Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Virology, June 2000, p. 5257-5265, Vol. 74, No. 11
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Low Dynamic State of Viral Competition in a
Chronic Avian Hepadnavirus Infection
Yong-Yuan
Zhang and
Jesse
Summers*
Department of Molecular Genetics and
Microbiology, The University of New Mexico School of Medicine,
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Received 21 December 1999/Accepted 13 March 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The dynamic state of infection of 11 ducks with the duck hepatitis
B virus was investigated. Chronic infections were established in newly
hatched ducklings by inoculation with a mixture of wild-type virus and
a mutant virus with a partial replication defect. As expected, the
wild-type virus was rapidly enriched in the virus population during the
spread of infection. Enrichment thereafter was correlated with normal
growth of the liver, with the average mutant-to-wild-type ratio
stabilizing for at least 2 months beyond the time at which the liver
mass stabilized. Using experimentally determined growth rates for the
mutant and wild-type viruses, we estimated that after the spread of
infection, competition between the two virus strains was limited by the
amount of replication required to infect new hepatocytes in the growing
livers. The results suggest that, in a chronically infected liver, the
selection of variants with a replication rate advantage is inefficient
and that the emergence of such variants would depend on induced liver cell turnover, such as that occurring during chronic hepatitis.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Hepadnaviruses cause chronic
infections of the liver in a variety of animal species (for reviews,
see references 5 and 17). In the
absence of inflammation, infection becomes stably established in every
susceptible hepatocyte, persisting without causing any apparent
cytopathic effect. The noncytopathic state of infection is possible
because virus replication is regulated within the infected cell at a
level that does not interfere with normal cellular functions. The major
mechanism for this regulation is thought to act through copy number
control of viral genes in the nucleus (25, 26).
Active viral genes are found as a pool of up to 20 double-stranded
covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) molecules (14, 20,
26). The pool of cccDNA molecules is established early in the
infection. The infecting viral DNA molecule is first converted directly
to cccDNA and is transcribed in the nucleus to produce viral mRNAs and
proteins (1, 4, 24). The cccDNA is then replicated through
transcription of RNA pregenomes, transport of pregenomes to the
cytoplasm, and reverse transcription within newly formed viral
nucleocapsids to produce double-stranded circular DNA with an open,
relaxed conformation (rcDNA) (14, 21, 23). New cccDNA
molecules are then formed by the transport of the rcDNA molecules into
the nucleus and their conversion to cccDNA (26, 27). By the
time that an average of 10 to 20 cccDNA molecules have been formed,
sufficient levels of viral envelope proteins, particularly the large
envelope protein, preS, have accumulated to direct all rcDNA-containing
nucleocapsids into the pathway for enveloped virus assembly and
secretion. This process effectively prevents further production of
cccDNA as long as sufficient intracellular concentrations of preS
protein are maintained in the cell to direct nucleocapsids into the
virus assembly pathway (8, 9, 24, 25). The question of the
stability of the cccDNA molecules formed during this process is still
unresolved (3, 12, 15).
Little is known about the dynamic state of chronic hepadnavirus
infections. A high dynamic state would be one in which viral cccDNA
molecules are continually being replaced in the liver because of
metabolic instability or cell turnover. Conversely, a low dynamic state
would be characterized by a high degree of cccDNA stability and a long
hepatocellular lifetime, requiring little cccDNA replacement. Because
maintenance of the cccDNA pool in each infected cell is necessary for
the persistent state of the infection, the dynamics of the infection
determines the sensitivity of the persistently infected state of the
cell to inhibition of viral DNA synthesis. Inhibition of viral DNA
synthesis has been the major strategy for antiviral therapy of chronic
hepatitis B infection in humans.
In this report, we describe experiments that elucidate certain aspects
of the dynamic state of chronic infection by the duck hepatitis B
virus, DHBV. We measured the rate of replacement of a mutant strain of
DHBV bearing a partial replication defect with the wild-type DHBV
during three phases of infection: (i) the initial spread of infection,
(ii) growth of the fully infected liver, and (iii) the fully infected
adult liver. We showed that replacement was rapid during the spread of
infection but greatly reduced during growth of the liver and initially
absent in the adult liver, indicating a low dynamic state of viral
competition in the adult liver. Using experimentally determined values
for the relative rates of replication of the two viruses, we estimated
that the enrichment of wild-type virus could be accounted for by new
rounds of replication occurring exclusively in the newly synthesized
mass of the growing liver.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Animals.
