Identification and “Induction” of Interferon1

Ho, Monto

doi:10.1128/mmbr.28.4.367-381.1964

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study, methods for the elicitation and collection of interferon were devised to minimize as much as possible the accumulation of these contaminating factors. The steps consisted of the selection of optimally ultraviolet-inactivated inducer virus (10,11), the use of slowly rotating monolayers of cells bathed in a minimal amount of fluid (18), the omission of serum from the collecting medium during release of interferon, and restriction of the harvest interval to a 4-hr period, during which maximal liberation of interferon from the cells took place. As a result of these manipulations, starting materials with specific activities ranging from 20,000 to 40,000 units of interferon per mg of protein were regularly obtained, which represented an approximately 400to 800-fold improvement over crude chick interferon (5).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Purification, Characterization, and Attempts at Isotopic Labeling of Mouse Interferon

Paucker

Berman

Golgher

et al. 1970

J Virol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under optimal conditions which minimized the accumulation of extraneous proteins, interferon preparations were obtained in L cells containing from 2 × 10 4 to 5 × 10 4 units/mg of protein. The radiolabeled proteins were liberated simultaneously with interferon from cultures exposed to tritiated amino acids after viral stimulation and from corresponding controls, and were subsequently purified with the following results. Chromatography of interferon on carboxymethyl-Sephadex C-25 eliminated selectively unlabeled or poorly labeled proteins, resulting in a greater than sixfold increase in counts per minute per milligram of protein. Similarly purified control material harbored at least 12 times less tritium per milligram of protein than interferon, and the label was more diversely distributed among proteins of different molecular weights. On electrophoresis of interferon in polyacrylamide gels, labeled proteins were reduced further by a factor of at least 10 without loss in titer. Final purification was estimated at greater than 280-fold, representing a calculated specific activity of at least 1.4 × 10 7 units of interferon per milligram of protein.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Purification, Characterization, and Attempts at Isotopic Labeling of Mouse Interferon

Paucker

Berman

Golgher

et al. 1970

J Virol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is generally agreed that one of the prerequisites for the induction of interferon synthesis by virus infection is that cellular RNA and protein synthesis must not be inhibited to a degree which interferes with the synthesis of interferon (2, 5, 8). More specifically, it has been reported that NDV fails to induce interferon synthesis in CE cell cultures because of the high virulence of the virus for this host and the consequent rapid inhibition of host-cell functions (3,4). The data which we have presented make this view untenable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Cells Persistently Infected with Newcastle Disease Virus

Thacore

Youngner

1970

J Virol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of the replication patterns in L cells and in chick embryo (CE) cell cultures was carried out with the Herts strain of Newcastle disease virus (NDVO) and with a mutant (NDVpi) isolated from persistently infected L cells. A significant amount of virus progeny, 11 plaque-forming units (PFU)/cell, was synthesized in L cells infected with NDV0, but the infectivity remained cell-associated and disappeared without being detectable in the medium. In contrast, in L cells

show abstract

“…These results indicate that inhibition of a CP strain may not be mediated by a readily identifiable substance such as interferon (2), since such inhibitory activity has not been demonstrated against two interferon-sensitive viruses. It is possible that such inhibition may be the result of some inhibitory substance produced in response to the NCP infection, which may be specific for BVD-MD virus, or the cells doubly infected with CP and NCP strains may have failed to yield infective CP virus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 83%