1887

Abstract

SUMMARY

Interaction of [H]-labelled poly(rI).poly(rC) with the cell has been studied in several cell cultures which differ markedly in their sensitivity to the antiviral activity of the polynucleotide (in order of decreasing sensitivity): primary rabbit kidney (PRK) cells, human skin fibroblasts (HSF), mouse embryo fibroblasts (MEF), mouse L-929 cells, rabbit kidney (RK 13) cells, HeLa, BSC-1 and VERO cells.

No significant differences were noted in the amounts of either total or acid-insoluble radioactivity associated with the cell at various times, following exposure of [H]-poly(rI).poly(rC) to these different cell cultures. No significant differences were noted in the fate of cell-bound [H]-poly(rI).poly(rC) in four out of the eight cell cultures tested. However, significant differences were observed in the sensitivity of cell-bound [H]-poly(rI).poly(rC) to extraneous ribonuclease treatment: [H]-poly(rI).poly(rC) bound to the cells that are most sensitive to the antiviral activity of the polynucleotide (PRK, HSF, MEF, L-929, RK 13) appeared to be markedly more accessible to ribonuclease treatment than [H]-poly(rI).poly(rC) bound to cells that are rather insensitive to the antiviral activity of the polynucleotide (HeLa, BSC-1, VERO).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-19-1-113
1973-04-01
2022-12-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jgv/19/1/JV0190010113.html?itemId=/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-19-1-113&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bausek G. H., Merigan T. C. 1969; Cell interaction with a synthetic polynucleotide and interferon production in vitro. Virology 39:491–498
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Billiau A., Van Den Berghe H., De Somer P. 1972; Increased interferon release and morphological alteration in human cells by repeated exposure to double-stranded RNA. Journal of General Virology 14:25–31
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Colby C., Chamberlin M. J. 1969; Specificity of interferon induction in chick embryo cells by helical RNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 63:160–167
    [Google Scholar]
  4. De Clercq E., Merigan T. C. 1971; Thermal activation of the antiviral activity of synthetic polyribonucleotides: influence of DEAE-dextran in various cell cultures. Journal of General Virology 10:125–130
    [Google Scholar]
  5. De Clercq E., De Somer P. 1971; Antiviral activity of polyribocytidylic acid in cells primed with polyribo-inosinic acid. Science, New York 173:260–262
    [Google Scholar]
  6. De Clercq E., De Somer P. 1972; Mechanism of the antiviral activity resulting from sequential administration of complementary homopolyribonucleotides to cell cultures. Journal of Virology 9:721–731
    [Google Scholar]
  7. De Clercq E., Wells R. D., Grant R. C., Merigan T. C. 1971; Thermal activation of the antiviral activity of synthetic double-stranded polyribonucleotides. Journal of Molecular Biology 56:83–100
    [Google Scholar]
  8. De Clercq E., Wells R. D., Merigan T. C. 1970; Increase in antiviral activity of polynucleotides by thermal activation. Nature, London 226:364–366
    [Google Scholar]
  9. De Clercq E., Wells R. D., Merigan T. C. 1972; Studies on the antiviral activity and cell-interaction of synthetic double-stranded polyribo- and polydeoxyribonucleotides. Virology 47:405–415
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Field A. K., Tytell A. A., Lampson G. P., Hilleman M. R. 1967; Inducers of interferon and host resistance. II. Multistranded synthetic polynucleotide complexes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 58:1004–1010
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Field A. K., Tytell A. A., Lampson G. P., Hilleman M. R. 1968; Inducers of interferon and host resistance. V. In vitro studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 61:340–346
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hilleman M. R. 1970; Prospects for the use of double-stranded ribonucleic acid (poly I: C) inducers in man. Journal of Infectious Diseases 121:196–211
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Pitha P. M., Marshall L. W., Carter W. A. 1972; Interferon induction: rate of cellular attachment of poly IC. Journal of General Virology 15:89–92
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Schafer T. W., Lockart R. Z. Jun 1970; Interferon required for viral resistance induced by poly I. poly C. Nature, London 226:449–450
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Stewart W., Ii E., Gosser L. B., Lockart R. Z. 1972; The effect of priming with interferon on interferon production by two lines of L cells. Journal of General Virology 15:85–87
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Stewart W., Ii E., Lockart R. Z. Jun 1970; Relative antiviral resistance induced in homologous and heterologous cells by cross-reacting interferons. Journal of Virology 6:795–799
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Stewart W. E., Scott W. D., Sulkin S. E. 1969; Relative sensitivities of viruses to different species of interferon. Journal of Virology 4:147–153
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Vilcek J. 1970; Metabolic determinants of the induction of interferon by a synthetic double-stranded polynucleotide in rabbit kidney cells. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 173:390–403
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Vilcek J., Varacalli F. 1971; Sequential suppression by actinomycin D of interferon production and cellular resistance induced by poly I: C. Journal of General Virology 13:185–188
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-19-1-113
Loading
/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-19-1-113
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error