PrisonPlanet Forum
May 24, 2013, 11:19:49 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: PB1-F2--The "pandemic protein" is present but is currently "nonfunctioning"  (Read 5129 times)
sociostudent
Guest
« on: May 07, 2009, 03:39:52 AM »

http://pathogens.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html
The isolates that have a PB1 segment have a "nonfunctional PB1-F2 protein due to mutation".


The viral PB1 segment is of particular interest, since, in addition to the glycoprotein genes, the PB1 gene was the only other segment that was exchanged in the pandemic viruses of 1957 and 1968 [13]. Introduction of a novel PB1 gene into the 1998 swine reassortant viruses further implicates the role of this gene in the pathogenesis of (animal) influenza [14]. Moreover, while changes in the surface glycoproteins allow the viruses to overcome the preexisting humoral immune response, they may not be solely responsible for the high virulence of the pandemic influenza viruses. In particular, the 1918 pandemic was associated with significantly higher morbidity and mortality than the subsequent pandemics [15]. Recent reconstruction of the 1918 virus has confirmed that the viral polymerase from the 1918 influenza virus is required for full pathogenicity of the recombinant 1918 virus in mice [16]. In fact, substitution of the viral polymerase genomic segments with those of the modern H1N1 strain severely attenuated the virus in mice [16]. Recent identification and characterization of a novel influenza virus protein called PB1-F2 encoded by the PB1 gene introduced a potential virulence factor that could play a role in pathogenesis of infection with pandemic influenza viruses and explain the selection of the PB1 gene in these viruses [17].
The influenza virus PB1-F2 is a 90–amino acid (aa) protein that is associated with the induction of cell death. The protein directly permeabilizes mitochondria, resulting in the dissipation of the mitochondrial membrane potential and the release of cytochrome c [17–19]. We have previously shown that PB1-F2 contributes to viral pathogenesis in the mouse model and wanted to further investigate whether the PB1-F2 proteins encoded by highly pathogenic viruses have conserved mutations in their aa sequence that are associated with pathogenicity [20]. We chose to study the PB1-F2 proteins of the Hong Kong 1997 H5N1 viruses that caused an outbreak in humans. Characterization of the isolated viruses in mice revealed that the viruses could be subdivided into three different groups based on the pathogenicity phenotype: high-virulence, intermediate-virulence, and low-virulence [21]. Further studies provided molecular correlates of pathogenicity in the high-virulence group, though such studies were not conducted for the PB1-F2 protein [22].
Herein, we assess the contribution of the PB1-F2 protein to the pathogenicity of a highly pathogenic H5N1 virus and the 1918 pandemic strain virus. An alignment of the aa sequences of isolates from the Hong Kong 1997 H5N1 outbreak revealed that a mutation, N66S, was associated with high pathogenicity phenotype in mice. Using a recombinant A/WSN/33 virus with the PB1 segment of A/HK/156/97, we observed increased morbidity and mortality of mice infected with a virus that contained the N66S mutation. In addition, infection with the reconstructed A/Brevig Mission/18 virus, which has an S at position 66, resulted in increased pathogenicity when compared with a reconstructed A/Brevig Mission/18 virus in which position 66 was changed to N [16]. We thereby show that PB1-F2 proteins from highly virulent viruses can contribute to pathogenicity, and identify a single aa change that confers a virulent phenotype in mice.


http://web.mac.com/monotreme1/iWeb/Pandemic%20Influenza%20Information/Blog/D0A5321D-80A5-4E30-8CF1-D622FBCC2135.html

PB1-F2: A Virulence Factor Under Selection in Humans - The Karo Cluster
 
The 2nd segment in the influenza A genome codes for two proteins: PB1-F1 and PB1-F2.  PB1-F1 was referred to as simply PB1 before PB1-F2 was discovered. PB1-F2 is  unusual in that this protein is coded by a subset of the nucleotides that code for PB1-F2.  This is not the result of alternative splicing, but rather, the use of a different reading frame.  Thus, the two proteins are completely different in sequence (Lamb and Takeda, 2001; Chen et al. 2001).
 
PB1-F1 is a polymerase protein involved in replicating the viral genome.  In contrast, PB1-F2 appears to play a role in the virulence of influenza strains (Zamarin et al. 2006).  These authors explain the relevance of PB1-F2 to the virulence of pandemic strains:
 
    Based on our findings and on the fact that the PB1 genomic segment was always newly
    introduced into some pandemic influenza viruses of the last century, we speculate that the
    PB1-F2 protein plays an important role in pathogenesis of influenza virus infection and may
    be an important contributor to pathogenicity of pandemic influenza viruses.
 
PB1-F2 has been implicated in the severe symptoms and high death rate associated with the 1918 virus
(Kash, et al. 2006).
 
    We believe our data showing increased cell death responses in r1918-infected mice may be
    related to the effects of the 1918 PB1-F2 protein.
 
PB1-F2 is thought to kill cells by interfering with the function of mitochondria.  These organelles are the energy power plants of cells.  If these structures fail, a cell will die. There have been relatively few papers on the role of PB1-F2 and it's role in determining the virulence.  Indeed, as recently as October of 2006, researchers were still discussing which flu strains possessed functional PB1-F2 proteins (Zell et al. 2006).  However, the current thinking is that it may play a role in interspecies infection (Chen and Shih, 2006)
.
 
I recently did a BLASTP search with PB1-F1 and PB1-F2 protein sequences from the Karo cluster.  The results surprised me.  When I BLASTed PB1-F1, I saw no indication of adaptation to humans.  Two chicken strains, A/chicken/Deli Serdang/BPPVI/2005 and A/chicken/Tarutung/BPPVI/2005 were identical to the human consensus sequence.  Further, the PB1-F1 human sequence from one strain, A/Indonesia/CDC599N/2006, differed from the other human sequences by one amino acid. In striking contrast, PB1-F2 was 100% identical in all human strains from the Karo cluster but differed by two amino acids from the four closest chicken sequences, which were identical.  Thus, the PB1-F1 sequence did not distinguish between avian and human isolates, but PB1-F2 did.  I find this especially remarkable as these two proteins are coded for by the same nucleotides. For alignments, see PB1-F2 Sequence - The Karo Cluster.
 
To me, this suggests the possibility that PB1-F2, but not PB1-F1, is under selection for adaptation to humans.  The Karo cluster represents a small number of samples.  However, I am not the first to note human-specific sequences in PB1-F2. Dr. Guan's group has seen this same phenomenon in other cases in Indonesia and Vietnam (Smith et al. 2006):
 
    Molecular analysis of the H5N1 genotype Z genome shows that only the M2 and PB1-F2
    genes were under positive selection, suggesting that these genes might be involved in
    adaptation of this virus to new hosts following interspecies transmission.
At the amino acid
    level 12 residues were under positive selection in those genotype Z viruses, in the HA and
    PB1-F2 proteins. Some of these residues were more frequently observed in human isolates   
    than in avian isolates and are related to viral antigenicity and receptor binding.
 
One question that remains unresolved by my analysis here is this:  What was the source of the human specific PB1-F2 sequences in the Karo cluster?  There are too many differences between the closest avian sequences at the nucleotide level to suggest that any of the strains isolated from birds in GenBank were the direct source.  It may be that there is a bird strain somewhere in Karo that was not sequenced that would provide the missing link to the human sequences.  Yet, we were told that intensive efforts were made to find the source of the human infections - in birds. They failed.  Could it be that they have been looking in the wrong class of animals?  More on the issue of a mammalian reservoir next.


Protein enhances lethality of influenza virus

Clues from the past may influence preparations for the future

...It is relatively rare for an influenza virus to be virulent enough to cause death in healthy humans. Many deaths associated with influenza are caused by the combined influence of viral disease and the following secondary bacterial infection.Although the 1918 pandemic strain was one of the few influenza viruses capable of killing healthy victims on its own, the majority of fatal cases from the “Spanish Flu” can be attributed to secondary bacterial pathogens rather than primary viral disease. This important interaction between influenza viruses and bacteria is not well understood.

Dr. Jonathan A. McCullers from the Department of Infectious Diseases at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee and colleagues examined this interaction by studying a newly discovered influenza A virus (IAV) protein, called PB1-F2. The gene encoding PB1-F2 is present in nearly all IAVs, including highly pathogenic avian IAVs that have infected humans and the IAV associated with the 1918 pandemic. “PB1-F2 was recently shown to enhance viral pathogenicity in a mouse infection model, raising questions about its effects on the secondary bacterial infections associated with high levels of influenza morbidity and mortality,” explains Dr. McCullers.

The researchers found that expression of PB1-F2 increased the incidence of and exacerbated secondary bacterial pneumonia in a mouse model.

Intranasal delivery of a synthetic peptide derived from a portion of PB1-F2 had the same effects. Further, an influenza virus engineered to express a version of PB1-F2 identical to that in the 1918 pandemic strain was more virulent in mice and led to more severe bacterial pneumonia, explaining in part both the unparalleled virulence of the 1918 strain and the high incidence of fatal pneumonia during the pandemic.

The finding that PB1-F2 promotes lung pathology in primary viral infection and secondary bacterial infection also provides critical information for the future. “Given the importance of IAV as a leading cause of virus-induced morbidity and mortality year in and year out, and its potential to kill tens of millions in the inevitable pandemic that may have its genesis in the viruses currently circulating in southeast Asia, it is imperative to understand the role of PB1-F2 in IAV pathogenicity in humans and animals,” says Dr. McCullers. “These findings also reinforce the recent suggestion of the American Society for Microbiology that nations should stockpile antibiotics for the next pandemic, since many of the deaths during this event are likely to be caused by bacterial super-infections.”
###
The researchers include Julie L. McAuley of Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis; Felicita Hornung of Laboratory of Viral Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda; Kelli L. Boyd of Animal Resources Center, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis; Amber M. Smith of Department of Mathematics, University of Utah in Salt Lake City; Raelene McKeon of Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis; Jack Bennink and Jonathan W. Yewdell of Laboratory of Viral Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda; and Jonathan A. McCullers of Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis.

This work was supported by the NIH (grants AI-66349 and AI-54802), the NIAID intramural research program, and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC).

McAuley et al.: “Expression of the 1918 Influenza A Virus PB1-F2 Enhances the Pathogenesis of Viral and Secondary Bacterial Pneumonia.” Publishing in Cell Host & Microbe 2, 240–249, October 2007. DOI 10.1016/j.chom.2007.09.001 www.cellhostandmicrobe.com

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-pel100407.php




As someone on the flutracker forum pointed out:
http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?p=228321
"comparing the PB1-F2 from 1918 and from 2009

first line: nucleotides (partial)
2nd line: main reading frame encoding the long protein PB1
3rd line: PB1-F2 reading frame encoding the short protein PB1-F2

protein encoding stops when a "}" is found

3 mutations are needed, which were synonymous in PB1, to undo the 3 stops,
but even then it seems unlikely that the encoded protein could fulfill its task and act as a
PB1-F2 in other human viruses.
But there is still the possibility to acquire a whole new PB1 by reassortment.

Presumably the PB1-F2 became nonfunctional years ago in Mexican swine and this
can't so easily be undone now in humans - except by reassortment."


Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2009, 11:21:27 AM »

I wonder if it just started functioning but in the Ukraine...


http://tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=116254&page=4
If the sequences ever go public for the strain hitting the Ukraine it will be the PB1-F2 sequence that will tell us if it is 1918 reborn or not. Until someone gets that data as proof all of these biowarfare arguments are tin.

The symptoms and lung path coming back from Ukraine deaths don't seem to be any different from the worst cases in N. America. The death rate is skyrocketing there but who's to say it's not due to population genetics, environment (I'm sure it's nutsack inverting cold there), or standard of care specific to that country.

Although we may never see the PB1-F2 sequences from there just like we didn't get them publicly from Argentina or New Guinea. Whether that is on purpose or not is a whole other issue.

Study unravels some of the mystery surrounding the devastating 1918 pandemic
10. October 2007 23:56
Often called the most devastating epidemic in the recorded history of the world, the 1918 influenza virus pandemic was responsible for more than 40 million deaths across the globe.

The incredible lethality of the 1918 flu strain is not well understood, despite having been under intense scrutiny for many years. Now, a new study published by Cell Press in the October issue of the journal Cell Host & Microbe unravels some of the mystery surrounding the devastating 1918 pandemic and provides key information that will help prepare for future pandemics.

It is relatively rare for an influenza virus to be virulent enough to cause death in healthy humans. Many deaths associated with influenza are caused by the combined influence of viral disease and the following secondary bacterial infection. Although the 1918 pandemic strain was one of the few influenza viruses capable of killing healthy victims on its own, the majority of fatal cases from the “Spanish Flu” can be attributed to secondary bacterial pathogens rather than primary viral disease. This important interaction between influenza viruses and bacteria is not well understood.

Dr. Jonathan A. McCullers from the Department of Infectious Diseases at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee and colleagues examined this interaction by studying a newly discovered influenza A virus (IAV) protein, called PB1-F2. The gene encoding PB1-F2 is present in nearly all IAVs, including highly pathogenic avian IAVs that have infected humans and the IAV associated with the 1918 pandemic. “PB1-F2 was recently shown to enhance viral pathogenicity in a mouse infection model, raising questions about its effects on the secondary bacterial infections associated with high levels of influenza morbidity and mortality,” explains Dr. McCullers.

The researchers found that expression of PB1-F2 increased the incidence of and exacerbated secondary bacterial pneumonia in a mouse model. Intranasal delivery of a synthetic peptide derived from a portion of PB1-F2 had the same effects. Further, an influenza virus engineered to express a version of PB1-F2 identical to that in the 1918 pandemic strain was more virulent in mice and led to more severe bacterial pneumonia, explaining in part both the unparalleled virulence of the 1918 strain and the high incidence of fatal pneumonia during the pandemic.

The finding that PB1-F2 promotes lung pathology in primary viral infection and secondary bacterial infection also provides critical information for the future. “Given the importance of IAV as a leading cause of virus-induced morbidity and mortality year in and year out, and its potential to kill tens of millions in the inevitable pandemic that may have its genesis in the viruses currently circulating in southeast Asia, it is imperative to understand the role of PB1-F2 in IAV pathogenicity in humans and animals,” says Dr. McCullers. “These findings also reinforce the recent suggestion of the American Society for Microbiology that nations should stockpile antibiotics for the next pandemic, since many of the deaths during this event are likely to be caused by bacterial super-infections.”

[/b]
http://www.cellpress.com/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/ferguswalsh/2009/10/how_not_to_run_an_immunisation_campaign.html

http://lib.bioinfo.pl/auid:125649
 J Virol. 2004 Jun ;78 (12):6304-12 15163724 (P,S,G,E,B) Cited:19
[Cited?]
PB1-F2, an influenza A virus-encoded proapoptotic mitochondrial protein, creates variably sized pores in planar lipid membranes.
[My paper] A N Chanturiya, G Basañez, U Schubert, P Henklein, J W Yewdell, J Zimmerberg
Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Biophysics, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Building 10, Room 10D14, Bethesda, MD 20892-1855. joshz@helix.nih.gov
A conditions, frameshifted region of the influenza A virus PB1 gene encodes a novel protein, termed PB1-F2, a mitochondrial protein that can proapoptotic induce cell death. Many proapoptotic proteins are believed to act at the mitochondrial outer membrane to form an apoptotic pore permeable with lipids. We studied the interaction of isolated, synthetic PB1-F2 (sPB1-F2) peptide with planar phospholipid bilayer membranes. The presence of the nanomolar concentrations of peptide in the bathing solution induced a transmembrane conductance that increased in a potential-dependent manner. Positive potential influenza on the side of protein addition resulted in a severalfold increase in the rate of change of membrane conductance. sPB1-F2-treated and membranes became permeable to monovalent cations, chloride, and to a lesser extent, divalent ions. Despite various experimental conditions, we did influenza not detect the distinctive conductance levels typical of large, stable pores, protein channels, or even pores that are partially proteinaceous.(sPB1-F2) Rather, membrane conductance induced by sPB1-F2 fluctuated and visited almost all conductance values. sPB1-F2 also dramatically decreased bilayer stability in gene an electric field, consistent with a decrease in the line tension of a lipidic pore. Since similar membrane-destabilizing profiles are proteins seen with proapoptotic proteins (e.g., Bax) and the cytoplasmic helix of human immunodeficiency virus gp41, we suggest that the basis gene for sPB1-F2-induced cell death may be the permeabilization and destabilization of mitochondrial membranes, leading to macromolecular leakage and apoptosis.

What do ya'll think? It's a shot in the dark, but it's the only thing that seems to make sense right now.
Logged
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2009, 11:53:21 AM »

if it was a time-release aspect, we'd be epidemic-pandemic ... and we're not, we're just epidemic-Ukraine.

what the flips goin' on in Ukraine?

Mike

I wonder if it just started functioning but in the Ukraine...
Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2009, 12:07:36 PM »

if it was a time-release aspect, we'd be epidemic-pandemic ... and we're not, we're just epidemic-Ukraine.

what the flips goin' on in Ukraine?

Mike


idk, but unless the sequences become publicly available for the isolates, we won't know...if they'd post the sequences on recombinomics or something, at least we'd be able to tell if the PB1-F2 gene was functioning or not.
Logged
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2009, 12:33:05 PM »

ah, I'm not totally sure how we'all feel about Doctor Bill Deagle but here's his latest interview about A-H1N1 and Ukraine.

http://projectcamelot.org/Bill_Deagle_15_November_2009.mp3

he's citing use of Oracle 8i to staple bits of RNA together and reckons it's time to kill some gross percentage! and he reckons Ukraine's a A-H1N1 variant....  hmm.....

"Gah, I just want more TRUTH, f**ker."  (character source BLADE RUNNER) I'm totally sick of the speculation all over this damned infowar.
Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2009, 12:39:59 PM »

ah, I'm not totally sure how we'all feel about Doctor Bill Deagle but here's his latest interview about A-H1N1 and Ukraine.

http://projectcamelot.org/Bill_Deagle_15_November_2009.mp3

he reckons it's time to kill some gross percentage! and he reckons Ukraine's a A-H1N1 variant....  hmm.....

"Gah, I just want more TRUTH, f**ker."  (character source BLADE RUNNER) I'm totally sick of the speculation all over this damned infowar.

