Potyviruses, monoclonal antibodies, and antigenic sites

Jordan, R.

doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6920-9_10

Cited by 38 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In silico prediction and experimental validation of cross-reactivity with other potyviruses Antibodies raised against PVY show in many cases cross-reactivity with other potyviruses (Joisson et al, 1992;Jordan, 1992). The classical method to determine the specificity of monoclonal antibodies is to test them randomly with other potyviruses.…”

Section: Location Of the Epitopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epitope identification and in silico prediction of the specificity of antibodies binding to the coat proteins of Potato Virus Y strains

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A phage library containing 2.7 · 10 9 randomly expressed peptides was used to determine the epitopes of three monoclonal antibodies that bind to the coat protein of potato virus Y. Construction of the consensus sequences for the peptides obtained after three selection rounds indicated that each antibody recognized a different epitope located within the first 50 N-terminal amino acids of the coat protein. The location of the epitopes was confirmed by heterologous expression of the N-terminal part of the coat protein in Escherichia coli, and, subsequently, by performing an immunological test with the three antibodies. The accuracy of the phage library was demonstrated by predicting in silico the cross-reactivity of the three antibodies with other potyvirus family members. ELISA and in silico predictions revealed the same results in almost every case. The potential of peptide phage libraries to optimize the use of antibodies in plant virology is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Location Of the Epitopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epitope identification and in silico prediction of the specificity of antibodies binding to the coat proteins of Potato Virus Y strains

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To rule out the possibility that an aphid-borne potyvirus was contaminating the CVYV cultures, three series of experiments were conducted. CVYV-infected cucumber and melon plant extracts were tested in double-antibody sandwich (DAS)-ELISA with antisera raised against the five most common potyviruses encountered in cucurbits in the Mediterranean region (Lecoq et al, 1998) In addition, CVYV-infected plant extracts did not react in antigen-trapped indirect ELISA with monoclonal antibody PTY 1, which detects most aphid-transmitted potyviruses but which does not detect potyvirids transmitted by other vectors with the exception of Ryegrass mosaic virus (RGMV) (Jordan, 1992 ;Richter et al, 1995) (data not shown). Finally, attempts to transmit CVYV-Isr and CVYV-Jor by the aphid Myzus persicae by the non-persistent mode were unsuccessful (data not shown).…”

Section: Cucumber Vein Yellowing Virus (Cvyv) Is Widespread In Cucurbmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytological and molecular evidence that the whitefly-transmitted Cucumber vein yellowing virus is a tentative member of the family Potyviridae

