactions and endocytosis through an ITIM motif
[16]. The sequence of porcineSiglec-10
contains one ITIM and one ITIM-like motif. When ITIM-possessing inhibitory receptors
interact with their ligand, their ITIM motif becomes phosphorylated, allowing them
to recruit other enzymes, such as SHP-1 and SHP-2. These kinds of phosphatases will
decrease the activation of the molecules involved in cell signalling [37], which can negatively regulate signal
transduction [38]. HumanSiglec-10 is
reported to be associated with the tyrosine phosphatase SHP-1, a known negative
regulator of nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) activation [39], while the inhibition of NF-κB
activation is mediated by SHP-1 via the ITIM motif of Siglec-10 [33]. NF-κB belongs to a family of
inducible transcription factors that are involved in pathogen- or cytokine-induced
immune and inflammatory responses, as well as cell proliferation and survival [40]. One of the most remarkable features of
PRRSVinfection is the failure to elicit the expression of inflammatory cytokines in
the lungs of pigs, particularly type I interferons, interleukin-1 (IL-1) and tumour
necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), which are important in antiviral responses.
Whether this phenomenon is related to the function of Siglec-10 needs to be
identified [41, 42]. In our study, in
addition to its binding and internalization ability, there is a possibility that
Siglec-10 also acts as an inhibitory immune receptor to facilitate the infection of
PRRSV. Further studies are needed to test the hypothesis that PRRSV can interact
with Siglec-10 via the ITIM motif on B cells, leading to downregulation of
immune-related signal transduction, and therefore possibly escape the immune
system.In conclusion, this study revealed that, similarly to Siglec-1, Siglec-10 is able to
improve PRRSVinfection in non-permissive cells in combination with CD163. Like
Siglec-1, Siglec-10 is able to mediate the attachment and endocytosis of PRRSV,
which is dependent on the sialic acid-binding activity of the N-terminal
immunoglobulin domain. Siglec-10 showed a higher affinity towards the type 2 PRRSV
strain MN-184compared to the type 1 PRRSV strain LV. For the type 2 PRRSV strain
MN-184, Siglec-10 was as performant as Siglec-1 in its receptor function, whereas
for the type 1 PRRSV strain LV, Siglec-1 was the most effective entry mediator. In
the future, more work will be required to determine the replication kinetics of
other PRRSV strains in Siglec-10-positive cells, and the impact of PRRSV replication
in these cells on the immune response.
Methods
Cell lines, viruses and antibodies
PK-15 (porcine kidney) cells were grown in MEM supplemented with 10 %
foetal bovine serum (FBS) and a mixture of antibiotics. Marc-145 cells were
cultivated as described previously [7].
They were then maintained in a humidified 5 % CO2 atmosphere
at 37 °C. The European prototype PRRSVLV strain was passaged 13
times on macrophages and subsequently 5 times on Marc-145 cells. The MN-184
virus strain (American type) was passaged five times on Marc-145 cells.PRRS virions were visualized via the nucleocapsid protein specific mAb 13E2
[26, 43] and a secondary
conjugate. For detection of the V5-tag, a mouse monoclonal antibody (GenScript;
A00641) and a goat anti-mouse IgG horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-labelled
secondary antibody (Dako; P0447) were used, or a directly labelled mAb
conjugated with FITC (Invitrogen; R963-25), was used. For the visualization of
CD163, either a mouse monoclonal antibody (2A10/11, IgG1; AbD Serotec,
Dusseldorf, Germany) or a goat polyclonal antibody (R and D Systems,
Minneapolis) with appropriate secondary conjugates were used.
Cloning, construction and identification of porcine Siglecs
The primer pairs were designed based on the sequences submitted and characterized
on NCBI (Table 1). The coding region of
putative porcine Siglecs were amplified and cloned. Briefly, total RNA was
extracted from porcine spleen (Siglec-10) or PBMCs (Siglec-3 and Siglec-5) using
the RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen). Afterwards, reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) was
performed using random primers with the SuperScript III reverse transcriptase
kit according to the standard procedure (Thermo Science). After RT-PCR
amplification with the Herculase DNA polymerase kit (Agilent Technologies), the
purified PCR product was cloned into the pCDNA3.1D/V5-His-TOPO vector in frame
with the V5 tag (Invitrogen) via restriction enzymes and T4 ligase (Invitrogen).