I'm trying to avoid the speculation, I'm sorry...I'm just trying to see the big picture, here. If that Dr. Niman guy wasn't such a fearmongering douchebag, I'd write him an email asking about PB1-F2, the Ukrainian situation, if any mutations to the virus have occurred, whether different strains have mixed together (like H1N1/H5N1 or H1N1/H3N2, or H1N1/H2N2), etc. etc. etc. 

I have a feeling they're turning the Ukraine into a petri dish for what they'll do to us later.
Logged
grapecrusher1
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,537



« Reply #6 on: November 17, 2009, 01:30:55 PM »

If that Dr. Niman guy wasn't such a fearmongering douchebag

Why do you feel that way?  Remarkably, he has been right on a bunch of times.  I follow him closely and find him the only voice that makes sense and has any credibility amidst a bunch of gobolly gook from MSM to obscure blogs.

btw he doesnt like me and I am only after his virology expertise not his vaccine opinion.
Logged

"The meek shall inherit NOTHING" -- Zappa
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2009, 01:41:22 PM »

Socio,

we have Russia Today on my freeview box and RUSSIA has just delivered "medicine to deal with the Ukraine  epidemic".

Last winter, wasn't there a debacle between Ukraine and Russia about some oil pipeline supply to Europe?

Smiley

Mike
Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #8 on: November 17, 2009, 05:24:34 PM »

Socio,

we have Russia Today on my freeview box and RUSSIA has just delivered "medicine to deal with the Ukraine  epidemic".

Last winter, wasn't there a debacle between Ukraine and Russia about some oil pipeline supply to Europe?

Smiley

Mike


Yep.

The Russia–Ukraine gas disputes refer to a number of disputes between Ukrainian oil and gas company Naftohaz Ukrainy and Russian gas supplier Gazprom over natural gas supplies, prices, and debts. The disputes have involved politicians of both countries, and have threatened natural gas supplies in numerous European countries that depend on Russian natural gas transported through Ukraine. Russia provides about a quarter of the natural gas consumed in the European Union. Ukraine transports about 80% of Russian gas going to EU.[1]

A serious dispute started in March 2005 over the natural gas and transit prices. During this conflict Russia claimed Ukraine was not paying for gas, and diversing gas exported to EU from the pipelines. Ukrainian officials at first denied the last accusation [2][3], but later Naftohaz Ukrainy admitted it withheld some Russian gas intended for other European countries, and used it for domestic needs. The dispute culminated on 1 January 2006 when Russia cut off gas supplies passing through Ukrainian territory.[4] On 4 January 2006 a preliminary agreement between Russia and Ukraine was achieved, the supply was restored and the situation calmed.

Another dispute arose in October 2007 over Ukrainian gas debts and culminated in the gas supplies reduction in March 2008. During the last months of 2008 relations between Russia and Ukraine again became tense because of a dispute over the size of gas debts owed by Ukraine.[5]

In January 2009, the dispute resulted in 18 European countries reporting major falls or cut-offs of their gas supplies from Russia transported through Ukraine.[6][7]

In September 2009 officials from both countries do not expect a new conflict[8][9], at least not till the Ukrainian 2010 presidential elections[10], but in October 2009 a disagreement about the amount of gas Ukraine would import from Russia in 2010 occurred. Ukraine intents to imports less gas in 2010 because of it's economic recession it's industries requires far less gas, Gasprom insists that Ukraine fulfils its contractual obligations.[11]
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Historical background
    * 2 Disputes of 1990s
    * 3 Dispute of 2005–2006
    * 4 Dispute of 2007–2008
    * 5 Dispute of 2008–2009
    * 6 Current state of relations
    * 7 See also
    * 8 References
    * 9 External links

[edit] Historical background
See also: European dependence on Russian energy

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, oil import prices to Ukraine reached world market levels in 1993, but both Ukrainian gas import prices and transit fees for Russian exports to Europe were set in bilateral negotiations, below European levels to some degree.[12] At the same time Ukraine remained the main transit corridor for Russia's gas export. In 2004–2005, about 80% of Russian gas exports to the European Union were made through Ukraine.[13][14] Two-thirds of Gazprom's revenue comes from the sale of gas that crosses Ukraine.[15]

Ukraine's own annual gas consumption was in 2004–2005 around 80 billion cubic meters (bcm), of which around 20 bcm were Ukraine's own production, 36 bcm were bought from Turkmenistan, and 17 bcm were received from Russia as a payment for Russian gas transit. The remaining 6–8 bcm were purchased from Russia.[16] The gas trading system differed substantially from the gas sale to the European Union and caused problems in the form of large-scale deliveries of relatively cheap Russian gas causing increase of energy-intensive industries and supporting Ukraine's status as one of the world's least energy-efficient countries and largest gas importers; accumulation of Ukrainian debts and non-payment; unsanctioned diversion of gas and alleged theft from the transit system; and Russian pressure on Ukraine to hand over infrastructure in return for debts.[12]

Gas trading was conducted under bilateral intergovernmental agreements providing a framework for sales, transit volumes and prices and sometimes other issues such as storage and establishment of production joint ventures. Commercial agreements were negotiated between the relevant companies in the framework of intergovernmental agreements, and supplemented by annual agreements specifying exact prices and volumes for the following year. Gas sales prices and transit tariffs were set in relationship to each other.[12] Commercial agreements and trade relations have been non-transparent and trade has conducted by shady middlemen Itera, EuralTransGaz, and since 2004 by RosUkrEnergo, a company with no assets, no track record, and no transparency about its owners. According to Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Timochenko the company controlled by Semion Mogilevich. There are allegations that the company is controlled by Semion Mogilevich and its beneficiaries include of well-placed officials in the Russian and Ukrainian gas industries and governmental structures.[15][17] Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has accused that RosUkrEnergo is owned by a business ally of the Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko.[18] The Ukrainian investigation into RosUkrEnergo, during Yulia Tymoshenko's previous term as Prime Minister, was closed after she was fired by Yushchenko in September 2005.[19]

According to the contract on 21 June 2002, signed between Gazprom and Naftohaz, the payment for the transfer of Russian natural gas through Ukrainian pipeline system had been made in the form of barter exchange – up to 15% of gas pumped through the Ukrainian territory was taken by Ukraine instead of payments in cash.[citation needed] This contract was supposed to be valid until the end of 2013.[citation needed] On 9 August 2004, the two companies signed an addendum to the contract, according to which the amount of gas given as a payment was calculated based on the tariff of US$1.09 for transportation of 1,000 cubic meters over a distance of 100 kilometres (62 mi) and the price of the natural gas supplied for Ukraine was $50 per 1,000 cubic meters (approximately $1.40 per million Btu).[20] The price also did not change, notwithstanding the gas prices in the European markets.[21] According to the addendum the price was not subject to changes until the end of 2009.[20] Gazprom argued that this addendum was only applicable provided that the two countries sign an annual intergovernmental protocol that has higher legal status for specifying the terms of gas transit.[22] According to Gazprom, the addendum becomes void as the annual protocol had not been signed for 2006 under the required terms.[23] Russia claimed that Gazprom's subsidies to the Ukrainian economy amounted to billions of dollars.[24]

According to the agreement of 2006, RosUkrEnergo gets more than 20 percent of the total delivered gas, which in 2007 was 15 bcm of 73 bcm.
[edit] Disputes of 1990s

The first disputes about gas debts and non-payment appeared immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Because of disputes over non-payments by Ukraine, Russia suspended gas supplies several times in 1992, 1993 and 1994. This led to illicit diversions of gas from transit pipelines by Ukrainian companies and institutions in September 1993 and November 1994. These diversions of gas were acknowledged by Ukraine, while accusations of other diversions were disputed.[12] In September 1993, at a summit conference in Massandra, Crimea, Russian president Boris Yeltsin offered to Ukrainian president Leonid Kravchuk cancellation of debt in return for control of the Black Sea fleet and Ukraine's nuclear warheads. After a strong reaction from politicians in Kiev, the idea was abandoned.[12] An intergovernmental agreement was drafted on gas issues, including a clause stating that Ukraine would enable Gazprom to participate in the privatization of Ukrainian enterprises in the gas and other sectors. In March 1994, a Ukrainian deputy prime minister agreed with Russia that Gazprom could take a 51% stake in the pipeline system. In early 1995, Russia and Ukraine agreed to create a joint company Gaztransit to operate Ukraine's gas transit assets in exchange for the write-off of much of Ukraine's debts to Russia. However, none of these agreements were ever implemented and in November 1995 the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a law prohibiting privatization of oil and gas assets.[12]

In 1998, Gazprom and Naftohaz made a contract, under which Gazprom would pay for transit with volumes of gas, with a link between gas prices and transit tariffs. However, this contract did not resolve the issue of gas debts.[12] In 1998, Gazprom alleged that Ukraine had illegally diverted gas from transit and suspended exports of oil and electricity to Ukraine in 1999. Gazprom also claimed that Ukraine's gas debt had reached $2.8 billion.[13] In 2001, then Deputy Prime Minister Oleh Dubyna acknowledged that in 2000 alone 8.7 bcm of Russian gas had been siphoned off from export pipelines.[12] The debt issue was settled on 4 October 2001, by signing intergovernmental agreement on Additional Measures Regarding the Provision of Transit of Russian Natural Gas on the Territory of Ukraine (the 2001 Transit Agreement).[13]
[edit] Dispute of 2005–2006
Main article: Russia–Ukraine gas dispute of 2005–2006
Then President of Russia Vladimir Putin at a meeting on 29 December 2005 with Alexei Kudrin (Russian Finance Minister), Viktor Khristenko (Russian Energy Minister), Alexander Medvedev (Deputy Chairman of the Gazprom board), Ivan Plachkov (Ukrainian Energy Minister) and Alexey Ivchenko (CEO of Naftohaz), in which the dispute was discussed.

In 2005, negotiations over gas price for 2006 started. Gazprom insisted a new price of about $160 per 1,000 cubic meters.[citation needed] Government of Ukraine agreed with gradual increase of prices in return for increased gas transit fees and changing the payments for transit from barter to cash.[25][verification needed] In May 2005 it was revealed that 7.8 bcm of gas which Gazprom had deposited in Ukrainian storage reservoirs during the previous winter had not been made available to the company. It remained unclear if the gas was missing, had disappeared due to technical problems, or had been stolen.[26] This issue was resolved in July 2005 by agreement between Gazprom, Naftohaz and RosUkrEnergo, according to which Naftohaz received 2.55 bcm of gas as partial settlement of the Russian gas transit over 2005 services and 5.25 bcm was sold by Gazprom to RosUkrEnergo who has to receive it from Naftohaz.[27] However, the negotiations between Gazprom and Naftohaz over a gas prices and a new gas supply agreement failed and on 1 January 2006 Gazprom started reducing the pressure in the pipelines from Russia to Ukraine.[28]

Although Russia cut off only supplies to Ukraine, a number of European countries saw a drop in their supplies.[3] The European Commissioner for Energy Andris Piebalgs as also the EU Presidency Austria and several affected member states warned that blocking of gas deliveries is unacceptable.[citation needed] Pascal Lamy, director general of the World Trade Organisation, expressed opinion that all Post-Soviet states should pay market prices for their energy needs in order to improve the efficiency of their economies.[29]

The supply was restored on 4 January 2006, after the preliminary agreement between Ukraine and Gazprom was settled.[30] The five year contract was signed, although with the prices set for six months only. According to the contract, the gas was sold not directly to Naftohaz, but to the Russian-Swiss company RosUkrEnergo. The price of natural gas sold by Gazprom to RosUkrEnergo rose to $230 per 1,000 cubic metres, which after mixing it with two thirds of cheaper supplies from Central Asia was resold to Ukraine at a price of $95 per 1,000 cubic metres.[31][32] The parties also agreed to raise the tariff for transit from US$1.09 to US$1.60 per 1,000 cubic meters per 100 km which concerns not only the transit of Russian gas to Europe but also Turkmen gas through Russia to Ukraine.[citation needed] On 11 January 2006, presidents Vladimir Putin and Viktor Yushchenko confirmed that the conflict had concluded.[citation needed]

As one possible reason of this conflict that has been mentioned is the more pro-NATO and EU approach of the new 'orange' Government of Ukraine. Russia declined this, stating the cause that they don't want to subsidize former Soviet republics.[33]
[edit] Dispute of 2007–2008
Then President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko at a meeting of the Russian–Ukrainian Intergovernmental Commission at the Kremlin on 12 February 2008, at which the gas dispute was discussed.

On 2 October 2007 Gazprom threatened to cut off gas supplies to Ukraine because unpaid debt of $1.3 billion.[34] This dispute appeared to be settled on 8 October 2007.[35] On 5 January 2008 Gazprom warned Ukraine again it will reduce its gas supplies on 11 January 2008 if a $1.5 billion gas debt would not be paid.[36] Presidents Putin and Yushchenko announced on 12 February 2008 an agreement on the gas issue.[37] Ukraine would begin paying off its debts for natural gas, consumed in November–December 2007 and the price at $179.5 will be preserved in the year 2008.[38][38] The presidents also decided to replace RosUkrEnergo and UkrGazEnergo by two new intermediaries, creating them as joint ventures of Gazprom and Naftohaz.[39]

At the end of February 2008, Gazprom threatened to reduce the supply of natural gas to Ukraine from 3 March 2008, unless the pre-payment for 2008 had been paid.[40][41] The Ukrainian government said it paid the gas bill for 2007 but still has refused to pay the bill for 2008.[42] A Gazprom spokesman claimed that 1.9 bcm of gas deliveries worth about $600 million still wasn't paid. Ukraine disagrees with a debt that accumulated in recent months when Russia used its own gas to make up for a shortfall in less expensive Central Asian gas.[43] On 3 March 2008 Gazprom cut its shipments to Ukraine by 25% (a day later with another 25%), claiming that the $1.5 billion debt still was not paid, although Ukrainian officials stated it had been paid.[44] Gas supplies were restored 5 March 2008 after Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller and Naftohaz CEO Oleh Dubyna agreed during negotiations by phone on a settlement to the crisis with gas supplies to Ukraine. On 6 March 2008 the Ukrainian cabinet refused to execute the gas agreements done by presidents Yushchenko and Putin. The government did not want to pay in advance for 2008 and it opposed the creation of a Naftohaz–Gazprom venture that would sell gas in Ukraine.[45] Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko stated that Ukraine did not need any additional newly created joint ventures, and as of 1 March 2008, UkrGazEnergo is no longer operating on Ukraine's domestic gas market.[46]
[edit] Dispute of 2008–2009
Main article: 2009 Russia–Ukraine gas dispute
Vladimir Putin and Viktor Yushchenko (12 February 2008)

The gas crisis of 2009 began with a failure to reach an agreement on gas prices and supplies for 2009. Ukraine owed a debt of $2.4 billion to Gazprom for consumed gas, and Gazprom asked this amount be repaid before the commencement of a new supply contract.[47] Although in December 2008 more than $1 billion was paid by Ukraine to reduce its debt, Gazprom remained committed to cut supplies to Ukraine on 1 January 2009, if Ukraine did not redeem its $1.67 billion debt for gas supplies and $450 million in fines.[48][49][50] On 30 December 2008, Naftohaz paid $1.522 billion,[51] but parties were not able to agree the price for 2009. Ukraine proposed a price of $201 and later $235, while Gazprom demanded $250 per 1,000 cubic meters.[52] Negotiations between Gazprom and Naftohaz were interrupted on 31 December 2008.[53]

Deliveries of 90 million cubic meters of natural gas per day, destined for Ukraine, were cut off in full on 1 January 2009 at 10:00 MSK. Transit deliveries to the EU continued at a volume of 300 million cubic meters per day.[54] President Yushchenko sent a letter to President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso proposing the European Union's involvement in the settlement of the dispute.[55] A Ukrainian delegation including Fuel and Energy Minister Yuriy Prodan, Deputy Foreign Minister Konstantin Yeliseyev, President's representative for energy issues Bohdan Sokolovsky, and Deputy Head of Naftohaz Vadym Chuprun visited Czech Republic as the EU Presidency and a number of the EU other member states in the first week of 2009 to hold consultations on the gas crisis.[56][57]

On 2 January 2009 Hungary, Romania and Poland reported that pressure in their pipelines had dropped. Bulgaria also reported that supply was falling and that transit to Turkey, Greece and Republic of Macedonia was affected.[58][59][60] On 4 January 2009 lawsuits were filed both by RosUkrEnergo (against Ukraine) and Gazprom (against Naftohaz) with the Stockholm Tribunal of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, Sweden.[61][62] Ukraine has also filed in lawsuits there.[63] According to Naftohaz, RosUkrEnergo owes the company $40 million for services in transportation of natural gas.[64] On 5 January 2009 Kyiv's economic court decided to ban Naftohaz from transiting Russian gas in 2009 at a price of $1.60 per 1,600 cubic meters per 100 kilometers. The court declared ineffective contracts on Russian gas transit via Ukraine because they were signed without being empowered by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine.[65]

On 5 January 2009 Prime Minister Putin instructed the head of Gazprom Alexei Miller to reduce supplies via Ukraine to Europe by the amount of gas Ukraine had allegedly taken since deliveries ended on 1 January 2009.[66] On 7 January 2009, all Russian gas flow through Ukraine was halted amid mutual accusations between the two parties.[67][68][69] Several countries reported a major fall in supplies of Russian gas starting from 7 January 2009; the worst affected were Bulgaria, Moldova and Slovakia.[6][70][71]

Talks between Naftohaz and Gazprom were resumed on 8 January 2009 overnight.[67][72][73] Ukraine agreed to guarantee the unimpeded transit of natural gas on the condition that Gazprom would guarantee and supply technical gas for Ukraine's gas transit system to function; this was denied by Russia.[74] Although the European Union, Ukraine and Russia agreed the deployment of the international monitoring group on the gas metering stations between Russia and Ukraine, the supplies to Europe were not restored.[75][76][77][78] Naftohaz blocked the transit, blaming a lack of pressure in the pipeline system and saying that because of the design of the Soviet-built pipeline it could not ship gas entering through the Sudzha metering station over the specific route to leave Ukraine through Orlivka metering station without cutting off the Donetsk region, Luhansk region and portions of the Dnipropetrovsk region of Ukraine.[79][80][81] Instead of this route, Naftohaz suggested a technically more feasible alternative through Valuyki and Pisarevka metering stations but was refused.[82][83][84]
Signing of the deal reached at the Moscow summit at 19 January 2009 by Oleh Dubyna and Alexei Miller (with Yulia Tymoshenko and Vladimir Putin standing in the background)