One-day-old white Pekin ducklings were obtained
from Metzer Farms (Redlands, Calif.). Ducklings testing negative for
DHBV infection by dot hybridization were infected by intravenous
injection of 0.1 ml of a suspension of virus. Infected birds were
housed together, as previously described (28). Ducks were
euthanized for necropsy by injection of a sodium pentobarbital solution
(200 mg/kg of body weight).
Preparation of virus inocula.
DHBV-16 wild-type virus was
obtained from the culture medium of the chicken hepatoma cell line, LMH
(7), stably transformed with a plasmid expressing DHBV-16
(16). The DHBV-3 mutant, DR1-13, was obtained from the
culture medium of LMH cells transfected with a DR1-13 plasmid
expression vector (22). The medium was harvested at day 3 to
8 posttransfection and concentrated 50-fold from the culture fluids by
precipitation with 10% polyethylene glycol (PEG 8000), as previously
described (24). The virus titer in the concentrated stocks
was assayed by selective extraction of DNA from enveloped particles
(9) and Southern blot hybridization and compared with
standard plasmid DNAs on the same blot. Virus titers were expressed as
DHBV genomes. Inocula for injection were prepared by appropriate
dilution of the virus stocks in Leibowitz's (L15) medium (Gibco BRL).
Procedures used in the analysis of viral DNA replicative intermediates,
agarose gel electrophoresis, and blot hybridization were previously
published (8).
Analysis of viral DNA in the serum.
The level of viremia was
determined by quantitation of viral DNA in the serum by dot
hybridization and phosphorimage analysis. Serum (2 µl) was applied
directly to nylon membranes, denatured by brief treatment with 0.2 N
NaOH, and neutralized with 0.2 M Tris-HCl. DNA was detected on the
filter by hybridization with a 32P-labeled riboprobe
specific for the minus strand. For analysis of the viral genotype, DNA
was extracted directly from 50 µl of serum by digestion with pronase,
phenol extraction, and ethanol precipitation (28). The viral
DNA was dissolved in 15 µl of Tris-EDTA (TE) (10 mM Tris-HCl
[pH = 7.5], 1 mM EDTA), and 5 µl of the sample was then used
in a 50-µl PCR.
PCR and sequencing.
Amplification of the serum viral DNA was
carried out with a primer set corresponding to nucleotides 2492 to 2516 (biotinylated plus strand), and 2840 to 2818 (minus strand), according
the numbering of Mandart et al (13). The standard PCR buffer
contained DNA template; 200 µM (each) dATP, dGTP, dCTP, and TTP; 50 mM KCl; 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.3; 1.5 mM MgCl2; 0.02%
gelatin; and 38 pmol of each primer in a final volume of 50 µl, with
2.5 units of Taq DNA polymerase (Promega). Amplification was
carried out for 35 cycles of 94°C for 30 s, 58°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 45 s. The biotinylated PCR products (40 µl
total) were adsorbed with 20 µl of streptavidin-coated M-280
Dynabeads (DYNAL Corp.) suspended in a solution of 20 mM Tris-HCl [pH
8.0], 2 M NaCl, and 1 mM EDTA and washed two times with 50 µl of TE
with the help of a magnetic particle concentrator (DYNAL catalogue no.
120.04). The nonbiotinylated strand was released from the beads by
denaturation in 0.1 N NaOH (50 µl), the denaturing solution was
removed, and the beads were washed two times with 50 µl of TE. Washed
beads with specifically bound biotinylated plus-strand products were
used directly in sequencing reactions using a minus-strand primer
(nucleotides 2747 to 2729).
Determination of the ratio of wild-type to DR1-13 DNA.