Lecoq¹,

Desbiez²,

Delécolle³

et al. 2000

Journal of General Virology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cucumber vein yellowing virus (CVYV) is widespread in cucurbits in the Middle East. CVYV has filamentous particles and is transmitted byBemisia tabaci by the semi-persistent mode. It has not yet been assigned to a specific genus or family. Ultramicroscopic observations revealed numerous cylindrical cytoplasmic inclusions in melon and cucumber cells infected by CVYV isolates from Israel and Jordan. Depending on the section orientation, the inclusions appeared as pinwheels or as bundles. In addition, a 1n9 kb DNA fragment was amplified by RT-PCR from CVYV-infected plant extracts using primers designed to detect all potyvirids. Sequence comparisons with the amplified fragment indicated that CVYV is more closely related to Sweet potato mild mottle virus than to any other virus in the family Potyviridae. These results suggest that CVYV can be considered as a tentative new member of the genus Ipomovirus, family Potyviridae.Cucumber vein yellowing virus (CVYV) causes a severe disease of cucumbers and other cucurbits in the Oriental Mediterranean Basin (Cohen & Nitzany, 1960 ;Harpaz & Cohen, 1965 ;Al-Musa et al., 1985 ;Yilmaz et al., 1989). CVYV is reported to have rod-shaped particles, 740-800 nm long with a diameter of 15-18 nm (Sela et al., 1980). The virus is readily transmitted mechanically and by the whitefly Bemisia tabaci by the semi-persistent mode (Harpaz & Cohen, 1965 ;Mansour & Al-Musa, 1993). Due to the instability of CVYV particles, difficulties have been encountered in obtaining purified virus preparations (Sela et al., 1980 ;Mansour & Hadidi, 1999) ; therefore, very little is known of the biophysical Author for correspondence : Herve! Lecoq.Fax j33 4 32 72 28 42. e-mail Herve.Lecoq!avignon.inra.frThe GenBank accession number of the sequence reported in this paper is AF233429. and biochemical properties of CVYV and the virus is still unclassified (Brunt et al., 1996 ;Lecoq et al., 1998). However, Sela et al. (1980) have reported that the CVYV coat protein (CP) has a molecular mass of 39 kDa and that the viral nucleic acid is a double-stranded DNA, suggesting that CVYV could be a member of a new virus family.In order to investigate the taxonomic position of CVYV further, cytopathological, serological and molecular studies were conducted. Cucumber (Cucumis sativus cv. Beit Alfa) and melon (Cucumis melo cv. Ve! drantais) plants were inoculated mechanically with the CVYV type strain from Israel (CVYVIsr) or with a CVYV isolate from Jordan (CVYV-Jor) and were kept subsequently in independent screened cages maintained in an insect-proof greenhouse. The two strains induced similar vein-clearing symptoms in cucumber and melon, but CVYVJor caused a more severe stunting in cucumber.For cytological studies, leaf pieces 1 mm across were collected from symptomatic young leaves 3-4 weeks after inoculation and similar samples from healthy plants were used as controls. Samples were fixed with glutaraldehyde, post-fixed with osmium tetroxide and embedded in araldite CY212 (Agar Scientific) (Dele! colle, 1978). Thin sectio...

show abstract

“…For instance, a panel of selected MAbsreacted with eight out of nine strainsofBYMV [56], and would seem to be very reliable for B YMV detection, if the ninth strain had not been included in the test. The broadly reacti ve MAb PTY 1 [56], advocated and already commercially distributed as a general tool for potyvirus detection, does not react with papaya ringspot virus (PRSV-W) and peanut mottle virus [55], and with Hippeastrum mosaic virus, two Nerine potyviruses and a potyvirus of Gloriosa [26]. So, negative reaction with this MAb does not exclude potyvirus group affinity of the virus investigated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Potyviruses, chaos or order?

Bos¹

1992

Potyvirus Taxonomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. At first potyviruses were easily distinguished by biological and serological properties because only a few were known and information on their host ranges was limited. The first evidence of serological cross reaction between two of these viruses was reported in 1951 and was further corroborated for three obviously distinct members of the group in 1960. In 1968 attention was drawn to the fact that some legume and non-legume potyviruses have much wider host ranges than previously known and that within the potyvirus group there is as much biological variation within viruses and overlap between viruses as there is in serology. The concept of continuity within the group was soon supported by others and became known as the "continuum hypothesis." Results with highly sensitive serological methods using polyclonal antisera were conflicting, and nucleic acid hybridization techniques did not unambiguously discriminate between potyviruses.Recent results, obtained with antibodies directed toward epitopes located in the N -termini of the coat proteins of potyviruses, suggest that there are ways to more definitely group strains of one potyvirus and distinguish them from other potyviruses. However, there are exceptions to this rule, as in the case of bean yellow mosaic virus and clover yellow vein virus which are clearly distinct in host range, inclusion bodies, and migration velocity of coat protein, but which still react with antibodies to the N-terminal epitopes of one virus. So the question remains of whether coat-protein properties, especially the serological reactivity of N-termini, which do not alter overall virus integrity when lost, sufficiently represent the genome of a pathogenic virus entity as a single criterion for classification.

show abstract

Potyviruses, monoclonal antibodies, and antigenic sites

Cited by 38 publications

References 40 publications

Epitope identification and in silico prediction of the specificity of antibodies binding to the coat proteins of Potato Virus Y strains

Epitope identification and in silico prediction of the specificity of antibodies binding to the coat proteins of Potato Virus Y strains

Cytological and molecular evidence that the whitefly-transmitted Cucumber vein yellowing virus is a tentative member of the family Potyviridae

Potyviruses, chaos or order?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About