On 17 January 2009, Russia held an international gas conference in Moscow. The EU was represented by the Presidency (the Czech Minister of Industry and Trade Martin Říman) and European Commission (the EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs), so that the EU could speak with one voice.[85][86][87] Ukraine was represented by the Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.[88] The summit did not achieve any solution to the crisis and the negotiations continued bilaterally between prime ministers Putin and Tymoshenko. Early 18 January 2009 morning after five-hour talks Putin and Tymoshenko reached a deal on restoring gas supplies to Europe and Ukraine.[89][90] Parties agreed that Ukraine would start paying European prices for its natural gas, less a 20 percent discount for 2009, and would pay the full European market starting from 2010. In return for the discounts Ukraine agreed to keep its transit fee for Russian gas unchanged in 2009. The two sides had also agreed not to use intermediaries.[91][91] On 19 January 2009, the head of Gazprom Alexei Miller and the head of Naftohaz Oleh Dubyna signed the 10-year agreement on natural gas supplies to Ukraine for the period of 2009-2019.[92][93][94] Gas supplies restarted on 20 January 2009 and were fully restored on 21 January 2009.[95]

According to the EU Commission and Presidency, the gas crisis caused irreparable and irreversible damage to customers' confidence in Russia and Ukraine, and that means Russia and Ukraine can no longer be regarded as reliable partners.[81][83][87] According to reports, due the gas crisis Gazprom lost more than $1.1 billion in revenue for the unsupplied gas.[96] Ukraine incurred losses because its steel and chemical plants were temporarily shut down due to the lack of gas. It also lost $100 million in transit fees because of the cut-off.[96]

There were also accusations of illegally taking gas by Ukraine; these accusations were not confirmed.[97][98] At the same time the issue of technical gas to fuel compressor stationsand to maintain pressure in the pipeline network remained unclear.[99][100] When some sources say that responsibility for providing the technical gas falls to Ukraine,[101] others say that this is the responsibility of Gazprom.[102]

There were several theories about alleged political motives behind the conflict, such as a pressuring the Ukrainian politicians or stopping the EU and NATO expansions to include Ukraine.[103][104][105] Others suggested that Ukraine's actions were being orchestrated by the United States.[78] Both sides tried to win sympathy for their arguments fighting a PR war.[106][107]

In August 2009 it was agreed loans worth $1.7bn will lend be lend to Ukraine to help it provide stable supplies of Russian gas to Europe by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in return for reforms in Ukraine's gas sector.[1]
[edit] Current state of relations

After meeting[108] her Russian counterpart Putin Ukrainian Prime Minster Tymoshenko declared on 3 September 2009 "Russia and Ukraine, have agreed that at Christmas, there won't be any halt in gas supplies. Everything will be quite calm on the basis of the current agreements". Tymoshenko also said that the Ukrainian and Russian premiers had agreed that sanctions would not be imposed on Ukraine for the country buying less gas than expected and that the price of Russian gas transit across Ukraine may grow 65% till 70% in 2010.[109] A week before Gazprom had said it expected gas transit fees via Ukraine to rise by up to 59 percent in 2010.[8]

On October 8, 2009 Tymoshenko announced that Ukrainian 2010 natural gas imports will be significantly less than in previous years "because we have less need for natural gas". Because of it's economic recession the industries require far less gas. In response to Tymoshenko Gazprom Chief Executive Alexey Miller stated that Ukraine should stick to the January (2009) contract for 2010.[11]

On November 16, 2009 Commissioner for Energy at the European Commission Andris Piebalgs stated that Russia and the European Union do not expect another gas conflict with Ukraine. According to him there were no gas price negotiations or questions other than that of gas payments.[110]
[edit] See also
Crystal energy.svg    Energy portal

    * European dependence on Russian energy
    * Druzhba pipeline
    * Nord Stream
    * Nabucco Pipeline
    * Energy policy of Russia
    * Energy superpower
    * List of countries by natural gas proven reserves
    * Peak gas
    * Politics of Russia
    * Politics of Ukraine
    * Russia–Belarus energy dispute
    * Urengoy-Pomary-Uzhgorod pipeline
    * Yamal–Europe pipeline

[edit] References

   1. ^ a b "EU reaches gas deal with Ukraine". BBC News. 2009-08-01. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8179461.stm. Retrieved 2009-08-01.
   2. ^ "Ukraine gas row hits EU supplies". BBC. 2006-01-01. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4573572.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
   3. ^ a b "Ukraine 'stealing Europe's gas'". BBC. 2006-01-02. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4574630.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
   4. ^ "Ukraine takes extra Russian gas". BBC. 2006-01-24. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4642684.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
   5. ^ "Ukraine - time to pay gas bills". Russia Today. 2008-11-26. http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/33776. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
   6. ^ a b "FACTBOX - 18 countries affected by Russia-Ukraine gas row". Reuters. 2009-01-07. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE5062Q520090107?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
   7. ^ Cendrowicz, Leo (2009-01-09). "Russia-Europe Gas Spat Ends — For Now". Time. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1870597,00.html. Retrieved 2009-01-09.
   8. ^ a b "UPDATE 2-Ukraine says has good winter gas stocks for Europe". Reuters. 2009-09-07. http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idINL762912420090907?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-09-07.
   9. ^ "There are no controversies on gas issues between Ukraine and Russia". UNIAN. 2009-09-08. http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-335038.html. Retrieved 2009-09-08.
  10. ^ "UPDATE 2-Gazprom sees political risk to Ukraine gas payments". Reuters. 2009-09-12. http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssOilGasExplorationProduction/idUSLC31093620090912?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0. Retrieved 2009-09-12.
  11. ^ a b "Ukraine, Russia's Gazprom disagree on 2010 imports". Kyiv Post. 2009-10-08. http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/50341. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
  12. ^ a b c d e f g h Pirani, Simon (2007) (PDF). Ukraine's Gas Sector. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. ISBN 978-1-901795-63-9. http://www.oxfordenergy.org/pdfs/NG21.pdf. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  13. ^ a b c (PDF) Ukraine: Energy Policy Review 2006. IEA/OECD. 2006. pp. 204; 220. ISBN 92-64-10991-9. http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2006/ukraine2006.pdf. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  14. ^ Nichol, Jim; Woehrel, Steven; Gelb, Bernhard A. (2006-02-15) (PDF). Russia’s Cutoff of Natural Gas to Ukraine: Context and Implications. CRS Report. RS22378. http://www.italy.usembassy.gov/pdf/other/RS22378.pdf. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  15. ^ a b Chow, Edward; Elkind, Jonathan (2009). "Where East Meets West: European Gas and Ukrainian Reality" (PDF). The Washington Quarterly (Center for Strategic and International Studies) 32 (1). http://www.twq.com/09winter/docs/09jan_ChowElkind.pdf. Retrieved 2009-01-10.
  16. ^ "Russia-Ukraine gas dispute remains unsettled". RIA Novosti. 2005-12-20. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20051220/42586383.html. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  17. ^ "The High Price of Gas: Transcript". BBC. 2006-11-06. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/6121508.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-21.
  18. ^ David Jolly (2009-01-08). "Deal Struck to End Gas Cutoff". New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/09/world/europe/09gazprom.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss. Retrieved 2009-01-21.
  19. ^ Nikolaus von Twickel, Max Delany, Natalya Krainova (2008-01-28). "Mogilevich Arrested With Arbat Boss". New York Times. http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/1010/42/303006.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-21.
  20. ^ a b "Україна перехоплює ініціативу в газовій війні. Читайте документи". Українська правда. 2005-12-22. http://pravda.com.ua/news/2005/12/22/36935.htm. Retrieved 2008-12-15.
  21. ^ "Expert: Ukraine vs Gazprom: the price of the problem". Regnum. 2006-01-10. http://www.regnum.ru/english/569483.html. Retrieved 2008-12-15.
  22. ^ ""Газпром": Цена газа для Украины может составить $500-700" (in Russian). Korrespondent. 2005-12-23. http://korrespondent.net/business/140219. Retrieved 2008-12-15.
  23. ^ "Comment on Naftagaz Ukrainy's statement from 7 December 2005". Gazprom. 2005-12-07. http://www.gazprom.com/eng/news/2005/12/18443.shtml. Retrieved 2008-12-15.
  24. ^ "Обнародован текст стенограммы «газовых переговоров»". From-UA. 2005-12-30. http://www.from-ua.com/news/43b5160a4b11f. Retrieved 2008-12-15.
  25. ^ Russian newspaper Kommersant daily, Tuesday, March 29, 2005
  26. ^ Stern, Jonathan (2006-01-16) (PDF). The Russian-Ukrainian gas crisis of January 2006. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. http://www.oxfordenergy.org/pdfs/comment_0106.pdf. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  27. ^ "Gazprom and Naftogaz Ukrainy settle 7.8 bcm of Russian gas in Ukrainian UGS facilities problem". RUSTOCKS.com. 2005-07-17. http://www.rustocks.com/index.phtml/pressreleases/0/46/7822?filter=2005. Retrieved 2008-12-21.
  28. ^ "Russia cuts off gas supply to Ukraine". International Herald Tribune. 2006-01-01. http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/01/europe/web.0101gas.php. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
  29. ^ "Putin's Kremlin Flexes Its Muscles With Gazprom". Forbes. 2006-01-02. http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2006/01/02/putin-gazprom-ukraine-cx_po_0102autofacescan02.html. Retrieved 2009-01-13. "These countries should pay today's market prices for their energy to improve the efficiency of their economies"
  30. ^ "Ukraine and Russia reach gas deal". BBC. 2006-01-04. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4579648.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  31. ^ "Russia, Ukraine reach deal on gas pricing; EU relieved, oil price falls". Forbes. 2006-01-04. http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/afx/2006/01/04/afx2426965.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  32. ^ "Russia, Ukraine Agree on New Gas Prices". Kommersant. 2006-01-04. http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=-7864. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  33. ^ "Russia's State-Controlled Gas Firm Announces Plan to Double Price for Georgia". Washington Post. 2007-11-03. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/02/AR2006110201520.html. Retrieved 2007-11-03.
  34. ^ "Gazprom may cut gas to Ukraine". BBC. 2007-10-03. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7024294.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  35. ^ "Ukraine settles Russian gas row". BBC. 2007-10-08. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7034849.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  36. ^ "Gazprom threatens Ukraine gas cut". BBC. 2008-02-07. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7233401.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  37. ^ "Russia, Ukraine deal averts gas crisis". CNN. 2008-02-12. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/02/12/putin.russia/index.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  38. ^ a b "Ukraine, Russia, settle gas debt dispute". UNIAN. 2008-02-12. http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-235920.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  39. ^ "Yushchenko called Tymoshenko's policy a policy of risky ventures and intrigues". UNIAN. 2008-03-07. http://unian.net/eng/news/news-240060.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  40. ^ "Gazprom restarts row with Ukraine". BBC. 2008-02-26. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7265377.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  41. ^ "Gazprom to reduce Ukraine's gas". BBC. 2008-02-29. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7271604.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  42. ^ "Russia and Ukraine reach gas deal". BBC. 2008-02-12. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7240191.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  43. ^ "Gazprom cuts gas to Ukraine by 25%". France 24. 2008-02-12. http://www.france24.com/en/20080303-gazprom-cuts-gas-ukraine-25-russia-ukraine&navi=MONDE. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  44. ^ "Gazprom cuts Ukraine gas supply". BBC. 2008-03-03. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7274380.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  45. ^ "Tymoshenko refused to execute gas agreements of Presidents". UNIAN. 2008-03-06. http://unian.net/eng/news/news-239931.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  46. ^ "Yulia Tymoshenko is satisfied that Ukraine "withstood the confrontation" over gas". Personal web site of Yulia Tymoshenko. 2008-03-05. http://www.tymoshenko.com.ua/eng/news/first/5332/. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  47. ^ "Gazprom, Naftogaz sign long-term cooperation deal". Ukrainian News. 2008-11-20. http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/164193.html. Retrieved 2008-12-17.
  48. ^ "Gazprom rejects Ukraine's claim". Upstream Online. 2008-12-23. http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article168740.ece. Retrieved 2008-12-25.
  49. ^ "Gazprom to receive Ukraine's $1.5 bln gas debt payment Jan. 11". RIA Novosti. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090102/119335474.html. Retrieved 2009-01-09.
  50. ^ "Kiev told to pay up or gas is off". Upstream Online. 2008-12-24. http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article168753.ece. Retrieved 2008-12-25.
  51. ^ Dmitry Zhdannikov (2008-12-30). "Ukraine says repaid gas debt, Russia says not yet". Reuters. http://uk.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUKLU15776220081230?sp=true. Retrieved 2008-12-31.
  52. ^ Osborn, Andrew (2009-01-02). "Russia Firm Cuts Gas to Ukraine, But EU Hit Is Cushioned". Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123080339916446769.html. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
  53. ^ Pavel Polityuk, Sabina Zawadzki, Dmitry Zhdannikov (2008-12-31). "Russia: gas talks fail, will cut off Ukraine". Reuters. http://uk.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUKLV43959420081231?sp=true. Retrieved 2008-12-31.
  54. ^ "Russia fully cuts gas to Ukraine, ups supplies to Europe". RIA Novosti. 2009-01-01. http://en.rian.ru/world/20090101/119302144.html. Retrieved 2009-01-01.
  55. ^ "Ukraine asks EU to take part in settlement of Ukrainian-Russian gas dispute". Interfax Ukraine. 2009-01-01. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4213/. Retrieved 2009-01-01.
  56. ^ "Ukrainian Delegation Meets Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek in Prague" (PDF). The Czech Presidency of the EU Council. 2009-01-02. http://www.eu2009.cz/scripts/file.php?id=6066&down=yes. Retrieved 2009-01-04.
  57. ^ "Ukrainian envoys go to EU for gas consultations". Ukrinform. 2009-01-02. http://www.ukrinform.ua/eng/order/?id=150308. Retrieved 2009-01-02.
  58. ^ "Russia looks to re-route EU gas". BBC. 2009-01-02. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7808937.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-02.
  59. ^ "Ukraine warns EU of gas 'problem'". BBC. 2009-01-03. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7809450.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-03.
  60. ^ Kotlowski, Aleksander (2009-05-30). "Russian Energy Strategy and Transit Routes in Eastern Europe". Oil, Gas & Energy Law Intelligence (MARIS) 7 (2. Special issue on EU - Russia relations (requires subscription)). ISSN 1875-418X. http://www.ogel.org/article.asp?key=2889. Retrieved 2009-06-07.
  61. ^ "UPDATE: RosUkrEnergo Sues Ukraine For Failure To Meet Commitments On Gas Transit At Stockholm Tribuna". Ukrainian News Agency. 2009-01-04. http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/172463.html. Retrieved 2009-01-04.
  62. ^ "Gazprom To Sue Naftohaz Ukrainy For Ensuring Smooth Gas Transit". Ukrainian News Agency. 2009-01-04. http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/172475.html. Retrieved 2009-01-04.
  63. ^ Yuri Kulikov; Tanya Mosolova (2009-01-04). "Russia gas disruption spreads to Czechs, Turks". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4BN32B20090104?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-04.
  64. ^ "Naftohaz Ukraine: Intermediary RosUkrEnergo owes $40 million for gas transit". Kyiv Post. 2009-01-03. http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/32638. Retrieved 2009-01-03.
  65. ^ "Kyiv court bans Naftogaz from transiting Russian gas at $1.60 per 1,600 cubic meters per 100 kilometers". Kyiv Post.. 2009-01-06. http://www.kyivpost.com/business/32682. Retrieved 2009-01-06.
  66. ^ "Russia to cut Ukraine gas supply". BBC News. 2009-01-05. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7812368.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-05.
  67. ^ a b "Russia says will restore gas when monitors in place". Reuters. 2009-01-08. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5062Q520090108. Retrieved 2009-01-08.
  68. ^ "Ukraine has stolen 86 mln cu m of gas in 2009 - Gazprom". RIA Novosti. http://en.rian.ru/world/20090107/119390033.html. Retrieved 2009-01-09.
  69. ^ "Kremlin wants Ukraine to stop diverting Russian gas, reopen transit". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-07. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4433/. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
  70. ^ "FACTBOX: Countries affected by Russia-Ukraine gas row". Reuters. 2009-01-06. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE50531Q20090106?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0. Retrieved 2009-01-06.
  71. ^ "European gas supplies disrupted". BBC. 2009-01-06. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7812860.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-06.
  72. ^ "Talks held between Gazprom, Naftogaz CEOs". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-08. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4462/. Retrieved 2009-01-08.
  73. ^ "Heads of Gazprom and Naftogaz plan to resume talks on return from Brussels". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-08. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4513/. Retrieved 2009-01-08.
  74. ^ "Ukraine to pump gas to EU if Russia supports transit". Reuters. 2009-01-08. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5074JI20090108. Retrieved 2009-01-08.
  75. ^ "EU technical experts to monitor gas flows from Russia - agreement between Ukrainian premier and European commission president". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-07. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4440/. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
  76. ^ Denis Dyomkin Yuri Kulikov (2009-01-10). "EU seeks to clear gas monitoring deal with Russia". Reuters. http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE5063OV20090110?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-10.
  77. ^ "Russia 'to resume gas supplies'". BBC News. 2009-01-12. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7824510.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-12.
  78. ^ a b Dmitry Zhdannikov; Ron Popeski (2009-01-13). "Worried EU states to fly to Moscow over gas row". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5062Q520090113?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-13.
  79. ^ Bruno Waterfield (2009-01-15). "Ukraine blocks gas after Russia turns taps on". Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/4227364/Ukraine-blocks-gas-after-Russia-turns-taps-on.html. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
  80. ^ "Naftogaz acknowledges it couldn't take Russian gas". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-13. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/4987/. Retrieved 2009-01-13.
  81. ^ a b "EU warns of legal action over gas". BBC News. 2009-01-14. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7827829.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-14.
  82. ^ "Naftogaz offers different transit route to Gazprom - source in Naftogaz". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-01-14. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/5017/. Retrieved 2009-01-14.
  83. ^ a b "EU premiers plead with Ukraine and Russia for gas". Reuters. 2009-01-13. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5062Q520090114?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0. Retrieved 2009-01-14.
  84. ^ "Gazprom’s transit request on Jan 16 in agreement with Ukrainian dispatchers' proposals". Kyiv Post. 2009-01-16. http://www.kyivpost.com/world/33454. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
  85. ^ The Czech Presidency of the EU Council (2009-01-15). "One voice for the EU and Gas first: Member States support Czech Presidency and Commission". Press release. http://www.eu2009.cz/en/news-and-documents/news/one-voice-for-the-eu-and-gas-first:-member-states-support-czech-presidency-and-commission-6197/. Retrieved 2009-01-16.
  86. ^ "EU to attend gas summit in Moscow". BBC News. 2009-01-15. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7830517.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-15.
  87. ^ a b "Russian and Ukrainian PMs to hold talks on gas row". Reuters. 2009-01-15. http://uk.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUKLE11812920090115?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-15.
  88. ^ Oleg Shchedrov; Simon Shuster (2009-01-17). "Moscow gas crisis talks go into night, no deal yet". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSLG68736920090117?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-17.
  89. ^ "Russia, Ukraine PMs agree to restore gas supplies: reports". Reuters. 2009-01-17. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5062Q520090117. Retrieved 2009-01-17.
  90. ^ "'Gas to flow' after Moscow deal". BBC News. 2009-01-18. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7834796.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-18.
  91. ^ a b "EU wary as Russia and Ukraine reach gas deal". Reuters. 2009-01-18. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5062Q520090118?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0. Retrieved 2009-01-18.
  92. ^ "Ukraine, Russia Agree On Gas Supplies To Ukraine For 2009-2019". Ukrainian News Agency. 2009-01-19. http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/174732.html. Retrieved 2009-01-19.
  93. ^ Oleg Shchedrov; Ron Popeski (2009-01-19). "Russia and Ukraine sign 10-year gas supply deal". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5062Q520090119?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-19.
  94. ^ "Russia and Ukraine sign gas deal". BBC News. 2009-01-19. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7836736.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-19.
  95. ^ "Russian gas reaches Europe again". Reuters. 2009-01-21. http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE5091KI20090121?sp=true. Retrieved 2009-02-24.
  96. ^ a b Andrei Nesterov (2009-02-20). "Russia-Ukraine 'Gas War' Damages Both Economies". Worldpress.org. http://www.worldpress.org/Europe/3307.cfm. Retrieved 2009-02-24.
  97. ^ "Gazprom's official statement on the gas crisis". RT. 2009-01-08. http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/35651. Retrieved 2009-01-10.
  98. ^ "Ukraine did not steal gas – Piebalgs". UNIAN. 2009-01-21. http://unian.net/eng/news/news-296245.html. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
  99. ^ "Ukraine accused of stealing gas". BBC News. 2009-01-02. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7808465.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-02.
 100. ^ "Rada commission confirms Ukraine was not stealing Russia gas". Kyiv Post. 2009-02-06. http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/35035. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
 101. ^ "Russia, Ukraine Envoys In Brussels For Gas Talks With EU". RFE/RL. 2009-01-08. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/01/mil-090108-rferl01.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-10.
 102. ^ "Russia accuses Ukraine of siphoning gas to Balkans". International Herald Tribune. 2009-01-02. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/01/02/europe/EU-Russia-Ukraine-Gas.php. Retrieved 2009-01-10.
 103. ^ "Russia-Ukraine feud goes beyond gas pipes". The International Herald Tribune. 2009-01-14. http://iht.com/articles/2009/01/14/europe/gazprom.2-407519.php?page=2. Retrieved 2009-01-14.
 104. ^ Roger Boyes (2009-01-07). "Comment: Gazprom is not a market player, it’s a political weapon". The Times. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5458245.ece. Retrieved 2009-01-08.
 105. ^ Hasan Selim Ozertem (2009-02-13). "Comment: Aftermath of the Energy Crisis – Russia Still Dominant in the Market!". Journal of Turkish Weekly. http://www.turkishweekly.net/columnist/3099/aftermath-of-the-energy-crisis-russia-still-dominant-in-the-market-.html. Retrieved 2009-02-13.
 106. ^ Christian Lowe (2009-01-07). "What is Russia's end-game in gas row?". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE5062VY20090107?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
 107. ^ "No clear winner in Europe's gas game". BBC News. 2009-01-15. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7828827.stm. Retrieved 2009-01-15.
 108. ^ "Putin and Tymoshenko "removed gas problems"". UNIAN. 2009-09-02. http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-334088.html. Retrieved 2009-09-02.
 109. ^ "Russian gas transit fee may grow 65-70% in 2010, says Ukrainian premier". Interfax-Ukraine. 2009-09-03. http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/19488/. Retrieved 2009-09-03.
 110. ^ Andris Piebalgs: Russia, EU don’t expect another gas conflict with Ukraine, Kyiv Post (November 16, 2009)