The
ratio of wild-type to DR1-13 DNA in the serum samples was determined by
the ratio of PCR products derived from the respective templates, using
the sequence difference at nucleotide 2547 (C in the plus strand of the
wild type and G in DR1-13). This nucleotide difference is responsible
for the mutant phenotype of DR1-13 virus (22). Thus, in the
sequencing ladder consisting of minus strands, DR1-13 shows a C at
position 2547 where the wild-type nucleotide is G. Because the
wild-type sequence is compressed in the G lane in this region, we used
the intensity of the 2547C band as a measurement of the fraction of
DR1-13 sequence in the sample. The intensity of the 2547C band was
normalized to the combined intensity of the neighboring upstream C
bands at positions 2552 and 2551, since these two positions (as well as
all upstream positions) were the same in both viruses. The ratio of
2547C to the sum of 2552C and 2551C was determined for known mixtures
of wild-type and DR1-13 cloned DNAs and shown to be linearly
proportional to the fraction of DR1-13 DNA in the amplification
template (data not shown). Therefore, we used this ratio for each serum
virus sample to calculate the fraction of DR1-13 in the sample. The
fraction of the wild type (DHBV-16) was taken to be 1 minus the
fraction of DR1-13.
Primary hepatocyte cultures.
Primary duck hepatocyte (PDH)
cultures were prepared from ducklings approximately 1 week of age by
collagenase perfusion of the liver in situ, as previously described
(17). Nearly confluent cell layers in 60-mm standard tissue
culture dishes were exposed to virus for 24 h beginning 1 day
after plating, and the medium was changed daily. Cultures were
harvested for DNA extraction at 8 or 9 days postinfection. The cell
layers were washed once with a buffered saline solution containing 0.5 mM EDTA and stored at
80°C.
Extraction of cccDNA from PDHs.
Cell layers were lysed by
the addition of 0.4 ml of TE containing 0.2% (wt/vol) Nonidet P-40
(NP-40), and cell debris and nuclei were released from the plate by
scraping with a rubber policeman. The debris and nuclei were pelleted
by microcentrifugation for 1 min, and the pellet was resuspended in 0.2 ml of TE containing 0.2% NP-40. The nuclear suspension was lysed by
the addition of 0.2 ml of a solution containing 0.15 N NaOH and 6%
sodium dodecyl sulfate. The lysed nuclei were incubated at 37°C for
15 min to allow the cellular DNA to be irreversibly denatured. These
conditions, however, did not result in irreversible denaturation of
DHBV cccDNA. The alkaline solution was acidified with the addition of
0.1 ml of 3 M acetic acid adjusted to pH 5.0 with KOH, and the
potassium-dodecyl sulfate-protein complex, which contained most of the
denatured cellular DNA and protein-bound viral DNA, was removed by
microfuge centrifugation for 1 min. The supernatant was extracted once
with phenol to remove any remaining single-stranded or protein-bound DNA, and the cccDNA fraction was recovered by ethanol precipitation.
Extraction of DNA from enveloped virus particles in culture
fluids of PDHs.
Culture fluids from PDHs were clarified of cell
debris by low-speed centrifugation. The clarified supernatants were
adjusted to 10% vol/vol fetal bovine serum, sodium chloride (1.5 g/45
ml) and PEG 8000 (5 g/45 ml) were added, and the virus was allowed to
precipitate overnight at 4°C with gentle stirring. The PEG 8000-precipitable material was recovered by centrifugation at 2,000 × g for 20 min and dissolved in 1 ml of
HEPES-buffered saline, 2 mM HEPES [pH 7.45], 0.15 M NaCl) containing
2 mM CaCl2. A portion (0.4 ml) was adjusted to 75 mM with
Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), added to pronase (0.5 mg/ml), and incubated at
37°C for 1 h to degrade soluble proteins and nonenveloped viral
cores. Magnesium acetate was added to a final concentration of 6 mM,
DNase I (type II; Sigma) was added to a concentration of 100 µg/ml,
and the samples were digested for 30 min. EDTA (10 mM final
concentration) and sodium dodecyl sulfate (0.5% final concentration)
were added, and the samples were digested for an additional 30 min.