Constructs were verified by sequencing. Porcinesialoadhesin and CD163 were
previously cloned into the pcDNA3.1D/V5-His-TOPO vector (Invitrogen) and the
pBudCE4.1 vector (Invitrogen) [7, 9].
The spatial structure of the Siglecs was predicted using the I-TASSER online
tool (https://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu) and analysed by PyMOL
(version 6.6). Comparisons of the predicted domains, motifs and features of
Siglecs from different species were performed on the Sample Modular Architecture
Research Tool (SMART). For further functional analysis of Siglec-10, a
point-mutation (R119E) was introduced into the predicted sialic acid-binding
domain of Siglec-10 with the primers pS10RE-FW and pS10RE-RV, as listed in Table 1. Site-directed mutagenesis was
carried out using the Quick-change site-directed mutagenesis kit (Agilent
Technologies) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
Table 1.
The list of primers used in the study
Primers used for PCR amplification of Siglec-3, -5 and -10 and for the
mutagenesis of Siglec-10, artificial restriction sites (underlined) for
cloning, mutated residues (bold)
Name
Primer Sequence
Fragment size
Purpose
Siglec3-FL-F
5′
-GTTAAGCTTaGCCACCATGCGGCCGCTGCTGCTGCT-3′
1143 bp
Full-length cloning of Siglec-3
Siglec3-FL-R
5′-TCTtCTCGAGttCCGGGTCCCGATCTCTGTGTAT-3′
Siglec5-FL-F
5′-GTTAAGCTTGCCACCATGGTGCCCCTGCTGCTGCTGCTG-3′
1665 bp
Full-length cloning of Siglec-5
Siglec5-FL-R
5′-TCTCTCGAGttTTTGCTTTTTCTGATCTCTGAGTAC-3′
Siglec10-FL-F
5′-CTTGGTACCGCCACCATGCTCCTGCCGCTGCTCTTAG-3′
1842 bp
Full-length cloning of Siglec-10
Siglec10-FL-R
5′-GCTGCGGCCGCTGTGGAACTGGACCGCAGCATATT-3′
pS10R119E-FW
5′-CATGCCGCCTACTTCTTTgaaTTGGAGAGAGGCCCTTAC-3′
1842 bp
Mutation of binding site for Siglec-10
pS10R119E-RV
5′-GTACGGCGGATGAAGAAActtAACCTCTCTCCGGGAATG-3′
The list of primers used in the study
Primers used for PCR amplification of Siglec-3, -5 and -10 and for the
mutagenesis of Siglec-10, artificial restriction sites (underlined) for
cloning, mutated residues (bold)
Expression analysis of Siglecs in eukaryotic cells by immunofluorescence
analysis and Western blot
PK-15 cells were transiently transfected with the Siglec-encoding vectors using
Lipofectamine (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer’s instructions.
Forty-eight hour post-transfection, the cells were fixed with 4 %
paraformaldehyde, permeabilized with 0.01 % Triton X-100 or not
permeabilized, and stained with Hoechst
(10 µg ml−1; Invitrogen) and directly
labelled V5-FITC mAbs (1 : 500, Invitrogen; R963-25). The results
were analysed by (confocal) fluorescence microscopy (Leica Microsystems GmbH,
Heidelberg, Germany).For Western blot analysis 48 h post-transfection, cells were collected and
washed using ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). Cellular lysates were
prepared by lysis in buffer containing 50 mM Tris (pH 7.4), 150 mM
NaCl, 1 % Nonidet P-40, 0, 1 % SDS, 5 mM EDTA and protease
inhibitor cocktail (Roche) in water. Samples were either left untreated, or
treated with endoglycosidase H, PNGase F (New England Biolabs, Inc.) or 100
mU/ml Vibrio cholerae sialidase (Roche Applied Science) for
3 h at 37 °C. Afterwards, samples were mixed with reducing
Laemli buffer (5×) SDS-PAGE loading dye, boiled for 10 min, and
subjected to SDS-PAGE (12 % gel) using a BioRad Mini Protean 3 system.