[edit] External links
Search Wikinews    Wikinews has related news: Russia cuts off gas supplies to Ukraine

    * The Russian-Ukrainian Gas Conflict: Russian Analytical Digest No. 53, 20 January 2009
    * Relations of France with Russia and NATO, and the gas crisis between Russia and Ukraine, ISRIA, 14 January 2009
    * Gazprom Ukraine Facts (Gazprom's website)
    * Map of major natural gas pipelines in central and eastern Europe, BBC (based on INOGATE detailed European map)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes"
Categories: Energy in Russia | Energy in Ukraine | Energy policy | Gazprom | Politics of Russia | Politics of Ukraine | Russia–Ukraine gas disputes


I would hold off on judgement, though, until we know what kind of medicine it is..is it antivirals, vaccines, or more antibiotics?
Logged
trailhound
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,749



« Reply #9 on: November 17, 2009, 08:22:04 PM »

I wonder if it just started functioning but in the Ukraine...

 +1
Logged


"Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." Qur'an 5:2
At the heart of that Western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value..." -RFK
luckee1
Guest
« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2009, 08:33:36 PM »

pandemic protein?  Um yeah, I will regard that like I would a cockroach.  'Present buy non-functioning"  um no!  I don't frigging think so.

Stomp the shit out of it , put on my old combat boots stomp them to death! grab the shotgun and shoot the damn thing to oblivion! 

Put it in my veins, no f**king way!

Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2009, 09:30:05 PM »

Oh, I wish the good people that are left in our government would read this forum sometimes, check it out, this is sick beyond words:
A Single Mutation in the PB1-F2 of H5N1 (HK/97) and 1918 Influenza A Viruses Contributes to Increased Virulence
Gina M. Conenello1, Dmitriy Zamarin1, Lucy A. Perrone2, Terrence Tumpey2, Peter Palese1,3*

1 Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York, United States of America, 2 Influenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America, 3 Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York, United States of America
Abstract Top

The proapoptotic PB1-F2 protein of influenza A viruses has been shown to contribute to pathogenesis in the mouse model. Expression of full-length PB1-F2 increases the pathogenesis of the influenza A virus, causing weight loss, slower viral clearance, and increased viral titers in the lungs. After comparing viruses from the Hong Kong 1997 H5N1 outbreak, one amino acid change (N66S) was found in the PB1-F2 sequence at position 66 that correlated with pathogenicity. This same amino acid change (N66S) was also found in the PB1-F2 protein of the 1918 pandemic A/Brevig Mission/18 virus. Two isogenic recombinant chimeric viruses were created with an influenza A/WSN/33 virus background containing the PB1 segment from the HK/156/97: WH and WH N66S. In mice infected with WH N66S virus there was increased pathogenicity as measured by weight loss and decreased survival, and a 100-fold increase in virus replication when compared to mice infected with the WH virus. The 1918 pandemic strain A/Brevig Mission/18 was reconstructed with a pathogenicity-reducing mutation in PB1-F2 (S66N). The resultant 1918 S66N virus was attenuated in mice having a 3-log lower 50% lethal dose and caused less morbidity and mortality in mice than the wild-type virus. Viral lung titers were also decreased in 1918 S66N–infected mice compared with wild-type 1918 virus–infected mice. In addition, both viruses with an S at position 66 (WH N66S and wt 1918) induced elevated levels of cytokines in the lungs of infected mice. Together, these data show that a single amino acid substitution in PB1-F2 can result in increased viral pathogenicity and could be one of the factors contributing to the high lethality seen with the 1918 pandemic virus.
Author Summary Top

PB1-F2 is the most recently discovered protein produced by the influenza A virus. It has been previously shown that PB1-F2 is present in the mitochondria, where it induces cell death; our laboratory has demonstrated that PB1-F2 is a contributor to pathogenesis in the mouse model of infection. To study PB1-F2 further, we examined highly pathogenic strains of avian influenza virus and located an amino acid change that seemed to be associated with increased death in mice. We studied this amino acid change in PB1-F2 at position 66 in two different viruses. A recombinant virus that has a PB1 gene from an H5N1 virus was used as well as a fully reconstructed 1918 pandemic virus. In this study, we show that a mutation in PB1-F2 found in highly pathogenic influenza A virus isolates causes nonpathogenic viruses to induce disease in mice. In addition, we show that the increased pathogenicity is associated with higher levels of virus and cytokines in the lungs. We conclude that PB1-F2 does affect pathogenicity, and that position 66 seems to play an important role in contributing to the effects of PB1-F2 in the mouse model.

Citation: Conenello GM, Zamarin D, Perrone LA, Tumpey T, Palese P (2007) A Single Mutation in the PB1-F2 of H5N1 (HK/97) and 1918 Influenza A Viruses Contributes to Increased Virulence. PLoS Pathog 3(10): e141. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141

Editor: Yoshihiro Kawaoka, University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States of America

Received: June 7, 2007; Accepted: August 10, 2007; Published: October 5, 2007

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose.

Funding: GC and DZ were partially supported by NIH/NIAID 1 T32 AI07647-Training Program: Mechanisms of Virus-Host Interactions. This work was also partially supported by National Institutes of Health grants RO1-AI8998, 1 PO1 AI058113, and UO1AI070469, and the Center for Research on Influenza Pathogenesis HHSN2662000700010C.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Abbreviations: aa, amino acid; LD50, 50% lethal dose; MDCK, Madin Darby canine kidney; MOI, multiplicity of infection; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; PFU, plaque-forming unit

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: peter.palese@mssm.edu
Introduction Top

Influenza A virus causes 300,000–500,000 deaths worldwide each year, and in pandemic years, this number can increase to 1 million (in 1957–1958 ) or as high as 50 million, as was seen in 1918–1919 [1–3]. More recently, H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses have generated great concern regarding their potential to cause a pandemic. H5N1 infections in humans were seen in Hong Kong in a small outbreak in 1997 that resulted in 18 human infections and six fatalities, and since 2003, 309 human cases of H5N1 have been confirmed with a 61% fatality rate (6/1/07) [4–7]. Recent work on these viruses has aimed to elucidate the virulence factors that account for the severe illness observed in humans and mice [4,8–12].

The viral PB1 segment is of particular interest, since, in addition to the glycoprotein genes, the PB1 gene was the only other segment that was exchanged in the pandemic viruses of 1957 and 1968 [13]. Introduction of a novel PB1 gene into the 1998 swine reassortant viruses further implicates the role of this gene in the pathogenesis of (animal) influenza [14]. Moreover, while changes in the surface glycoproteins allow the viruses to overcome the preexisting humoral immune response, they may not be solely responsible for the high virulence of the pandemic influenza viruses. In particular, the 1918 pandemic was associated with significantly higher morbidity and mortality than the subsequent pandemics [15]. Recent reconstruction of the 1918 virus has confirmed that the viral polymerase from the 1918 influenza virus is required for full pathogenicity of the recombinant 1918 virus in mice [16]. In fact, substitution of the viral polymerase genomic segments with those of the modern H1N1 strain severely attenuated the virus in mice [16]. Recent identification and characterization of a novel influenza virus protein called PB1-F2 encoded by the PB1 gene introduced a potential virulence factor that could play a role in pathogenesis of infection with pandemic influenza viruses and explain the selection of the PB1 gene in these viruses [17].

The influenza virus PB1-F2 is a 90–amino acid (aa) protein that is associated with the induction of cell death. The protein directly permeabilizes mitochondria, resulting in the dissipation of the mitochondrial membrane potential and the release of cytochrome c [17–19]. We have previously shown that PB1-F2 contributes to viral pathogenesis in the mouse model and wanted to further investigate whether the PB1-F2 proteins encoded by highly pathogenic viruses have conserved mutations in their aa sequence that are associated with pathogenicity [20]. We chose to study the PB1-F2 proteins of the Hong Kong 1997 H5N1 viruses that caused an outbreak in humans. Characterization of the isolated viruses in mice revealed that the viruses could be subdivided into three different groups based on the pathogenicity phenotype: high-virulence, intermediate-virulence, and low-virulence [21]. Further studies provided molecular correlates of pathogenicity in the high-virulence group, though such studies were not conducted for the PB1-F2 protein [22].

Herein, we assess the contribution of the PB1-F2 protein to the pathogenicity of a highly pathogenic H5N1 virus and the 1918 pandemic strain virus. An alignment of the aa sequences of isolates from the Hong Kong 1997 H5N1 outbreak revealed that a mutation, N66S, was associated with high pathogenicity phenotype in mice. Using a recombinant A/WSN/33 virus with the PB1 segment of A/HK/156/97, we observed increased morbidity and mortality of mice infected with a virus that contained the N66S mutation. In addition, infection with the reconstructed A/Brevig Mission/18 virus, which has an S at position 66, resulted in increased pathogenicity when compared with a reconstructed A/Brevig Mission/18 virus in which position 66 was changed to N [16]. We thereby show that PB1-F2 proteins from highly virulent viruses can contribute to pathogenicity, and identify a single aa change that confers a virulent phenotype in mice.
Materials and Methods Top
Cell Lines

Madin Darby canine kidney (MDCK), 293T, and A549 cells were obtained from ATCC (http://www.atcc.org/) and were maintained in MEM and DMEM culture media (Gibco, http://www.invitrogen.com/), respectively, supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (Hyclone, http://www.hyclone.com/) and penicillin/streptomycin (Gibco).
Constructs and Cloning

The pPolI vectors encoding viral genomic RNA of the WSN strain have been described previously [23]. The PB1 gene of the A/HK/156/97 virus was reverse transcribed from purified genomic RNA, amplified by PCR with PB1 segment-specific primers, and cloned into the pPolI vector. The cloning of genes for A/Brevig Mission/18 has been described previously [16]. To generate pPolI vectors encoding the N66S PB1-F2 mutants, the pPolI vectors encoding the A/HK/483/97 PB1 or A/Brevig Mission/18 PB1 were subjected to site-directed mutagenesis using the Stratagene Quick-Change mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, http://www.stratagene.com/). Sequences of each construct were confirmed by automated sequencing performed at the Mount Sinai sequencing core facility.
Reverse Genetics for Recombinant Viruses

The reverse genetics technique for the generation of recombinant influenza viruses has been described previously [23]. Briefly, 293T cells were transfected with eight pPolI vectors encoding the viral genomic RNA segments and four pCAGGS protein expression vectors encoding the subunits of viral polymerase and the nucleocapsid protein. The transfected 293T cells were cocultured with MDCK cells, and virus released into the supernatant was isolated by plaque purification on MDCK cells. The presence of the introduced mutations was confirmed by reverse transcription and sequencing of the PB1 genes of the newly generated viruses. Viruses possessing 1918 genes were generated under biosafety level 3 (BSL-3 with enhancements) containment [24] to ensure the safety of laboratory workers, the environment, and the public. All subsequent laboratory and animal work with live virus containing A/Brevig Mission/18 genes also was performed under these high-containment conditions.
Mouse Experiments

Female C57/BL6 mice 6 to 7 wk old (Jackson Laboratories, http://www.jax.org/) were anesthetized with intraperitoneal injection of 0.07 ml of ketamine/xylazine (0.15 mg ketamine and 0.03 mg xylazine), and infectious virus was diluted in PBS/BSA/PS (phosphate-buffered saline/bovine serum albumin/penicillin and streptomycin) and inoculated intranasally in a volume of 30 μl. To assess virus pathogenicity, groups of four mice were inoculated with appropriate dose and were monitored daily for weight loss over 8 d. Mice that lost more than 25% of their initial body weight were killed according to institutional guidelines and scored as dead. To determine viral replication in the lungs, lungs were collected on days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 after infection from 2 (days 1 and 2) or 4 (days 3, 5, 7, and Cool mice from each group and two mice in the PBS group. The lungs were homogenized in PBS using a Dounce homogenizer and processed for virus titering. Virus titers in the supernatant of lung homogenates were determined by plaque assay in MDCK cells.

For 1918 recombinant virus infections, female BALB/c mice, 6 to 7 wk old (Jackson Laboratories) were anesthetized with an intraperitoneal injection of 0.2 ml of 2,2,2-tribromoethanal in tert-amylalcohol (Avertin; Aldrich Chemical Co., http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/), and 50 ul of infectious virus diluted in PBS was inoculated intranasally. The 50% lethal dose (LD50) titers were determined by inoculating groups of three mice intranasally with serial 10-fold dilutions of virus. LD50 titers were calculated by the method of Reed and Muench [25]. Individual body weights from eight mice were recorded for each group daily and monitored daily for disease signs and death for 14 d after infection. For determination of lung virus titers, 18 additional mice were infected intranasally with the intermediate inoculating dose (104 plaque-forming unit [PFU]) of virus. On days 1–3 and 5–8 after infection, three mice from each group were killed, and whole lungs were removed aseptically and homogenized in 1 ml of sterile PBS. Homogenates were titrated for virus infectivity using a standard plaque assay. The statistical significance of virus titer data was determined by using analysis of variance.
Cytokine Quantitation

To determine the in vivo levels of cytokine supernatants from the lung, homogenates of the lungs of WH-infected mice were assayed for IFN-γ and TNF-α (assay sensitivity, 2 pg/ml) by use of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits purchased from R&D Systems (http://www.rndsystems.com/).