Viral DNA was recovered by phenol extraction and ethanol precipitation. Viral DNA was never recovered from control samples treated with NP-40
to dissociate enveloped virus prior to the addition of pronase (data
not shown).
Mathematical treatments. (i) Wild-type enrichment and replication
space.
In hepadnavirus infections, the vast majority of viral DNA
that is synthesized in the liver is secreted from the hepatocyte and
eliminated from the blood and therefore does not participate in further
replication. Only a small fraction that is converted to cccDNA for the
initiation of new rounds of infection or for maintenance of the cccDNA
pool is actually expressed in the liver. Therefore, the genotype of all
the virus produced by the infected liver is determined entirely by the
cccDNA pool. When two virus strains differing only in their replication
rates compete in the liver, the enrichment of one strain over the other
in the blood can occur only by changes in the pool of cccDNA, brought
about by new cccDNA synthesis. Thus, the enrichment in the blood is a
function of the relative rate at which one virus synthesizes new cccDNA
molecules from a parental cccDNA (the growth rate), and the number of
cycles, or generations, of cccDNA synthesis that has occurred. Each
generation of cccDNA synthesis contributes a fixed enrichment of one
virus over the other as well as an expansion of the total population of
cccDNA molecules.
In these experiments, we calculated the theoretical expansion of a
cccDNA population consisting of a mixture of wild-type virus and the
slower replicating mutant, DR1-13, from the enrichment of the wild-type
strain over the mutant in the blood that we observed. When the growth
of both strains follows first-order kinetics, the expansion of each
cccDNA population is described by the following expression:
|
(1)
|
where V(0) is the amount of cccDNA at time zero,
V(t) is the amount after time t, and k
is the first-order growth-rate constant. The ratio of the wild type
(VWT) to DR1-13 (VDR1-13)
at time t, divided by their ratio at time zero, here defined
as the enrichment (E), is
|
(2)
|
where kWT and
kDR1-13 are the first-order growth-rate
constants for the wild-type virus and for DR1-13, respectively. This equation can be solved for t, the time required for a
particular enrichment, E, to occur.
|
(3)
|
The total expansion of wild-type and DR1-13 cccDNA that is
required for enrichment E is given by combining equation 1 for VWT + VDR1-13
and equation 3:
|
(4)
|
where the relative growth rate, kREL, is
defined as kDR1-13/kWT.
The relative expansion, S, of the total cccDNA population is
|
(5)
|
where FWT and
FDR1-13 are the fractions of wild-type and
DR1-13, respectively, at t = 0. We define S
as the fractional increase in "replication space" (see Discussion).
(ii) Averaging.
As seen in equation 3, ln(E) is
linearly proportional to the number of generations of growth (growth
rate × time) in a mixed population of viruses. In describing the
average behavior in the group of birds at each time point, we averaged
the log E values to produce the logarithm of a value defined
as the geometric mean. The geometric mean represents the enrichment due
to the average number of generations of virus growth among various birds.
 |
RESULTS |
In previous studies, we have explored how strains of the avian
hepadnavirus, DHBV, compete with each other during chronic infection of
the liver. We showed that a cytopathic mutant of DHBV is at a severe
disadvantage during chronic infection in competition with the
noncytopathic wild-type virus (10, 11), and that under
certain circumstances, a precore-minus mutant of DHBV is enriched over
a wild-type virus (28). In this study, we determined the
rate at which one strain of DHBV could be enriched over a slower
replicating strain during chronic infection due to a growth-rate advantage. For this purpose, we established mixed infections of ducklings with a low-replication mutant of DHBV in competition with
wild-type DHBV.
Replication defect of the DHBV mutant, DR1-13.
The mutant,
DR1-13, kindly provided by Dan Loeb (McArdle Laboratory, University of
Wisconsin) is partially defective in plus-strand primer translocation,
due to a single nucleotide substitution of C
G at position 2547, one
nucleotide downstream of DR1. This defect results in enhanced
production of in situ-primed linear DNA at the expense of the circular
double-stranded DNA, the precursor to cccDNA. Production of functional
cccDNA is reduced accordingly. Nevertheless, the replication of DR1-13
is sufficiently rapid to cause chronic experimental infections after
inoculation into 3-day-old ducklings. The phenotype of this mutant has
been described in detail (22). The DR1-13 mutation does not
change the coding of the precore open reading frame.