Proteins were transferred to a PVDF membrane (Membrane Hybond-P; GE Healthcare)
using a BioRad mini trans-blot system, and then the membranes were blocked
overnight using blocking solution (5 % skimmed milk in PBS, 0.1 %
Tween-20). A V5-specific mAb (GenScript; A00641) diluted 1 : 2000
in PBS and peroxidase-labelled goat anti-mouse IgG antibodies (Dako) diluted
1 : 1000 in blocking solution were used for the detection of
protein. HRP-conjugated anti-alpha tubulin monoclonal antibody (Abcam, ab40742)
was used to stain tubulin. The results were visualized with an ECL Western
blotting detection system (GE Healthcare).
Red blood cell binding assay
Human red blood cells were obtained from healthy donors and stored at
4 °C in Alsever’s solution. After three washings, cells
were diluted in RPMI. PK-15 cells were transiently transfected with the
Siglec-encoding vectors using Lipofectamine (Invitrogen).
Forty-eight hours post transfection, cells were washed with RPMI and half
of the wells were pre-treated with 10 mU/ml Vibrio cholerae
sialidase (Roche) in RPMI for 1 h at 37 °C. The other half
were mock-treated with RPMI. After treatment, cells were washed three times with
RPMI and incubated with washed erythrocytes (0.25 % v/v in RPMI)
for 1 h at 37 °C. Subsequently, cells were washed and
erythrocyte binding was evaluated by light microscopy.
Infection experiments on non-target cells expressing recombinant receptors
with or without neuraminidase treatment
PK-15 cells were transiently transfected with a pCD163-encoding vector alone
(pCD163+) or in combination with a Siglec-encoding vector
(pCD163+ Siglec+). Forty-eight hours
post-transfection, cells were washed and pre-treated with 10 mU/ml
Vibrio cholerae sialidase (Roche) in RPMI or just
mock-treated with RPMI for 1 h at 37 °C. After three washes
with PBS, cells were inoculated with 250 µl PRRSVLV or MN-184
virus at a m.o.i. of 0.5. At 1 h p.i., the inoculum was removed, cells
were washed three times with PBS and washing fluids were replaced with
300 µl MEM containing 10 % FCS. At 24 h p.i., cell
supernatants were collected and cells were fixed with ice-cold methanol. For the
quantification of infected cells, fixed cells were incubated with the PRRSV
N-specific monoclonal antibody 13E2 (IgG2a) followed by a secondary goat
anti-mouse IgG2a FITC-labelled antibody (Invitrogen) [43]. To reduce the background signal, 10 % negative
goat serum was included for blocking during each step. Cell nuclei were stained
with Hoechst (10 µg ml−1, Invitrogen) for
10 min at room temperature. The infection level and expression of the
different Siglecs and pCD163 were quantified by confocal microscopy (absolute
number of virus- or receptor-positive cells). To determine the titre of
extracellular virus, the collected supernatant was centrifuged to remove cell
debris and used for virus titration. For titration on Marc-145 cells, cells were
seeded 3 days before inoculation. Monolayers were inoculated with a
10-fold dilution series of the samples and incubated for 7 days at
37 °C. The cytopathic effect (CPE) was then visualized by light
microscopy. Finally, the virus titres were calculated as TCID50
ml−1[44]. Parallel
experiments were performed for the binding site-directed mutation construct.
PK-15 S10+ cell line establishment, virus binding and
internalization analysis
PK15 cells were transfected with the Siglec-10-encoding plasmid containing the
geneticin resistance gene using Lipofectamine (Invitrogen). The
Siglec-10-expressing PK15 cells were selected with geneticin
(200 µg ml−1, GIBCO) and subsequently
subcloned. Cells were initially identified using immunofluorescence staining,
primarily using V5-FITC mAbs (Invitrogen; R963-25) and further confirmed using a
monoclonal antibody (1G10) against Siglec-10 that was developed in this study.