For high-containment laboratory work with 1918 recombinant viruses, the in vivo levels of cytokine proteins were determined from three individual mice per group. On day 4 after infection, mice were exsanguinated from the axilla and killed, and lung tissues were removed from naive and infected mice. Individual whole-lung samples were immediately frozen at −70 °C. On the day of analysis, tissues were thawed, homogenized in 1 ml of cold PBS, and centrifuged at 150g for 5 min. Cytokine protein levels were measured from clarified lung homogenates by the Bioplex Protein Array system [26] (Bio-Rad, http://www.bio-rad.com/) using beads specific for mouse IL-1β, IFN-γ, and TNFα. Cytokine protein levels were measured according to the manufacturer's instructions by fluorescently conjugated monoclonal antibodies in duplicate against a standard curve.
Results Top
Conserved Mutations in Highly Pathogenic Influenza A Viruses

It has been previously shown that H5N1 viruses from the Hong Kong 1997 outbreak fall into three separate pathogenicity phenotypes: low, intermediate, and high [22]. The intermediate phenotype had aa sequence identity with the high-pathogenicity phenotype and all of the previously identified molecular correlates of a high pathogenicity phenotype, but caused a less severe disease in mice. However, PB1-F2 was not examined in the study by Katz et al. because it was not known at the time [22]. Alignment of the 1997 human H5N1 PB1-F2 sequences available in the National Center for Biotechnology Information database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) revealed several aa changes that separated the high-virulence from the low-virulence groups. These were (low-virulence versus high-virulence) E6D, R53K, N66S, and R75H. These changes were silent in the open reading frame of the PB1 gene. Alignment of the proteins with other PB1-F2 sequences available in the database revealed that with the exception of the N66S substitution, all of the described mutations were previously present in other influenza viral strains. The N66S mutation was of a particular interest, since it was found only to be present in the highly virulent 1997 H5N1 group, in the PB1-F2 proteins of some avian isolates, and in the 1918 A/Brevig Mission/18 PB1-F2 (Figure 1). Interestingly, the A/HK/156/97 virus (from the intermediate-virulence group), which was previously shown to possess all of the molecular signatures of the high-virulence group, possesses N at position 66 of the PB1-F2 protein.
thumbnail

Figure 1. Alignment and Location of N66S Mutation in the PB1-F2 Protein

Alignment of human isolates of influenza A viruses from a H5N1 Hong Kong outbreak and from the 1918 H1N1 pandemic. Viruses in red are of the high-pathogenic phenotype, those in purple are of intermediate pathogenicity, and those in blue are of low pathogenicity in mice. Yellow indicates C-terminal region with α-helical structure, and green indicates the minimal mitochondrial targeting sequence.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141.g001

aa residue 66 resides in the C-terminal α-helical region of PB1-F2. This region is the interacting domain for ANT3 and VDAC1 and contains the mitochondrial targeting sequence, making the C-terminal region essential for the function of PB1-F2 [19,27]. The location of the N66S mutation in the structure of PB1-F2 and its presence in the C-terminal region supports the hypothesis that this aa change could impact PB1-F2′s effects in vivo. We hypothesized that this aa substitution may be responsible for the decreased pathogenicity phenotype observed for the A/HK/156/97 virus. Given these findings, we proceeded to determine whether the PB1-F2 mutation in position 66 (N66S) in the 1997 H5N1 viruses contributed to viral pathogenicity.
Impact of PB1-F2 aa 66 on Viral Growth and Virulence In Vitro and In Vivo
In vitro.

To examine the effect of the mutation in position 66 on the pathogenicity of influenza A viruses, we created recombinant viruses containing either an asparagine (N) or serine (S) at that site of the PB1-F2 protein. A chimeric virus was created in the A/WSN/33 background that contained the A/HK/156/97 PB1 gene (WH). These viruses were rescued in a BSL-2 environment, making them easier to study. In addition, the WH virus has been characterized in a previous paper [20]. Site-directed mutagenesis was used to introduce the N66S mutation in PB1-F2 without changing the amino acid sequence of the PB1 protein (WH N66S). These viruses were then grown in MDCK cells to determine their growth kinetics in vitro. Cells were inoculated at two different multiplicities of infection (MOIs), 0.1 and 0.001. The two viruses have similar replication kinetics in MDCK cells (Figure 2A). The r1918 and r1918 S66N viruses also have similar growth kinetics in MDCK cells when inoculated at MOIs of .01 and .001 (Figure 2B).
thumbnail

Figure 2. In Vitro Growth Curve of Recombinant Viruses

(A) MDCK cells were inoculated at an MOI of 0.1 and 0.001, and virus growth of WH and WH N66S was assessed at the time points indicated. The figure is representative of three similar experiments.

(B) MDCK cells were inoculated at an MOI of .01 and .001, and virus growth of r1918 and r1918 S66N was assessed at the time points indicated.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141.g002
In vivo.

Next, 1 × 104 PFU of the viruses were inoculated into mice to determine pathogenicity and viral growth in vivo. Body weights were monitored for up to 8 d after infection. The WH N66S virus caused the mice to start losing weight at day 3, and weight loss continued in all WH N66S–infected mice until day 8, resulting in 50% of the mice succumbing to infection. The WH virus, while causing a slight decrease in weight at day 7, did not cause significant weight loss, and all of the inoculated mice survived the infection (Figure 3A). This difference in pathogenicity is mirrored by the viral replication in the lungs. The WH N66S virus was found to replicate to higher titers in the lungs and exhibited peak virus titers 2 d earlier than the WH virus. WH N66S replication in the lungs was significantly higher than WH on days 2, 5, and 8 after infection, with WH N66S replicating to almost 100 times higher titers on each day (Figure 3B). However, virus levels in the lung were equal on day 7, suggesting that the continued weight loss of WH N66S–infected mice is partially the result of increased cytokine production in the lung. In addition, the high virus titer on day 7 in WH-infected mice corresponds to the mild weight loss seen in Figure 2B. WH N66S–infected mice exhibited slower viral clearance with persisting high viral titers, whereas the WH virus was cleared more effectively from the lung, with 3 out of 4 mice completely clearing the virus by day 8 (Figure 3B). Increased viral load and slowed viral clearance during WH N66S infection could suggest an impaired cellular immune response.
thumbnail

Figure 3. Contribution of PB1-F2 N66S Mutation to Pathogenicity of Recombinant Virus

(A) Mice were inoculated with 1 × 104 PFU of virus or PBS, and their weights were recorded every day after infection.

(B) Virus titers from lung homogenates were measured from mice infected with WH or WH N66S virus at days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 after inoculation. Error bars represent 1 standard deviation.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141.g003

The 1918 pandemic virus contains an S at position 66 in PB1-F2 corresponding to increased virulence as seen in the A/Hong Kong/483/97 virus. To examine this aa in the context of a fully reconstructed 1918 virus, a single aa change was made (S66N) in PB1-F2 without changing the aa sequence of PB1. To evaluate the virulence and pathogenicity of the 1918 S66N mutant virus, the morbidity (measured by weight loss), virus replication, and LD50 titers were determined in BALB/c mice and compared with a group of animals infected with wild-type 1918 virus, previously shown to be highly lethal in mice [28].

As shown in Figure 4A, mice infected with doses of 103, 104, 105, and 106 PFU of the wild-type 1918 virus began to lose weight within 3 d. The mice showed progressive signs of illness, such as ruffled fur and listlessness during the first week of infection before succumbing to infection (LD50 = 102.5) by day 10 after inoculation. In contrast to the highly virulent wild-type 1918 virus infection, higher amounts of inoculating virus (105 and 106 PFU) were required to cause severe disease and weight loss among the mice infected with 1918 S66N mutant virus (Figure 4B). Furthermore, the lethality was substantially lower (LD50 = 105.25), requiring 500 times more virus than wild-type 1918 virus to kill mice. Infection of mice with the 104 PFU of 1918 S66N mutant virus resulted in lung virus titers, on days 2 and 3 after infection, that were at least 12-fold lower than those of mice infected with the same dose of wild-type 1918 virus (Figure 4C).
thumbnail

Figure 4. The Effect of the S66N Mutation on Pathogenicity in Mice

(A) Eight mice were inoculated with recombinant wt 1918 virus at 102, 103, 104, 105, or 106 PFU, and their weights were measured every day. Average weights are represented in the graph.

(B) Eight mice were inoculated with recombinant 1918 S66N virus at 102,103, 104, 105, or 106 PFU, and their weights were measured every other day. Average weights are represented in the graph.

(C) Effect of S66N mutation on mouse lung titers in r1918 virus. Virus titers from lung homogenates were measured from 3 mice infected per time point with r1918 or r1918 S66N virus at days 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 after inoculation. Error bars represent 1 standard deviation.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141.g004
Cytokine Dysregulation in the Lungs of Infected Mice

To better understand the increased pathogenicity in the infected mice, we examined the levels of TNF-α and IFN-γ in the lungs. IFN-γ levels were observed to be higher in mice infected with WH N66S virus, especially at days 7 and 8 after infection, when the levels were approximately two times higher than the levels in the WH virus-infected mice (Figure 5A). 1Levels of TNF-α in the lung also showed significant differences late in infection. At days 7 and 8 after infection, TNF-α levels in mice infected with WH N66S virus had a two times higher increase over levels in WH-infected mice (Figure 5B).
thumbnail

Figure 5. Cytokine Levels in Lungs of Infected Mice

(A) IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed on lung homogenates with four mice per time point for each virus and is represented here in ng/ml. *p < .05.

(B) TNF-α enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed on lung homogenates with four mice per time point for each virus represented here in ng/ml. *p < .05.

(C) Lung homogenates collected on day 4 after inoculation were measured for the levels of IL-1β, IFN-γ, and TNF-α using the Bioplex Protein Array system. All error bars represent 1 standard deviation.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030141.g005

Individual lung tissues were also collected on day 4 after infection from 1918 virus–infected mice. A single timepoint (day 4 after infection) was chosen because it was previously determined that maximal lung cytokine/chemokine levels occurred at this time among mice infected with highly virulent influenza strains [27,28]. Tissues were homogenized and lysates were assayed for cytokines by the Bioplex Protein Array system. Determination of IL-1α, IFN-γ, and TNF-α levels demonstrated that these cytokines were produced above their constitutive levels 4 d after infection with both 1918 S66N mutant and wild-type virus (Figure 5C). All three cytokines were detected at significantly higher levels (p ≤ 0.5, analysis of variance) in 1918 wild-type–infected than in 1918 S66N mutant–infected mice. Together, these data indicate that PB1-F2 may play a role in immunomodulation, especially later in infection during viral clearance.
Discussion Top

Previous studies by our lab have shown that PB1-F2 contributes to the pathogenesis of the influenza A virus [20]. When expression of PB1-F2 was knocked out of a moderately virulent virus in mice, there was a significant loss in pathogenicity, indicating that PB1-F2 plays an important role in virulence [20]. In the present study, we show that a single aa change in PB1-F2 from highly virulent viruses increases pathogenicity in mice and modulates the immune response. It has been proposed that PB1-F2 causes apoptosis of immune cells, which may lead to decreased antigen presentation and a decrease in the adaptive immune response [17]. Humans infected with highly pathogenic viruses consistently have decreased lymphocytes and impaired immune response to influenza virus infection [4,8,10,21,29,30]. We wondered if these effects could be caused in part by PB1-F2. In this study, we provide evidence that PB1-F2 does contribute to the high pathogenicity phenotype and that the N66S mutation, also found in the 1918 H1N1 virus, contributes to virulence in highly pathogenic viruses.

After aligning the PB1-F2 sequences from H5N1 viruses that exhibited high- and low-pathogenicity phenotypes, a single aa change was found to correlate with high pathogenicity. The location of the N66S mutation also made it an excellent candidate for affecting the proapoptotic function of PB1-F2. Position 66 is in the α-helical structure of PB1-F2, in the mitochondrial targeting sequence. The location of aa 66 in the C-terminal mitochondrial targeting sequence of the protein could affect PB1-F2 interactions with ANT3 and VDAC1, potentially increasing the induction of apoptosis by PB1-F2 [19].

Recombinant A/WSN/33 viruses were created to specifically examine the effects of the N66S mutation during viral infection. The recombinant virus WH has decreased pathogenesis in mice compared with that of A/WSN/33 (unpublished data), likely due to the mismatched polymerase genes, resulting in less efficient replication in the host. The N66S mutation within the PB1-F2 protein partially reversed this attenuating effect.

Within a natural setting, the presence of a “virulent” PB1-F2 may be important when influenza viruses cross species barriers or when new pandemic strains are generated by reassortment. In fact, the PB1 gene has been one of the segments found to reassort to create the pandemic strains of 1957 and 1968, potentially giving these viruses a more pathogenic PB1-F2 and thus a higher virulence [13]. It is possible that the PB1-F2 protein could allow a newly reassorted virus to replicate in a new host efficiently enough to spread, and develop mutations to create a more efficient polymerase complex. In addition, influenza surveillance data shows that in recent history (1970 onward), H3N2 infections cause almost 14 times the number of influenza related deaths than H1N1 infections and are associated with a higher epidemic severity index (as measured by the rate of increase in pneumonia and influenza mortality) [31–33]. Interestingly, recent H1N1 isolates contain a truncated PB1-F2, which possibly plays a role in their decreased virulence [19,34]. The mutation we investigate here is not currently found in recent H5N1 isolates; however, it is possible for those viruses to acquire the mutation either through the error-prone RNA polymerase or through reassortment with a virus that contains the N66S mutation.

The observation that the WH N66S virus grew to higher titers in the lung and persisted at high titers for a longer time than the WH virus supports the role of PB1-F2 in allowing for increased replication. This may also explain the impairment of viral clearance in the mice infected with WH N66S. In addition, the 1918 wt virus showed higher lung titers and slower viral clearance when compared with the 1918 S66N virus. We suspect that the delay in viral clearance due to expression of PB1-F2 protein may allow for prolonged viral replication and development of irreversible pulmonary immunopathology, the findings observed with highly pathogenic influenza strains. CD8+ T cells are mainly responsible for viral clearance in the host, and it is possible that their function could be impaired by PB1-F2 [35,36]. In support of this, we observed that the WH N66S and wt 1918 viruses caused a significant increase in IFN-γ and TNF-α cytokine production over the WH and 1918 S66N viruses, respectively. Whether this change in cytokine levels is through the direct action of PB1-F2 or through its impact on viral replication in the lung is difficult to determine. However, the cytokine dysregulation is of special interest because it has been associated with both H5N1 and 1918 H1N1 virus infections. In previous studies, cytokine dysregulation was associated with high virulence and death in animal models [29,37]. Our study supports these findings and suggests that PB1-F2 could be one of the factors contributing to the cytokine dysregulation seen in H5N1 virus–infected patients and 1918 H1N1 virus–infected animals [4,37].

Acknowledgments Top

LAP is supported by a postdoctoral fellowship sponsored by the American Society for Microbiology and the Coordinating Centers for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. PP is a Senior Scholar of the Ellison Medical Foundation.
Author Contributions Top

All authors conceived and designed the experiments and analyzed the data. GMC, DZ, LAP, and TT performed the experiments. GMC, DZ, TT, and PP wrote the paper.
References Top