Emergence of wild-type virus in mixed infections.
Twelve
ducklings were inoculated with 2 × 109 viral genomes
of a mixture of 1:100 (six birds) or 1:1,000 (six birds) wild-type and
DR1-13 viruses from transfected LMH cells. Five of six birds injected
with the 1:100 mixture and six of six birds injected with the 1:1,000
mixture developed a peak viremia between 4 and 10 days postinfection
and were studied for 72 and 224 days, respectively, the period covering
rapid growth to sexual maturity. Each duck was weighed periodically,
and blood was obtained for analysis of the genotype of the virus
population. Body and organ weights of laboratory-housed Pekin ducks at
necropsy, obtained in our laboratory over the last few years, were used
to infer a relationship between the total body mass of Pekin ducks at
different ages and their liver mass. This relationship is shown in Fig.
1. The average gain in total body mass
for the ducks used in this experiment and the calculated average
increase in liver mass are shown in Fig.
2.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Liver weight as a function of total body weight. Liver
and total body weights obtained from the necropsy of 34 white Pekin
ducks housed at the University of New Mexico HSC Animal Resource
Facility were plotted. The line plotted is a linear regression analysis
of the data points, performed with the Microsoft Excel Chart Function
tools. The average mature body weight of adult ducks was about 4 kg.
|
|

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Average body weights and calculated liver weights of the
infected ducks. The body weights ( ) for 11 ducks with mixed-virus
infections were obtained at the indicated times throughout the
experiment. The corresponding liver weights ( ) were calculated as a
fraction of the total body weight using the graph shown in Fig. 1.
|
|
All ducks remained viremic, as measured by dot hybridization,
throughout the period of study (data not shown). Viral DNA was
extracted from each serum sample and analyzed for the genotype
of the
circulating virus by PCR and direct sequencing. The fraction
of
wild-type virus in each sample for all ducks is shown in Fig.
3. By day 4 postinfection, wild-type
virus was readily detectable
in the blood of all birds, and the
fraction of wild-type virus
was greatly increased over that of the
inoculum. After day 4,
the fraction of wild-type virus in the blood
continued to rise
in most birds, but by 40 to 50 days postinfection,
this initial
rise was usually abated. However, further increases could
be seen
in five of six birds infected with the 1:1,000 mixture of
wild-type
and DR1-13 viruses, starting after day 100. The fraction of
wild-type
virus in individual birds was marked by significant
fluctuations
that occurred throughout the experiment. These
fluctuations were
not due to errors inherent in the assay, since
repeated assays
performed on the same serum sample showed a variance of
±5% of
the mean value (Fig.
4).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Percent wild type and enrichment for serum virus in 11 ducks with mixed-virus infections. Serum samples from each infected
duck were analyzed for the genotype ratio as described in Materials and
Methods. The percentage of wild-type virus ( ) and the log enrichment
of wild-type virus relative to the inoculum ( ) is shown for each
bird. (A) Five birds infected with 109 virus genomes of a
1:100 mixture of wild-type and DR1-13 viruses. (B) Six birds infected
with 109 virus genomes of a 1:1,000 mixture of wild-type
and DR1-13 viruses.
|
|

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Reproducibility of the sequencing assay for DR1-13/wild
type ratio. Serum (50 µl) from a coinfected duck was divided into six
portions, and the total DNA was extracted from each replicate sample
and subjected to PCR and direct sequencing. The relevant portions of
the G and C lanes are shown for each sample. The intensity of the
DR1-13-specific C band at position 2547 (arrow) was measured for each
sample and normalized to the combined intensities of the neighboring C
bands at positions 2551 and 2552. The normalized value was compared
with that obtained for a 1:1 mixture of DR1-13 and wild-type plasmid
templates (std) to obtain the proportion of DR1-13, which is indicated
as the percentage of DR1-13 below each pair of sample lanes.
|
|
To confirm that the DR1-13 genotype as detected in our assay retained
its replication defect, we tested the DR1-13 virus present
in late
serum samples from some of the ducks for its ability to
compete with
the wild type during outgrowth in a second passage
in ducklings. We
injected serum samples containing 10
8 genomes per ml into
2-day-old ducklings and assayed the viremic
sera for the presence of
the mutant genomes. The results of these
assays are shown in Table
1. No DR1-13 virus could be detected
in
the second-passage serum samples from any of these birds by
our assay,
indicating that the mutant virus in the serum samples
retained a
partial replication defect.