To stain the PK-15S10+ cells, cells were fixed with 4 % PF and
permeabilized or not permeabilized with 0.1 % Triton X-100 for
cytoplasmic staining or surface staining, respectively. Next, cells were
incubated with 1G10 (IgG1) diluted in PBS containing 10 % NGS, followed
by an incubation with secondary goat anti-mouse IgG1 FITC-labelled antibody. MAb
13D12 was used as an isotype-matched irrelevant control [45]. Cell nuclei were stained with Hoechst for
10 min at room temperature. The established cell line was used for the
virus binding and internalization assay. For virus binding, cells were
inoculated with purified LV virus at 4 °C for 1 h. Then,
cells were fixed with 4 % paraformaldehyde. For internalization, the
cells were fixed with 4 % paraformaldehyde 1 h post-virus
inoculation. After fixation, cells were washed with PBS and permeabilized with a
0.1 % Triton X-100 solution in PBS. As a control, non-transfected cells
were also fixed after inoculation of the virus, and subsequently washed and
permeabilized. Cells were stained for PRRSV particles using 13E2 specific to
PRRSV N protein [43] and goat anti-mouseFITC antibody. The antibody 1C11 against gB of PrV (IgG2a) was used as an
irrelevant isotype control [45]. The
results were analysed by confocal microscopy (Leica Microsystems GmbH).For quantification of the internalized virus particles for cells expressing
Siglec-10, PK-15 and CHO cells were transiently transfected with Siglec-10 and
Siglec-10R119E mutant expressing plasmid with Lipofectamine.
Cells were inoculated with purified PRRSVLV at a m.o.i. of 5, and after
incubation for 1 h at 37 °C, cells were washed and fixed
with methanol. Virus particles were stained using PRRSV nucleocapsid-specific
mAb 13E2 (IgG 2a), and Siglec-10 was stained using 1G10 (1 : 10,
IgG1). The antibodies 13D12 against gD of PRV (IgG1) and 1C11 against gB of PrV
(IgG2a) were used as irrelevant isotype controls [45]. Co-localization of Siglec-10 with virus particles was
counted (15 cells for each experimental condition).
Monoclonal antibody production
Five 4–6 week-old Balb/c mice were immunized intramuscularly with
2 µg of recombinant Siglec-10-encoding eukaryotic expression
plasmid and boosted 2 and 4 weeks later with the same amount. After four
immunizations, all of the mice had seroconverted. Serum was collected from
immunized mice and used as a source of polyclonal antibodies. The mouse with the
highest antibody titre was selected for a final boost with PK-15S10+
cells. Four days later, spleen lymphocytes were fused with the SP2/0 myeloma
cells as described previously [43,
46], using polyethylene glycol 4000 (Sigma). Siglec-10-specific
hybridomas were screened by performing a cell-based IPMA with the hybridoma
supernatant. Briefly, PK-15S10+ cells were fixed by drying and
subsequent incubation with 4 % paraformaldehyde and methanol +1 %
H2O2. Next, cells were incubated with undiluted
hybridoma supernatant for 1 h at 37 °C, followed by
biotinylated anti-mouse IgG antibody and streptavidin-biotinylated HRP complex
(GE healthcare). Afterwards, AEC substrate was added and the results were
analysed by light microscopy. Positive hybridomas were subcloned by limiting
dilution. The isotype of the obtained mAb was determined by ELISA with a mouse
monoclonal antibody isotyping test kit from Zymed Laboratories, Inc.