   1. Beveridge WI (1991) The chronicle of influenza epidemics. Hist Philos Life Sci 13: 223–234. Find this article online
   2. Nguyen-Van-Tam JS, Hampson AW (2003) The epidemiology and clinical impact of pandemic influenza. Vaccine 21: 1762–1768. Find this article online
   3. World Health Organization (2007) Acute respiratory infections: Influenza. Available at: http://www.who.int/vaccine_research/dise​ases/ari/en/ . Accessed 30 April 2007.
   4. de Jong MD, Simmons CP, Thanh TT, Hien VM, Smith GJ, et al. (2006) Fatal outcome of human influenza A (H5N1) is associated with high viral load and hypercytokinemia. Nat Med 12: 1203–1207. Find this article online
   5. Dybing JK, Schultz-Cherry S, Swayne DE, Suarez DL, Perdue ML (2000) Distinct pathogenesis of Hong Kong-origin H5N1 viruses in mice compared to that of other highly pathogenic H5 avian influenza viruses. J Virol 74: 1443–1450. Find this article online
   6. World Health Organization (2007) Cumulative number of confirmed human cases of avian influenza A/(H5N1) reported to WHO, 11 April 2007. Available at: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_inf​luenza/country/cases_table_2007_04_11/en​/index.html . Accessed 11 April 2007.
   7. Yuen KY, Chan PK, Peiris M, Tsang DN, Que TL, et al. (1998) Clinical features and rapid viral diagnosis of human disease associated with avian influenza A H5N1 virus. Lancet 351: 467–471. Find this article online
   8. Li Z, Jiang Y, Jiao P, Wang A, Zhao F, et al. (2006) The NS1 gene contributes to the virulence of H5N1 avian influenza viruses. J Virol 80: 11115–11123. Find this article online
   9. Mase M, Tanimura N, Imada T, Okamatsu M, Tsukamoto K, et al. (2006) Recent H5N1 avian influenza A virus increases rapidly in virulence to mice after a single passage in mice. J Gen Virol 87: 3655–3659. Find this article online
  10. Muramoto Y, Le TQ, Phuong LS, Nguyen T, Nguyen TH, et al. (2006) Pathogenicity of H5N1 influenza A viruses isolated in Vietnam between late 2003 and 2005. J Vet Med Sci 68: 735–737. Find this article online
  11. Muramoto Y, Le TQ, Phuong LS, Nguyen T, Nguyen TH, et al. (2006) Molecular characterization of the hemagglutinin and neuraminidase genes of H5N1 influenza A viruses isolated from poultry in Vietnam from 2004 to 2005. J Vet Med Sci 68: 527–531. Find this article online
  12. Stevens J, Blixt O, Tumpey TM, Taubenberger JK, Paulson JC, et al. (2006) Structure and receptor specificity of the hemagglutinin from an H5N1 influenza virus. Science 312: 404–410. Find this article online
  13. Kawaoka Y, Krauss S, Webster RG (1989) Avian-to-human transmission of the PB1 gene of influenza A viruses in the 1957 and 1968 pandemics. J Virol 63: 4603–4608. Find this article online
  14. Karasin AI, Schutten MM, Cooper LA, Smith CB, Subbarao K, et al. (2000) Genetic characterization of H3N2 influenza viruses isolated from pigs in North America, 1977–1999: Evidence for wholly human and reassortant virus genotypes. Virus Res 68: 71–85. Find this article online
  15. Zamarin D, Palese P (2004) Influenza virus: Lessons learned. In: Kowalski JB, editor. International Kilmer Conference Proceedings. Laval (Quebec, Canada): Polyscience Publications, Inc. pp. 308–319.
  16. Tumpey TM, Basler CF, Aguilar PV, Zeng H, Solorzano A, et al. (2005) Characterization of the reconstructed 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic virus. Science 310: 77–80. Find this article online
  17. Chen W, Calvo PA, Malide D, Gibbs J, Schubert U, et al. (2001) A novel influenza A virus mitochondrial protein that induces cell death. Nat Med 7: 1306–1312. Find this article online
  18. Chanturiya AN, Basanez G, Schubert U, Henklein P, Yewdell JW, et al. (2004) PB1-F2, an influenza A virus-encoded proapoptotic mitochondrial protein, creates variably sized pores in planar lipid membranes. J Virol 78: 6304–6312. Find this article online
  19. Zamarin D, Garcia-Sastre A, Xiao X, Wang R, Palese P (2005) Influenza virus PB1-F2 protein induces cell death through mitochondrial ANT3 and VDAC1. PLoS Pathog 1: e4 doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0010004.
  20. Zamarin D, Ortigoza MB, Palese P (2006) Influenza A virus PB1-F2 protein contributes to viral pathogenesis in mice. J Virol 80: 7976–7983. Find this article online
  21. Lu X, Tumpey TM, Morken T, Zaki SR, Cox NJ, et al. (1999) A mouse model for the evaluation of pathogenesis and immunity to influenza A (H5N1) viruses isolated from humans. J Virol 73: 5903–5911. Find this article online
  22. Katz JM, Lu X, Tumpey TM, Smith CB, Shaw MW, et al. (2000) Molecular correlates of influenza A H5N1 virus pathogenesis in mice. J Virol 74: 10807–10810. Find this article online
  23. Fodor E, Devenish L, Engelhardt OG, Palese P, Brownlee GG, et al. (1999) Rescue of influenza A virus from recombinant DNA. J Virol 73: 9679–9682. Find this article online
  24. Barbeito MS, Abraham G, Best M, Cairns P, Langevin P, et al. (1995) Recommended biocontainment features for research and diagnostic facilities where animal pathogens are used. First International Veterinary Biosafety Workshop. Rev Sci Tech 14: 873–887. Find this article online
  25. Reed LJ, Muench H (1938) A simple method for estimating fifty percent endpoints. Am J Epidemiol 27: 493–497. Find this article online
  26. de Jager W, te Velthuis H, Prakken BJ, Kuis W, Rijkers GT (2003) Simultaneous detection of 15 human cytokines in a single sample of stimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 10: 133–139. Find this article online
  27. Yamada H, Chounan R, Higashi Y, Kurihara N, Kido H (2004) Mitochondrial targeting sequence of the influenza A virus PB1-F2 protein and its function in mitochondria. FEBS Lett 578: 331–336. Find this article online
  28. Tumpey TM, Garcia-Sastre A, Taubenberger JK, Palese P, Swayne DE, et al. (2005) Pathogenicity of influenza viruses with genes from the 1918 pandemic virus: Functional roles of alveolar macrophages and neutrophils in limiting virus replication and mortality in mice. J Virol 79: 14933–14944. Find this article online
  29. Szretter KJ, Gangappa S, Lu X, Smith C, Shieh WJ, et al. (2007) Role of host cytokine responses in the pathogenesis of avian H5N1 influenza viruses in mice. J Virol 81: 2736–2744. Find this article online
  30. Tumpey TM, Lu X, Morken T, Zaki SR, Katz JM (2000) Depletion of lymphocytes and diminished cytokine production in mice infected with a highly virulent influenza A (H5N1) virus isolated from humans. J Virol 74: 6105–6116. Find this article online
  31. Simonsen L, Clarke MJ, Williamson GD, Stroup DF, Arden NH, et al. (1997) The impact of influenza epidemics on mortality: Introducing a severity index. Am J Public Health 87: 1944–1950. Find this article online
  32. Simonsen L, Fukuda K, Schonberger LB, Cox NJ (2000) The impact of influenza epidemics on hospitalizations. J Infect Dis 181: 831–837. Find this article online
  33. Thompson WW, Shay DK, Weintraub E, Brammer L, Cox N, et al. (2003) Mortality associated with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus in the United States. JAMA 289: 179–186. Find this article online
  34. Zell R, Krumbholz A, Eitner A, Krieg R, Halbhuber KJ, et al. (2007) Prevalence of PB1-F2 of influenza A viruses. J Gen Virol 88: 536–546. Find this article online
  35. Flynn KJ, Belz GT, Altman JD, Ahmed R, Woodland DL, et al. (1998) Virus-specific CD8+ T cells in primary and secondary influenza pneumonia. Immunity 8: 683–691. Find this article online
  36. Schepers K, Arens R, Schumacher TN (2005) Dissection of cytotoxic and helper T cell responses. Cell Mol Life Sci 62: 2695–2710. Find this article online
  37. Kobasa D, Jones SM, Shinya K, Kash JC, Copps J, et al. (2007) Aberrant innate immune response in lethal infection of macaques with the 1918 influenza virus. Nature 445: 319–323. Find this article online


Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2009, 09:44:29 PM »

Genetic Compatibility and Virulence of Reassortants Derived from Contemporary Avian H5N1 and Human H3N2 Influenza A Viruses
Li-Mei Chen#, C. Todd Davis#, Hong Zhou, Nancy J. Cox, Ruben O. Donis*

Influenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America
Abstract Top

The segmented structure of the influenza virus genome plays a pivotal role in its adaptation to new hosts and the emergence of pandemics. Despite concerns about the pandemic threat posed by highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 viruses, little is known about the biological properties of H5N1 viruses that may emerge following reassortment with contemporary human influenza viruses. In this study, we used reverse genetics to generate the 63 possible virus reassortants derived from H5N1 and H3N2 viruses, containing the H5N1 surface protein genes, and analyzed their viability, replication efficiency, and mouse virulence. Specific constellations of avian–human viral genes proved deleterious for viral replication in cell culture, possibly due to disruption of molecular interaction networks. In particular, striking phenotypes were noted with heterologous polymerase subunits, as well as NP and M, or NS. However, nearly one-half of the reassortants replicated with high efficiency in vitro, revealing a high degree of compatibility between avian and human virus genes. Thirteen reassortants displayed virulent phenotypes in mice and may pose the greatest threat for mammalian hosts. Interestingly, one of the most pathogenic reassortants contained avian PB1, resembling the 1957 and 1968 pandemic viruses. Our results reveal the broad spectrum of phenotypes associated with H5N1/H3N2 reassortment and a possible role for the avian PB1 in the emergence of pandemic influenza. These observations have important implications for risk assessment of H5N1 reassortant viruses detected in surveillance programs.
Author Summary Top

The influenza pandemics of 1957 and 1968 were caused by hybrid viruses consisting of a mixture of human and avian influenza genes. The introduction of avian genes resulted in a sudden change of the virus surface antigens, allowing its worldwide spread due to lack of immunity in the population. The highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 virus has continued its spread in domestic and wild birds in Asia, Europe, and Africa. Although H5N1 infection in humans is rare and person-to-person transmission is very inefficient, the steady accumulation of human cases has raised concern over the possible reassortment between H5N1 and human seasonal influenza resulting in a virus with new surface antigens and pandemic potential. In this study, we used recombinant DNA technology to generate a systematic collection of hybrid viruses (with genes from human and avian viruses) bearing H5N1 surface antigens and analyzed their properties in cell culture and in mice. The H5N1 hybrid viruses revealed a broad range of viability and multiplication capacity in cell cultures. In addition, several H5N1 hybrid viruses were highly virulent in mice. Results from this systematic analysis provide important insight to support risk assessment of reassortant H5N1 avian influenza viruses.

Citation: Chen L-M, Davis CT, Zhou H, Cox NJ, Donis RO (2008) Genetic Compatibility and Virulence of Reassortants Derived from Contemporary Avian H5N1 and Human H3N2 Influenza A Viruses. PLoS Pathog 4(5): e1000072. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072

Editor: Adolfo Garcia-Sastre, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, United States of America

Received: February 21, 2008; Accepted: April 15, 2008; Published: May 23, 2008

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose.

Funding: Funded entirely from DHHS/CDC budget. The sponsor reviewed the dual use potential of this reasearch and approved the manuscript for publication without changes.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

* E-mail: rvd6@cdc.gov

# These authors contributed equally to this work.
Introduction Top

The emergence of an influenza virus that will cause a pandemic is inevitable and therefore preparedness is mandatory. The new pandemic influenza virus is likely to carry a hemagglutinin (HA) gene other than the currently circulating H1 and H3 lineages in order to escape immunity in the human population. However, we cannot predict the mechanism by which the pandemic influenza virus will emerge. One possibility is the transfer of an avian influenza virus from birds to humans, made possible by adaptive mutations, as postulated for the 1918 pandemic [1],[2]. Another possible scenario would follow the paradigm of the H2N2 and H3N2 influenza pandemics of 1957 and 1968 in which avian virus genes were incorporated into circulating human influenza viruses by reassortment [3], giving rise to viruses with novel surface antigens; i.e. antigenic shift. The segmented structure of the viral genome facilitates exchange of gene segments between two viruses co-infecting a single host cell. Dual infection with avian and human influenza viruses and subsequent reassortment may occur in hosts that are susceptible to both kinds of viruses and serve as mixing vessels that generate novel reassortants [4],[5].

Wild aquatic birds are the natural reservoirs for influenza A viruses and have been found to harbor each of the 16 known HA subtypes [6]. Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 viruses are now enzootic among wild birds and poultry in three continents (http://www.who.int). Since 1997, when HPAI H5N1 viruses first emerged in Hong Kong to cause human respiratory illness and death, over 360 laboratory-confirmed human infections have been reported. Most human infections are caused by contact with infected poultry and to date H5N1 viruses have not yet acquired the ability to transmit efficiently among humans.

A major obstacle to transmission of the H5N1 virus among humans is thought to be the preferred receptor specificity of the H5 HA towards sialic acid (SA) with α2,3 linkage to galactose (the so-called avian receptor) [7],[8]. A switch of receptor specificity towards α2,6 linked SA (the human receptor) is considered to be a pre-requisite for sustained human to human transmission [9],[10]. However, it is not known whether other genes from H5N1 viruses would confer virulence and transmissibility in humans. It has been shown that a reassortant virus with the HA and NA from an H3N2 human virus and the PB2, PB1, PA, NP, M, and NS (so-called internal genes) of an H5N1 virus did not transmit efficiently in a ferret model [11]. (In this report, the term “internal genes” refers to the gene constellation comprising PB2, PB1, PA, NP, M, and NS, although the M gene encodes for the M2 protein, which is surface-exposed in virions.) The internal genes from this avian H5N1 virus were therefore postulated to lack at least one essential functional attribute to initiate a human pandemic. These critical function(s) might be acquired through a reassortment event between the H5N1 virus with a circulating human H3N2 influenza virus that generates the appropriate gene constellation.

Cough, cough...BAXTER....cough, (excuse me)

In theory, a single reassortment event between two influenza A viruses can yield up to 254 (28 minus two parental viruses) hybrid genotypes. However, the few available reports suggest that the number of natural or experimental reassortants is likely to be smaller [5],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16]. Reliable estimates of the expected frequency of hybrid genotypes resulting from dual infections are not possible in the absence of systematic studies on human-avian influenza reassortment. Comprehensive in vivo co-infection studies and in vitro evaluations of all the reassortant genotypes derived from a human influenza virus and an HPAI virus would help bridge this gap of knowledge. In this report, we analyze the repertoire of reassortants between contemporary avian H5N1 and human H3N2 viruses by evaluating the phenotypes of 63 (26-1) viral reassortants with HA and NA genes from an avian H5N1 virus and the six internal genes from either parental virus, assigned higher priority because only viruses with novel surface antigens may cause a pandemic. We used reverse genetics to derive the reassortant virus panel, and subsequently examined their replication characteristics in cell culture and their virulence in a mammalian system. Our in vitro and in vivo analyses revealed a high frequency of viable reassortants with a wide spectrum of virulence for mice, providing insight into their potential for future emergence in nature.
Results Top
Characterization of reverse genetics-derived H5N1 reassortant viruses in cell culture

To generate the collection of human-avian reassortant viruses for this study, we first developed plasmid-based reverse genetics (rg) systems for the two parental viruses; A/Wyoming/3/2003 (subtype H3N2) (WY03) and A/Thailand/16/2004 (H5N1) (TH04) [17]. The parental WY03 virus showed α2,6 linked SA receptor specificity [18], replicated to high titers in MDCK cell culture, and was avirulent in mice (data not shown). The TH04 virus showed α2,3 receptor specificity [8], replicated efficiently in MDCK cells and was highly virulent for mice [17]. Virus recovery from plasmid DNA transfections was evaluated by quantitative plaque analysis at 72 hours (h) post-transfection; herein referred to as rescue efficiency. Cell cultures transfected with WY03 and TH04 rg plasmids yielded >107 plaque-forming units (pfu)/ml of progeny virus, termed rgWY03 and rgTH04, which formed 4–5 mm diameter plaques, comparable to those of parental wildtype (wt) viruses (Figure 1). A wide range of virus yields and plaque diameters were obtained for each of the 63 H5N1 human-avian reassortant (rH5N1) plasmid transfections. In order to categorize the in vitro properties of each reassortant, rH5N1 genotypes were segregated into 4 phenotypic groups, according to their rescue efficiencies (Figures 1 and 2): (1) rH5N1 genotypes with wt or near-wt replication efficiency. Twenty-eight rH5N1 viruses (cell culture phenotype group 1) consistently yielded ≥106 pfu/ml in the transfected cell cultures (Figure 1), which represented rescue efficiencies similar to those of rgWY03 and rgTH04. Most of the cell culture group 1 viruses formed ~2–4 mm plaques in diameter (Figure 1). The efficient in vitro growth phenotypes of nearly one-half of the rH5N1 viruses in the group revealed a high frequency of functional compatibility between avian and human virus genes. (2) rH5N1 genotypes with moderate cell culture replication impairment. Fourteen rH5N1 viruses (22% of the rH5N1 genotypes) had rescue efficiencies between 104 and 106 pfu/ml (cell culture phenotype group 2), and most of these viruses formed 1–3 mm plaques (Figure 2). (3) rH5N1 genotypes with severe cell culture replication impairment. Eight reassortants (13% of the rH5N1 genotypes) yielded ~102–104 pfu/ml from transfected cell cultures, with plaque size ranging from 0.5–2 mm (cell culture phenotype group 3 in Figure 2). (4) Non-viable or marginally viable rH5N1 genotypes. Thirteen rH5N1 viruses (~20% of rH5N1 genotypes) yielded <100 pfu/ml from transfected cell cultures (cell culture phenotype group 4 in Figure 2). Their rescue efficiencies were 5 log10 pfu/ml lower than their rg parent viruses. The severe replication defects of viruses in this group may reflect structural or functional incompatibilities in avian-human viral RNA and/or protein complexes. Collectively, these categories guided our rationale for excluding reassortants with severe replication defects from further in vivo studies.
thumbnail

Figure 1. Characteristics of high yield avian-human reassortant viruses in cell culture.

Human and chicken symbols denote the parental WY03 or TH04 source of each gene segment. The genotype of reassortants (r) is denoted by the genes derived from WY03 virus, designated by their segment number; 1:PB2. 2:PB1. 3:PA. 4:HA. 5:NP. 6:NA. 7:M. 8:NS. All others genes derived from TH04 do not bear a number. For example, r3/8 indicates the reassortant virus carries PA and NS genes from WY03 virus, and the remaining segments from TH04 virus. Rescue efficiency represents the virus titer (log10 pfu/ml) from cell cultures at 72 hours after transfection; geometric mean from 3 independent experiments.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072.g001
thumbnail

Figure 2. Characteristics of moderate to low yield avian-human reassortant viruses in cell culture.

Symbols and virus nomenclatures are the same as described in Figure 1. Rescue efficiency represents virus titer (log10 pfu/ml) from cell cultures at 72 hours after transfection; geometric mean from 3 independent experiments. Plaque formation by reassortant viruses with <100 pfu/ml rescue efficiency was not determined (ND).
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072.g002

Notably, the severely impaired rH5N1 viruses in group 4 (Figure 2) were all characterized by the association of the nucleoprotein (NP) gene from WY03 virus with matrix (M) and/or nonstructural (NS) genes derived from TH04 virus. For example, the single gene reassortant r5 (group 4), which carried the NP from WY03 and the five other internal genes from TH04 had a rescue efficiency of <102 pfu/ml. However, replacement of the TH04 NS gene with the WY03 NS in the same background increased rescue efficiency to ~104 pfu/ml (r5/8 virus, group 2, Figure 2), which was significantly higher than r5 (P≤0.0001). Further introduction of the WY03 M segment into this gene constellation restored the rescue efficiency and plaque size of the reassortant virus (r5/7/8, group 1, Figure 1) to nearly wt level (P≤0.0001). In contrast, introduction of polymerase complex genes did not improve replication (r5 replication is similar to r1/5, r2/5, r3/5, and r1/2/3/5; P>0.9) (Figure 2). Conversely, only 6 out of 28 rH5N1 viruses (group 1) that replicated efficiently had NP of human origin, in every case along with human NS (Figure 1). These observations suggest that the NP gene of WY03 origin preferentially interacts with M and NS genes of the same origin for optimal replication. In contrast, the NP gene of the TH04 avian virus appears to be more compatible with the M or NS of heterologous origin (e.g., r1/2/3/7/8 virus replication was similar to r1/2/3/7 or r1/2/3/8; P = 1.0). Although not all viruses with human NP and avian M or NS were severely impaired, they generally displayed significantly reduced replication, suggesting that avian M and/or NS may not be incorporated into seasonal human H3N2 viruses in the absence of avian NP.

