1887

Abstract

SUMMARY

The antiviral activity of interferon was shown to be dependent on the input m.o.i. Cells could not be protected against the cytopathogenic effect of vaccinia, herpes, Echo or vesicular stomatitis virus at m.o.i. > 1. At a m.o.i. of ⩽ 1, cells could be protected but the amount of interferon necessary to yield protection was inversely related to the m.o.i. When protection was afforded, it was only transient. The duration of the antiviral effect of interferon was also inversely related to the m.o.i.

The dependence of the antiviral effect on the m.o.i. could not be explained by assuming the viruses to be mixtures of subtypes with different interferon sensitivity. Also, selection by interferon treatment of interferon-insensitive subtypes could not be shown. The greater antiviral effect of interferon at low m.o.i. was probably not caused by induction of interferon by the infecting virus. A direct inactivation by the virus of the antiviral effect of interferon could not be demonstrated. These results indicate that when interferon-treated cells are infected, they will not survive the infection. The only result of the interferon treatment will be to inhibit virus replication to some extent, leading only to a delay in cell death.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-46-1-205
1980-01-01
2022-01-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jgv/46/1/JV0460010205.html?itemId=/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-46-1-205&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Allen P. T., Schellekens H., Van Griensven L. J. L. D., Billiau A. 1976; Differential sensitivity of Rauscher murine leukaemia virus (MuLV-R) to interferons in two interferon-responsive cell lines. Journal of General Virology 31:429–435
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cantell K., Hirvonen S. 1978; Large scale production of human leukocyte interferon containing 108 units per ml. Journal of General Virology 39:541–543
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Finter N. B. 1964; Quantitative hemadsorption, a new assay technique. I. Assay of interferon. Virology 24:589–597
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Finter N. B. 1969; Dye uptake methods for assessing viral cytopathogenicity and their application to interferon assays. Journal of General Virology 5:419–427
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Finter N. B. 1973 In Interferon and Interferon Inducers. Frontiers of Biology vol 2 Chapter 14 pp 295–363 Edited by Finter N. B. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company;
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hallum J. V., Youngner J. S. 1966; Quantitative aspects of inhibition of virus replication by interferon in chick embryo cell cultures. Journal of Bacteriology 92:1047–1050
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hekker A. C., Bos J. M., Smith L. 1973; A stable freeze-dried smallpox vaccine made in monolayer cultures of primary rabbit kidney cells. Journal of Biological Standardization 1:21–32
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ho M. 1962; Kinetic considerations of the inhibitory action of an interferon produced in chick cultures infected with Sindbis virus. Virology 17:262–275
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Holmes A. R., Rasmussen L., Merigan T. C. 1978; Factors affecting the interferon sensitivity of human cytomegalovirus. Intervirology 9:48–55
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Isaacs A. 1959; Action of interferon on the growth of sublethally irradiated virus. Virology 9:56–61
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ke Y. H., Armstrong J. A., Breining M. K., Ople L., Postic B., Ho M. 1970; The assay and standardization of rabbit interferon. Symposia Series in Immunobiological Standardization 14:131–144
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lindenmann J. 1960; Interferon und inverse lnterferenz. Zeitschrift fur Hygiene und Infektionskrankheiten 146:287–309
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Lindenmann J., Gifford G. E. 1963; Studies on vaccinia virus plaque formation and its inhibition by interferon. Virology 19:302–309
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Marcus P. L., Sekellick M. J. 1976; Cell killing by viruses. III. The interferon system and inhibition of cell killing by vesicular stomatitis virus. Virology 69:378–393
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Metz D. H., Douglas A. R. 1977; Viral resistance to interferon. Texas Reports on Biology and Medicine 35:260–263
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Oie H. K., Easton J. M., Abjasjo D. V., Baron S. 1975; Murine cytomegavirus: induction of and sensitivity to interferon in vitro. Infection and Immunity 12:1012–1017
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Postic B., Dowling J. N. 1977; Susceptibility of clinical isolates of cytomegalovirus to human interferon. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 11:656–660
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Reed J. L., Muench H. 1938; A simple method for estimating fifty percent endpoints. American Journal of Hygiene 27:493–498
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Schellekens H., Weimar W., Cantell K., Stitz L. 1979; The antiviral effect of interferon in vivo may be mediated by the host. Nature, London 278:742
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Schellekens H., De Wilde G. A., Weimar W. 1980; Production and initial characterization of rat interferon. Journal of General Virology 46:243–247
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sellers R. F., Fitzpatrick M. 1962; An assay of interferon produced in rhesus monkey and calf kidney tissue culture using bovine enterovirus M6 as challenge. British Journal of Experimental Pathology 43:674–683
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Yamamoto K. N., Yamaguchi N., Oda K. 1975; Mechanism of interferon-induced inhibition of early simian virus 40 (SV 40) functions. Virology 68:58–70
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-46-1-205
Loading
/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-46-1-205
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