Immunofluorescence staining analysis for Siglec-10 in porcine spleen
tissue sections
To identify Siglec-10-positive cells in tissues, 10 µm thick
cryosections of frozen porcine spleen tissues were made and fixed in
100 % methanol at −20 °C for 15 min. Porcine
spleen tissues were collected from three conventional pigs. For double staining
of B cells and Siglec-10 positive cells, primary mouse monoclonal antibodies
against the B cell marker CD21 (IgG2b) and Siglec-10 (1G10, IgG1) and
isotype-specific secondary antibodies conjugated with FITC or Alexa Fluor 594
(Invitrogen) were used. Cell nuclei were stained with Hoechst 33 342. For
the staining of CD163 and Siglec-10 double-positive cells, goat polyclonal
antibody against CD163 (R and D Systems, Minneapolis) and mouse polyclonal
antibody against Siglec-10 were incubated at 4 °C overnight. After
three washes with PBS, sections were incubated with rabbit anti-goat AF594 for
1 h at 37 °C. Then, the sections were blocked with negative
rabbit serum for 30 min and incubated with goat anti-mousebiotin-labelled secondary antibody, followed by streptavidin FITC-labelled
antibody. For the staining with biotin-labelled antibody, the tissues were
pre-treated with an avidin/biotin blocking kit (Thermo Fisher). Counting was
performed in 3 cryosections for each pig, with 10 fields per cryosection,
selected in a random way. Results were analysed using a Leica TCS SPE
laser-scanning confocal microscope (Leica Microsystems GmbH). Positive cells
were counted within regions of interest (ROIs), including the B cell-rich area
and the CD163-rich area, and calculated using Image J.
Statistical analysis
All experiments were performed three times. Statistical significance
(*P<0.05;
**P<0.01;
***P<0.001) was calculated using
the two-way ANOVA test followed by the Bonferroni post-test to determine the
differences between the different receptor-transfected groups and the control
group, and also the treated and untreated groups. All of the statistical
analyses were performed using Graphpad Prism 5.
Authors: Z Escalona; B Álvarez; H Uenishi; D Toki; M Yuste; C Revilla; M Gómez del Moral; F Alonso; A Ezquerra; J Domínguez Journal: Dev Comp Immunol Date: 2014-10-02 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: B Álvarez; Z Escalona; H Uenishi; D Toki; C Revilla; M Yuste; M Gómez Del Moral; F Alonso; A Ezquerra; J Domínguez Journal: Dev Comp Immunol Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Nathalie Vanderheijden; Peter L Delputte; Herman W Favoreel; Joël Vandekerckhove; Jozef Van Damme; Peter A van Woensel; Hans J Nauwynck Journal: J Virol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Stefania Varchetta; Dalila Mele; Andrea Lombardi; Barbara Oliviero; Stefania Mantovani; Carmine Tinelli; Marta Spreafico; Daniele Prati; Serena Ludovisi; Giovanna Ferraioli; Carlo Filice; Alessio Aghemo; Pietro Lampertico; Floriana Facchetti; Francesca Bernuzzi; Pietro Invernizzi; Mario U Mondelli Journal: Gut Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Lily I Pao; Kong-Peng Lam; Joel M Henderson; Jeffery L Kutok; Marat Alimzhanov; Lars Nitschke; Matthew L Thomas; Benjamin G Neel; Klaus Rajewsky Journal: Immunity Date: 2007-06-28 Impact factor: 31.745
Authors: Hanne Van Gorp; Wander Van Breedam; Jan Van Doorsselaere; Peter L Delputte; Hans J Nauwynck Journal: J Virol Date: 2009-12-23 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Wander Van Breedam; Hanne Van Gorp; Jiquan Q Zhang; Paul R Crocker; Peter L Delputte; Hans J Nauwynck Journal: PLoS Pathog Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 6.823
Authors: Georges Saade; Céline Deblanc; Juliette Bougon; Corinne Marois-Créhan; Christelle Fablet; Gaël Auray; Catherine Belloc; Mily Leblanc-Maridor; Carl A Gagnon; Jianzhong Zhu; Marcelo Gottschalk; Artur Summerfield; Gaëlle Simon; Nicolas Bertho; François Meurens Journal: Vet Res Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 3.683
Authors: Jiexiong Xie; Ivan Trus; Dayoung Oh; Lise K Kvisgaard; Julie C F Rappe; Nicolas Ruggli; Nathalie Vanderheijden; Lars E Larsen; François Lefèvre; Hans J Nauwynck Journal: Viruses Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 5.048
Authors: Jiexiong Xie; Nick Vereecke; Sebastiaan Theuns; Dayoung Oh; Nathalie Vanderheijden; Ivan Trus; Jannes Sauer; Philip Vyt; Caroline Bonckaert; Christian Lalonde; Chantale Provost; Carl A Gagnon; Hans Nauwynck Journal: Vaccines (Basel) Date: 2021-06-03