Another remarkable gene incompatibility was noted with the r2/3/5/7/8 virus, bearing TH04 PB2 and the remaining five internal genes from WY03 virus (Figure 2, group 3). This reassortant virus formed tiny plaques (0.5 mm diameter) and had a very low rescue efficiency. This defect was repaired by providing a PA gene of avian virus origin; i.e., the rescue efficiency of r2/3/5/7/8 was significantly lower than r2/5/7/8 (Figure 1, group 1) (P<0.0001), suggesting a functional interaction of TH04 PB2 with the cognate avian PA gene. This finding suggests that reassortment of avian PB2 genes with human viruses may be linked to co-incorporation of the avian PA gene.
Virulence of rH5N1 viruses in mice

A set of 38 rH5N1 viruses with cell culture replication efficiencies comparable to those of parental viruses, or with only modest reductions, were chosen for study in a BALB/c mouse model to assess their virulence in a mammalian host. The plasmid-derived rgTH04 virus was highly virulent for mice, as indicated by a very low intranasal 50% mouse infectious dose (MID50 = 101.5 pfu) and lethal dose (LD50 = 101.8 pfu) (Figure 3). This virus replicated to high titers (>107 pfu/ml) in lungs by day 4 following an intranasal inoculation of 104 pfu and caused >19% body weight loss. Viral replication was also detected at systemic sites, such as brain and spleen, recapitulating the outcome of infection with the wt TH04 isolate [17]. In contrast, replication of the rgWY03 virus in mice was very inefficient as evidenced by an MID50 of 106 pfu and an LD50 of >106 pfu (determination of MID50 for rgWY/03 required additional doses of 105 and 106 pfu to detect virus in tissues; data not shown). However, the reassortant virus bearing HA and NA from TH04 and the remaining genes from WY03 virus (r1/2/3/5/7/8) replicated efficiently (MID50 of 101.8 pfu and titer of 107 pfu/ml in the lung), suggesting that the HA and/or NA from WY03 lack appropriate interaction with receptors or other host factors in the mouse respiratory tract [19]. Most importantly, the internal genes from WY03 mediated efficient viral replication of r1/2/3/5/7/8 virus in mice validating the BALB/c mouse as a useful model to evaluate the influence of human/avian internal gene combinations on the virulence phenotypes of rH5N1 viruses.
thumbnail

Figure 3. Replication of avian-human reassortant viruses in mice.

Symbols and virus nomenclature are as in Figure 1. The mouse infectious dose (MID50) and lethal dose (LD50) are expressed as the log10 pfu required to give one MID50 or one LD50. Maximum mean weight loss was determined from five mice per group (percent weight loss relative to dpi 0) following intranasal infection with 104 pfu. MST denotes the mean survival time in days following infection with 104 pfu. Virus titer in lung, spleen, brain or nasal turbinate are geometric means of the log10 pfu at 4 dpi of three mice infected with 104 pfu. LD50 values of rH5N1 in group A1 were significantly different from A2 and those from A1 and A2 were significantly different from TH04 WT (P<0.001) by analysis of variance. The — indicate that tissue titers were below limit of detection of the assay (0.7 log10 pfu/ml). Viruses are listed in ascending LD50 values. Viruses with identical LD50 are listed by descending weight loss.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072.g003

Three rH5N1 viruses were highly virulent for mice, with an LD50<103 pfu (Figure 3, group A1). Each of these rH5N1 had an MID50 of ≤101.5 pfu, replicated to high titers in the lung (≥106.5 pfu/ml), and caused >17% weight loss by 6–7 days post-infection (dpi) on average. The virulence of these viruses was comparable to that of wt TH04. In addition, the high frequency of virus detection in the spleen and brain of mice indicated systemic spread of these viruses, resembling infection with wt TH04. The ten viruses in group A2 were moderately virulent, with a mean LD50 value that was significantly different from that of the highly virulent group A1 viruses (P<0.001). The remaining 25 rH5N1 viruses in groups B1 and B2 exhibited low virulence phenotypes in mice with LD50 values >104 pfu. However, five rH5N1viruses (Figure 3, virulence group B1) caused significant transient weight loss (>16%), clinical signs, such as ruffled haircoat and lethargy, and three viruses (r1/3/7/8, r1/2/3/8, r1/5/7/8) each caused mortality in a single mouse infected at 104 pfu, suggesting potential for increased virulence at higher virus inoculums (data not shown). The other 20 rH5N1 viruses (Figure 3, virulence group B2) caused subclinical infections in mice, with minor weight loss (<15%). These viruses spread to the spleen and /or brain sporadically and their pulmonary replication capacity ranged from substantially efficient to nil. Although many rH5N1 viruses with high rescue efficiencies and large plaque phenotypes also displayed highly virulent phenotypes in mice, several rH5N1 viruses belonging to virulence group B2 (i.e., r2/7/8 and r1/3/8) had high rescue efficiencies but did not replicate well in mice. This finding highlights the limitations of inferring in vivo virulence properties solely from efficient in vitro replication characteristics.

Interestingly, r1/3/5/7/8, one of the most virulent rH5N1 among the 38 reassortants inoculated into mice had a gene constellation resembling that of the pandemic viruses from 1957 and 1968. In 1957, HA, NA and PB1 genes from an avian H2N2 virus were introduced into the circulating human H1N1 virus and caused the so-called “Asian flu” pandemic, whereas the 1968 “Hong Kong” pandemic virus incorporated the HA and PB1 genes from an avian donor [3]. In this study, a virus carrying HA, NA and PB1 of avian origin and the remaining genes from a human virus, namely r1/3/5/7/8, was highly virulent for mice (LD50 = 102.5 pfu). In contrast, a reassortant virus (r1/2/3/5/7/8) with all the internal genes from WY03 virus, including PB1, caused minimal mortality and had a significantly different LD50 (1.3 log10 pfu increase; P<0.001), suggesting that the PB1 of contemporary H5N1 viruses can reassort into circulating H3N2 viruses and increase their virulence for mice.

Efficient viral replication at the lower temperature of the upper respiratory tract is thought to be essential for droplet transmission of influenza virus between humans. Avian influenza viruses with a PB2 polymerase bearing glutamic acid at position 627 instead of lysine have decreased replication at 33°C in mammalian cells [20],[21],[22]. Although both WY03 and TH04 viruses have lysine at position 627 in PB2, it is not known whether new avian and human gene constellations would compromise viral replication at lower temperature. To address this question, we determined reassortant viral titers in the nasal turbinates collected at 4 dpi. We found that in general, rH5N1 viruses replicated less efficiently in nasal turbinates than in lungs, as reported previously [21]. Interestingly, some reassortants (i.e., r2/7, r2/7/8, and r3/7/8) showed extremely low replication in nasal turbinates despite considerable titers in lungs (Figure 3). These reassortants would be expected to lack efficient transmissibility by generation of nasal secretion droplets.
Replication of rH5N1 viruses in differentiated primary human tracheobronchial epithelial (HTBE) cells

Although mice are regarded as a useful mammalian model for studying the replication of HPAI viruses, the species differences between humans and mice mandate studies with models from the target species to complement the data. The epithelial cells of the respiratory tract are the primary targets of influenza infection. Therefore, we used in vitro differentiated HTBE cultures to evaluate the replication potential of the rH5N1 viruses in humans [23]. HTBE cells were infected with rgWY03 and rgTH04 viruses, or each of 38 rH5N1 viruses that were previously analyzed for virulence in mice. We quantified virus progeny released into the apical side of the pseudostratified epithelium because budding of HPAI H5N1 virus in the HTBE model remains polarized (data now shown). As shown in Figure 4A, both rgTH04 and rgWY03 parental viruses replicated efficiently in the HTBE cells. The rapid rise of WY03 virus titers to 108 pfu/ml at 32 h post-infection was consistent with the efficient spread of human viruses in HTBE cells, as described previously [23]. The plateau in WY03 virus production may be caused by virus-induced cell death, first noted at 40 h post-infection. In contrast, HTBE cells infected with rgTH04 virus showed no cytopathology and virus progeny increased steadily throughout the 56 h infection. The majority of rH5N1 viruses produced ≥104 pfu/ml by 24 h post-infection, and the growth kinetics were similar to parental rgTH04 or slightly delayed (e.g., r1/2/3/5/7/8 in Figure 4B and data not shown for others). In comparison, four rH5N1 viruses, r/3, r2/3, r3/8, r3/7/8, replicated substantially less efficiently in the HTBE cells (Figure 4, C and D). Interestingly, these four viruses also replicated poorly in mice; had MID50 values of ≥4 log10 pfu and caused minimal weight loss (Figure 3). These results supported the virulence data provided by the mouse model.
thumbnail

Figure 4. Replication kinetics of avian-human reassortant viruses in differentiated human tracheobronchial epithelial (HTBE) cells.

HTBE cells were infected in duplicate with parental TH04 and WY03 (A) or rH5N1 viruses (B, C, D) at an moi of 0.02; progeny viruses were collected and titrated on MDCK cells.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072.g004
In vitro viral polymerase activity

To study the mechanisms underlying the differences in the replication phenotypes of certain rH5N1, we exploited a mini-genome reporter assay which dissects the function of the viral ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex from the rest of the viral gene products [24],[25]. The 16 possible RNP combinations of PB2, PB1, PA and NP from either the TH04 or WY03 viruses were studied at 33°C or 37°C, to recapitulate the temperatures of the upper and lower respiratory tract, as reported previously [20]. Another panel of RNP combinations with A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (VN04) viral genes replacing TH04 genes was also analyzed in parallel to extend the results for other H5N1 viruses. The human RNP was almost equally active at 33°C and 37°C, whereas the avian RNP activity was substantially reduced at 33°C despite the presence of lysine at position 627 of PB2, in both TH04 and VN04 backgrounds (Figure 5). The RNP constituted by PB1 and PA from WY03 virus and PB2 from TH04 (or VN04) virus resulted in extremely low polymerase activities at 33°C and 37°C (Figure 5A and B, RNP denoted by asterisks). Although the RNP complexes carrying PB2 and PB1 from TH04 and PA from WY03 virus showed partially reduced polymerase activity, a similar combination derived from VN04 and WY03 viruses showed a more pronounced loss of replication activity (Figure 5A and B, RNP denoted by arrows). The reduced polymerase activities of these gene constellations were consistent with the low viral titer from lungs and nasal turbinates of mice infected with reassortant viruses r3/7/8, r3/8, r3 and r2/3 (Figure 3). Interestingly, the polymerase activity of the RNP with PB1 from TH04 and the other proteins from WY03 was comparable to that of the wt WY03 RNP. These findings indicated that the increased mouse virulence attributed to avian PB1 in the WY03 genetic background (r1/3/5/7/8) may not directly result from stimulation of the polymerase activities of the RNP. Alternative hypotheses to reconcile these observations would include an in vivo role for PB1 in RNP function, a possible modulation of host cell function by PB1-F2, or unknown interactions of PB1 with the remaining 4 genes absent in this assay: HA, NA, M and NS.
thumbnail

Figure 5. Polymerase activity of avian-human viral ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes.

(A) A549 cells were transfected in duplicate with pPol1-NS-Renilla and pSV40-Luc reporter plasmids, together with plasmids expressing PB2, PB1, PA and NP from either WY03 (human symbol) or TH04 (chicken symbol) viruses. Cells were incubated at 33°C (hatched bars) or 37°C (solid bars) for 24 hours and cell lysates were analyzed to measure Renilla and firefly luciferase activities. The latter was used to normalize transfection efficiency. Values shown represent the activities of each RNP relative to that of WY03 measured at 37°C (100%). (B) Viral RNP activities derived from WY03 (human symbol) or VN04 (chicken symbol) viruses are shown as described in panel A.
doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000072.g005
Characterization of a reverse genetics-derived H5N2 reassortant virus

Although H5N2 subtype viruses have been isolated from poultry in North America and Asia for many years [26], it is not clear whether the N2 derived from contemporary human H3N2 virus can support the efficient replication of a reassortant virus bearing the HA from circulating H5N1 virus. Balanced HA and NA activities are critical for efficient influenza virus infection and replication in various hosts. The HA of contemporary H5N1 viruses has retained a strong preference for α2,3 linked SA [7],[8]. In contrast, the NA derived from H3N2 human seasonal isolates has adapted over time to acquire α2,6 SA specificity [27],[28]. To evaluate the H5N2 reassortant, the NA of TH04 was replaced with the N2 from WY03 virus by reverse genetics. This virus, termed r6 (H5N2), was virtually identical to wt TH04 in rescue efficiency and replication in HTBE cells (Figure 1 and Figure 4B). In addition, this reassortant was highly virulent in mice, with an LD50 comparable to the parental TH04 virus (Figure 3). These results suggested that the NA activity from circulating H3N2 viruses can functionally support the activity of the H5 HA and promote H5N2 virus spread in the mammalian host.
Discussion Top

The influenza pandemics of the past century were caused by viruses carrying at least one internal gene of avian origin and a novel HA subtype that acquired α2,6 SA receptor binding specificity [3]. While many studies have focused on adaptive mutations in the avian HAs required for acquisition of human receptor specificity, little is known about the importance of the avian virus internal genes in pandemic emergence [7],[29],[30]. In this report, we used reverse genetics to systematically study reassortants with each of the 63 possible combinations of internal genes from contemporary avian and human viruses; all with H5N1 surface protein genes.

Collectively, these studies revealed that certain genes, such as human NP and avian PB2, often caused severe replicative impairment in cell culture when transferred alone to the heterologous virus background, whereas transfer of other genes, such as PB1, was less detrimental. The incompatibility of the human NP with a full complement of avian influenza genes was noted in early studies with Fowl Plague virus [13]. This is significant because the NP gene of influenza virus plays an important role in host range specificity [5],[31],[32]. In this report, we provide evidence suggesting that reassortants with NP of avian origin in a human virus background can replicate efficiently in mammalian cell cultures. This phenotype does not require the presence of other avian virus internal genes, whereas the NP gene of human origin depends on cognate NS and M genes for expression of the efficient replication phenotype. The best characterized event of the viral infectious cycle involving NP, M, and NS gene products is the nuclear export of viral RNP. In the nucleus, the influenza nuclear export protein (NEP; encoded by the NS gene) interacts with the M1 protein, which binds to the newly assembled viral RNP. NEP also interacts with host protein CRM1, thereby directing the nuclear export of the viral RNP complex [33],[34],[35]. Although a direct interaction between NEP and NP proteins has not been shown, the severely defective growth of reassortants possessing heterologous M and NS relative to NP suggests an unidentified crosstalk between these viral proteins, with the possible involvement of a host protein(s).

Striking viral phenotypes were also evident in rH5N1 viruses with heterologous polymerase subunits. The PB1 protein interacts with PA and PB2 forming transcriptionally active heterotrimers [36],[37],[38]. Although a direct interaction between PB2 and PA has never been reported, our genetic analyses pointed towards a specific interdependence between PB2 and cognate PA genes of avian origin, either through direct protein-protein interaction or concerted interaction with other viral or host factor(s). Interestingly, natural avian-mammalian reassortant viruses isolated from humans and swine possess PB2 and PA of the same host origin and sometimes carry a PB1 derived from a virus adapted to a third host species [39],[40]. Thus, linkage between avian PB2 and PA would be expected in the event of reassortment between an H5N1 virus and a seasonal H3N2 virus from humans.

The role of the avian PB1 genes in the emergence of reassortant viruses that caused the 1957 and 1968 influenza pandemics has remained enigmatic. This study shows that incorporation of an avian PB1 gene into a background of human virus internal genes significantly increased mouse virulence. We postulate that acquisition of the avian PB1 gene, as was seen in the 1957 and 1968 pandemic influenza strains may be a critical factor in the early stages of a pandemic, allowing the emerging reassortant to overcome competition with seasonal influenza viruses by enhancing its replication or virulence. Our results, therefore, have implications for assessing the potential virulence of novel reassortant viruses possessing human virus internal genes and PB1 from currently circulating H5N1 viruses.

Although reassortment between two different viruses could yield 254 possible new genotypes, this study characterized the subset of 63 genotypes with H5N1 surface antigens, of highest public health significance. In addition, these studies show that a reassortant virus with NA from a contemporary human H3N2 virus and the remaining 7 genes from TH04 replicated efficiently and was as lethal as wt H5N1 virus in mice, indicating that the current human N2 is compatible with the receptor binding function of the H5 HA. Although we did not analyze all the 63 additional genotypes carrying H5N2 surface genes, we anticipate that their virulence would be similar to their rH5N1 counterparts. However, these data should be interpreted in a broader context of human and avian influenza virus replication and evolution. The genotype of the rH5N1 that would emerge from natural co-infection is dictated by many factors besides the replication competency of a given reassortant. Dual infection of a single cell with human and avian influenza viruses involves co-replication of two genomes that may complement, interfere, and compete with each other. These events and the subsequent expansion of the reassortan will be further conditioned by the host species and tissue tropisms of the parental viruses and resulting reassortants. Ultimately, while use of reverse genetics technology to generate reassortants provides an experimental platform free of these many variables, natural reassortment between two viral genomes, and the consequences therein, are more complex.

In summary, we report a strikingly high level of compatibility between avian and human virus genes. Because few studies have described naturally occurring or experimentally derived avian-human reassortants, our results were surprising in that almost half of the rH5N1 viruses tested showed a high frequency of functional compatibility between avian and human virus genes. In addition, approximately 1 in 5 of all possible H5N1 reassortants was lethal for mice at doses below 104 pfu. The highly virulent reassortant genotypes identified in this study suggest that introduction of certain H5N1 viral segments into circulating human H3N2 viruses may increase their virulence for mice and perhaps other mammalian species. In addition, the moderately virulent reassortant viruses could circulate in a mammalian host, evolve by compensatory and/or adaptive mutations, and become more virulent for humans. The results of this study, therefore, underscore the necessity for enhanced viral surveillance strategies, which monitor reassortment events in nature to reduce the public health threat posed by H5N1 HPAI viruses currently circulating in three continents.
Materials and Methods Top
Viruses and cells

A/Thailand/16/2004 (TH04) and A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (VN04) H5N1 viruses and A/Wyoming/3/2003 (WY03) H3N2 virus obtained from the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance Network were provided by Alexander Klimov (CDC, Atlanta, USA). Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) and human lung carcinoma (A549) cells were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection and propagated in Dulbecco's Modification of Eagle's Medium with 10% fetal bovine serum. Viral infectivity was determined by plaque assay on MDCK cells as described [41]. Reassortant viruses containing any segment derived from the H5N1 virus were generated in compliance with the Institutional Biosafety Committee and NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules. Viruses were handled in biosafety level 3 containment, including enhancements required by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Select Agents program http://www.cdc.gov/od/ohs/biosfty/bmbl5/​bmbl5toc.htm .
Generation of reassortant viruses by reverse genetics

RT-PCR amplicons of the eight viral genes from WY03 and TH04 viruses were cloned into a dual-promoter plasmid for influenza A reverse genetics [42]. Virus rescue was performed by plasmid DNA transfection into co-cultured 293T/MDCK cells [42]. Culture medium from the transfected cells was harvested at 72 h and analyzed by plaque assay on MDCK monolayers. The plaque count and diameter were recorded as a measure of the virus rescue efficiency from plasmid DNA. DNA transfection of each genotype was performed at least three times independently. WY03 and TH04 rg plasmid sets were included as controls during each reassortant rescue to evaluate experimental variation. Viruses with H5 HA were propagated in 10–11 days old embryonated chicken eggs. The H3N2 virus was propagated in MDCK cells in the presence of 1 μg/ml TPCK-treated trypsin. Following propagation, the full genomes of reassortant viruses were sequenced to confirm presence of parental virus sequence.
Luciferase mini-genome reporter assay

A549 cells cultured in 24-well tissue culture plates were co-transfected with pPol1-NS-Renilla (100 ng) encoding a reporter mini-genome under transcriptional control of the human RNA polymerase I, pSV-Luc (200 ng) encoding firefly luciferase under SV40 virus RNA polymerase II promoter control, and four plasmids expressing viral PB2, PB1, PA, NP (50 ng each) from the strain of interest. Twenty-four hours after the transfection, the cell lysates were harvested and further diluted to perform the dual luciferase assay according to the manufacturer's protocol (Promega). The influenza polymerase catalytic activity derived from the Renilla luciferase plasmid (pPol1-NS-Renilla) was corrected to account for well-to-well differences in transfection efficiency using the firefly luciferase activity values from pSV-Luc plasmid.
Pathogenicity studies in mice

Groups of 6-8 week old female BALB/c mice (Jackson Laboratories, Bar Harbor, ME) were placed under light anesthesia and inoculated intranasally with 50 μl of serial 10-fold dilutions of infectious virus in PBS. For reassortant viruses tested, 104 pfu of virus was the highest dose used to infect mice; for WY03 virus, 106 pfu of virus was tested. Three mice from each group were euthanized at 4 days post-infection (dpi) and nasal turbinates, lungs, spleens, and brains were harvested, immediately frozen on dry ice, and stored at −80°C until further processing. Whole tissues were thawed, homogenized in 1 ml of cold PBS, and clarified by centrifugation (2,200×g) at 4°C. Virus titers of homogenates were determined by plaque assay in MDCK cells. Five additional mice in each group were monitored daily for clinical signs for 14 dpi. Mice that lost more than 25% of their body weight were euthanized humanely. The fifty percent mouse infectious dose (MID50) and fifty percent lethal dose (LD50) were calculated and expressed as the pfu value corresponding to 1 MID50 or LD50. Animal studies were conducted per approved Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee protocols.
Statistical analysis

Statistically significant differences of rescue efficiencies of avian-human reassortants in cell culture were determined by F-test adjusted for multiple comparisons. LD50 and MID50 values were calculated using the method of Reed and Muench [43]. Statistically significant differences between LD50 values of viruses in virulence group A1 and A2 were determined by comparing groups A1 and A2 to TH04 WT and group A1 to group A2 using an analysis of variance performed by an F test for multiple comparisons.
Viral replication in differentiated primary human tracheobronchial epithelial cells

Growth and differentiation of primary human tracheobronchial epithelial cells were performed as described previously [23],[30],[44]. Briefly, primary cells (passage level 3) were seeded in porous membrane inserts (Corning, 4.5 μm, 12 mm diameter) at the density of 5×104 cell/cm2. Three days after seeding the cells, the medium from the apical side was removed and the confluent monolayers were cultured at an air-liquid interface. The medium from the basal compartment was replaced daily, and the in vitro differentiation of primary cells was achieved after 4–6 weeks. Differentiated cells with trans-epithelial electrical resistance of ≥300Ω cm2 were used in our study. Kinetic analysis of reassortant virus growth was performed after infection of the monolayer at a multiplicity of infection (moi) of 0.02 pfu/cell as described [23],[30]; apically released virus was harvested at the appropriate times and analyzed by plaque assay.
Accession numbers

The GenBank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez) accession numbers for the genes described in this paper are: EU268216 (A/Thailand/16/2004, PB2 gene), EU268217 (A/Thailand/16/2004, PB1 gene), EU268218 (A/Thailand/16/2004, PA gene), EU268219 (A/Thailand/16/2004, HA gene), EU268220 (A/Thailand/16/2004, NP gene), EU268221 (A/Thailand/16/2004, NA gene), EU268222 (A/Thailand/16/2004, M gene), EU268223 (A/Thailand/16/2004, NS gene), EU268224 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, PB2 gene), EU268225 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, PB1 gene), EU268226 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, PA gene), EU268227 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, HA gene), EU268228 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, NP gene), EU268229 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, NA gene), EU268230 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, M gene), EU268231 (A/Wyoming/03/2003, NS gene).
Acknowledgments Top

We are indebted to the anonymous reviewers for valuable suggestions. We gratefully acknowledge Michael Shaw and Alexander Klimov for providing virus sequences. We thank Laurie Kamimoto and Paul Gargiullo for statistics consultation. We thank Pranee Thawatsupha, Malinee Chittaganpitch, Sunthareeya Waicharoen and the Thailand Ministry of Health for providing A/Thailand/16/2004 virus, Le Quynh Mai and the Vietnam Ministry of Health for providing A/Vietnam/1203/2004 virus. We also thank Amanda Balish for providing virus stock, Elizabeth Smith for sequencing support, Robert Webster and Eric Hoffmann for the reverse genetics system. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
Author Contributions Top

Conceived and designed the experiments: LC CD NC RD. Performed the experiments: LC CD. Analyzed the data: LC CD HZ RD. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: LC. Wrote the paper: LC CD HZ RD.
References Top

   1. Taubenberger JK, Reid AH, Lourens RM, Wang R, Jin G, et al. (2005) Characterization of the 1918 influenza virus polymerase genes. Nature 437: 889–893. Find this article online
   2. Reid AH, Taubenberger JK, Fanning TG (2004) Evidence of an absence: the genetic origins of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus. Nat Rev Microbiol 2: 909–914. Find this article online
   3. Kawaoka Y, Krauss S, Webster RG (1989) Avian-to-human transmission of the PB1 gene of influenza A viruses in the 1957 and 1968 pandemics. J Virol 63: 4603–4608. Find this article online
   4. Ito T, Couceiro JN, Kelm S, Baum LG, Krauss S, et al. (1998) Molecular basis for the generation in pigs of influenza A viruses with pandemic potential. J Virol 72: 7367–7373. Find this article online
   5. Scholtissek C, Burger H, Kistner O, Shortridge KF (1985) The nucleoprotein as a possible major factor in determining host specificity of influenza H3N2 viruses. Virology 147: 287–294. Find this article online
   6. Fouchier RA, Munster V, Wallensten A, Bestebroer TM, Herfst S, et al. (2005) Characterization of a novel influenza A virus hemagglutinin subtype (H16) obtained from black-headed gulls. J Virol 79: 2814–2822. Find this article online
   7. Stevens J, Blixt O, Tumpey TM, Taubenberger JK, Paulson JC, et al. (2006) Structure and Receptor Specificity of the Hemagglutinin from an H5N1 Influenza Virus. Science 312: 404–410. Find this article online
   8. Gambaryan A, Tuzikov A, Pazynina G, Bovin N, Balish A, et al. (2006) Evolution of the receptor binding phenotype of influenza A (H5) viruses. Virology 344: 432–438. Find this article online
   9. Matrosovich M, Tuzikov A, Bovin N, Gambaryan A, Klimov A, et al. (2000) Early alterations of the receptor-binding properties of H1, H2, and H3 avian influenza virus hemagglutinins after their introduction into mammals. J Virol 74: 8502–8512. Find this article online
  10. Tumpey TM, Maines TR, Van Hoeven N, Glaser L, Solorzano A, et al. (2007) A two-amino acid change in the hemagglutinin of the 1918 influenza virus abolishes transmission. Science 315: 655–659. Find this article online
  11. Maines TR, Chen LM, Matsuoka Y, Chen H, Rowe T, et al. (2006) Lack of transmission of H5N1 avian-human reassortant influenza viruses in a ferret model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 12121–12126. Find this article online
  12. Tian SF, Buckler-White AJ, London WT, Reck LJ, Chanock RM, et al. (1985) Nucleoprotein and membrane protein genes are associated with restriction of replication of influenza A/Mallard/NY/78 virus and its reassortants in squirrel monkey respiratory tract. J Virol 53: 771–775. Find this article online
  13. Scholtissek C, Rott R, Orlich M, Harms E, Rohde W (1977) Correlation of pathogenicity and gene constellation of an influenza A virus (fowl plague). I. Exchange of a single gene. Virology 81: 74–80. Find this article online
  14. Scholtissek C, Stech J, Krauss S, Webster RG (2002) Cooperation between the hemagglutinin of avian viruses and the matrix protein of human influenza A viruses. J Virol 76: 1781–1786. Find this article online
  15. Hatta M, Halfmann P, Wells K, Kawaoka Y (2002) Human influenza a viral genes responsible for the restriction of its replication in duck intestine. Virology 295: 250–255. Find this article online
  16. Castrucci MR, Donatelli I, Sidoli L, Barigazzi G, Kawaoka Y, et al. (1993) Genetic reassortment between avian and human influenza A viruses in Italian pigs. Virology 193: 503–506. Find this article online
  17. Maines TR, Lu XH, Erb SM, Edwards L, Guarner J, et al. (2005) Avian influenza (H5N1) viruses isolated from humans in Asia in 2004 exhibit increased virulence in mammals. J Virol 79: 11788–11800. Find this article online
  18. Kumari K, Gulati S, Smith DF, Gulati U, Cummings RD, et al. (2007) Receptor binding specificity of recent human H3N2 influenza viruses. Virol J 4: 42. Find this article online
  19. Ibricevic A, Pekosz A, Walter MJ, Newby C, Battaile JT, et al. (2006) Influenza virus receptor specificity and cell tropism in mouse and human airway epithelial cells. J Virol 80: 7469–7480. Find this article online
  20. Massin P, van der Werf S, Naffakh N (2001) Residue 627 of PB2 is a determinant of cold sensitivity in RNA replication of avian influenza viruses. J Virol 75: 5398–5404. Find this article online
  21. Hatta M, Gao P, Halfmann P, Kawaoka Y (2001) Molecular basis for high virulence of Hong Kong H5N1 influenza A viruses. Science 293: 1840–1842. Find this article online
  22. Hatta M, Hatta Y, Kim JH, Watanabe S, Shinya K, et al. (2007) Growth of H5N1 influenza A viruses in the upper respiratory tracts of mice. PLoS Pathog 3: 1374–1379. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0030133. Find this article online
  23. Matrosovich MN, Matrosovich TY, Gray T, Roberts NA, Klenk HD (2004) Human and avian influenza viruses target different cell types in cultures of human airway epithelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101: 4620–4624. Find this article online
  24. Perez DR, Donis RO (1998) The matrix 1 protein of influenza A virus inhibits the transcriptase activity of a model influenza reporter genome in vivo. Virology 249: 52–61. Find this article online
  25. Pleschka S, Jaskunas R, Engelhardt OG, Zurcher T, Palese P, et al. (1996) A plasmid-based reverse genetics system for influenza A virus. J Virol 70: 4188–4192. Find this article online
  26. Kawaoka Y, Webster RG (1985) Evolution of the A/Chicken/Pennsylvania/83 (H5N2) influenza virus. Virology 146: 130–137. Find this article online
  27. Baum LG, Paulson JC (1991) The N2 neuraminidase of human influenza virus has acquired a substrate specificity complementary to the hemagglutinin receptor specificity. Virology 180: 10–15. Find this article online
  28. Kobasa D, Kodihalli S, Luo M, Castrucci MR, Donatelli I, et al. (1999) Amino acid residues contributing to the substrate specificity of the influenza A virus neuraminidase. J Virol 73: 6743–6751. Find this article online
  29. Yamada S, Suzuki Y, Suzuki T, Le MQ, Nidom CA, et al. (2006) Haemagglutinin mutations responsible for the binding of H5N1 influenza A viruses to human-type receptors. Nature 444: 378–382. Find this article online
  30. Wan H, Perez DR (2007) Amino acid 226 in the hemagglutinin of H9N2 influenza viruses determines cell tropism and replication in human airway epithelial cells. J Virol 81: 5181–5191. Find this article online
  31. Snyder MH, Buckler-White AJ, London WT, Tierney EL, Murphy BR (1987) The avian influenza virus nucleoprotein gene and a specific constellation of avian and human virus polymerase genes each specify attenuation of avian-human influenza A/Pintail/79 reassortant viruses for monkeys. J Virol 61: 2857–2863. Find this article online
  32. Bean WJ (1984) Correlation of influenza A virus nucleoprotein genes with host species. Virology 133: 438–442. Find this article online
  33. Neumann G, Hughes MT, Kawaoka Y (2000) Influenza A virus NS2 protein mediates vRNP nuclear export through NES-independent interaction with hCRM1. Embo J 19: 6751–6758. Find this article online
  34. O'Neill RE, Talon J, Palese P (1998) The influenza virus NEP (NS2 protein) mediates the nuclear export of viral ribonucleoproteins. Embo J 17: 288–296. Find this article online
  35. Bui M, Myers JE, Whittaker GR (2002) Nucleo-cytoplasmic localization of influenza virus nucleoprotein depends on cell density and phosphorylation. Virus Res 84: 37–44. Find this article online
  36. Digard P, Blok VC, Inglis SC (1989) Complex formation between influenza virus polymerase proteins expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Virology 171: 162–169. Find this article online
  37. Detjen BM, St Angelo C, Katze MG, Krug RM (1987) The three influenza virus polymerase (P) proteins not associated with viral nucleocapsids in the infected cell are in the form of a complex. J Virol 61: 16–22. Find this article online
  38. Area E, Martin-Benito J, Gastaminza P, Torreira E, Valpuesta JM, et al. (2004) 3D structure of the influenza virus polymerase complex: localization of subunit domains. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101: 308–313. Find this article online
  39. Olsen CW (2002) The emergence of novel swine influenza viruses in North America. Virus Res 85: 199–210. Find this article online
  40. Ma W, Gramer M, Rossow K, Yoon KJ (2006) Isolation and genetic characterization of new reassortant H3N1 swine influenza virus from pigs in the midwestern United States. J Virol 80: 5092–5096. Find this article online
  41. Kawaoka Y, Naeve CW, Webster RG (1984) Is virulence of H5N2 influenza viruses in chickens associated with loss of carbohydrate from the hemagglutinin? Virology 139: 303–316. Find this article online
  42. Hoffmann E, Neumann G, Kawaoka Y, Hobom G, Webster RG (2000) A DNA transfection system for generation of influenza A virus from eight plasmids. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97: 6108–6113. Find this article online
  43. Reed LJ, Muench HA (1938) A simple method of estimating fifty per cent endpoints. Am J Hyg 27: 493–497. Find this article online
  44. Thompson CI, Barclay WS, Zambon MC, Pickles RJ (2006) Infection of human airway epithelium by human and avian strains of influenza a virus. J Virol 80: 8060–8068. Find this article online

Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2009, 11:00:28 PM »

Ok, apparently, it's functioning in some sequences now:
First functioning PB1-F2 protein
First H1N1 sequence with functioning PB1-F2 protein at Genbank.

[Influenza A virus (A/Singapore/GP2312/2009(H1N1))]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/protein/...report=genpept
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/262332915


For those not familiar with the significance of the PB1-F2 protein - it a factor for virulence. All H1N1 sequences so far didn't encode for a functioning PB1-F2 protein. This particular sequence stops at 57 amino acids. Normally PB1-F2 is 90 amino acids in length. For a sequence that is 90 amino acids long, if the amino acid in position 66 is an "S" instead of a "N" then it's very bad. We're talking the possibility of H5N1 or 1918 H1N1 virulence.

See preview flutrackers post:
http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37360
Logged
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2009, 11:56:04 PM »

so, let me get this right, there's a weak back-engineered virus that is VERY TRANSMITTABLE and therefore pandemic is issued ... that, when mutation occurs in position 66 of PB1-F2, alters a bird flu virus to link to normal flu receptors?

like arrest some criminals already - THIS IS XENOCIDE.
Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #15 on: November 18, 2009, 09:32:42 AM »

so, let me get this right, there's a weak back-engineered virus that is VERY TRANSMITTABLE and therefore pandemic is issued ... that, when mutation occurs in position 66 of PB1-F2, alters a bird flu virus to link to normal flu receptors?

like arrest some criminals already - THIS IS XENOCIDE.

Bingo. It made me literally ill to read that last night. As far as tyrannical genocide attempts go, this kind of deception is absolutely unprecedented.

They used Oracle 8i to do it, too--that's what's bothering me in a big way, the fact that the nwo minions/mad scientists have the tools they need to create viruses that not only have the genetic mutations necessary to do whatever they need it to do, they also can change up mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) patterns with 'em.

2010's gonna suck, ya'll.
Logged
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #16 on: November 18, 2009, 09:35:47 AM »

Wink

and here I was hoping that I'd get it all wrong.  Erm, we're f**ked, people.  Can we force an antidote out of these biotech companies after we've arrested some f**king corporate criminals already?

Bingo. It made me literally ill to read that last night. As far as tyrannical genocide attempts go, this kind of deception is absolutely unprecedented.
Logged
sociostudent
Guest
« Reply #17 on: November 18, 2009, 09:48:31 AM »

Wink

and here I was hoping that I'd get it all wrong.  Erm, we're f**ked, people.  Can we force an antidote out of these biotech companies after we've arrested some f**king corporate criminals already?


After we've arrested everyone responsible in the research, manufacturing, and sale of these bioweapons, there may not be enough left to help us find an antidote.  Cheesy

What's the definition of irony, again? Tongue
Logged
Mike Philbin
Guest
« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2009, 10:46:09 AM »

I think you just broke it.

 Roll Eyes

What's the definition of irony, again? Tongue
Logged
trailhound
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,749



« Reply #19 on: November 19, 2009, 10:11:49 AM »

Geesh socio things looking alot more clear than last week, are you going to break some of this down on the show tonight?
Logged


"Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." Qur'an 5:2
At the heart of that Western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value..." -RFK
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!