Treatment of data.
In spite of the fluctuations in the
fraction of wild-type virus in the blood of individual birds, a general
pattern of behavior in the data was apparent. In order to convert the
data into a form that quantitatively expressed the extent of wild-type
and DR1-13 virus replication in the liver, we calculated the
enrichment, E, of wild-type virus at each time point
relative to the inoculum. We defined E as the ratio of the
wild type to DR1-13 at each time point, divided by the same ratio at a
reference time point, i.e., the inoculum at day 0. E is
directly proportional to the relative increase in virus titer of the
two virus populations according to expansion with first-order kinetics,
and therefore log E would be a direct linear function of the
number of generations of replication of each virus. Figure 3 shows the
values of log E for each bird during the course of the experiment.
The enrichment plots illustrate the true extent of wild-type
replacement of DR1-13 during the initial period of spread of
infection
(about 100-fold enrichment between day 0 and 4), indicating
viral
growth through multiple generations, with each generation
contributing
a fixed amount of enrichment. After day 4, when the
livers were fully
infected, the enrichment of wild-type virus
appeared to be highly
restricted compared with that occurring
during the initial spread of
infection.
Fluctuations that occurred in individual birds throughout all phases of
enrichment did not occur with any obvious pattern.
The lack of a
pattern suggested that some factors affecting the
ratio of the two
viruses in the blood occurred in a manner that
was specific for each
bird, independently of the actual enrichment
or body weight. Since
these fluctuations tended to obscure any
underlying pattern of
enrichment, we attempted to cancel the effects
of independent variables
by averaging data from the same time
points among the entire group of
birds. Thus, the mean of the
log enrichment would reflect the common
pattern of virus growth
over time. This value, the log of the geometric
mean of the enrichments,
is plotted in Fig.
5, beginning at day 4 postinfection with
a
mean log enrichment of 2.18.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Mean log enrichment of wild-type virus and estimated
liver growth in all birds. The log enrichments over the inoculum,
depicted in Fig. 3, were averaged among all birds at each time point
and compared with the mean log estimated liver mass divided by the
estimated liver mass at the time of inoculation. The lines represent
separate linear regressions of the sequential data from three time
intervals, 0 to 45 days postinfection ( ), 45 to 101 days
postinfection ( ), and 101 to 235 days postinfection ( ).
|
|
This analysis suggested the presence of three apparent phases of virus
growth, as measured by enrichment, after the livers
were fully infected
at day 4. The first phase corresponded closely
with the phase of liver
growth, as calculated from the increase
in total body mass of each
bird, and may have been due to expansion
of the virus population into
the growing liver. This expansion
resulted in an approximately fourfold
mean enrichment of wild-type
virus. The second phase, during which no
enrichment was detected,
corresponded to the initial period of stable
liver mass, from
approximately day 40 to 100 postinfection. In this
phase of no
wild-type enrichment, the lack of new generations of virus
growth
may have been due to the lack of production of susceptible cells
for virus spread. The third phase of enrichment, resulting in
an
additional fourfold enrichment of the wild type, also occurred
during a
time of stable body weight, from which we inferred that
liver mass did
not increase. However, the livers harvested from
four of six ducks in
the experiment at 316 days postinfection
showed gross abnormalities
compared with the livers from five
ducks in the experiment that were
sacrificed at day 78 postinfection
(Table
2). The most striking change in these
livers was the replacement
of much of the liver parenchyma with amyloid
deposits associated
with gross changes in liver weight. In general,
amyloidosis was
not uniform throughout the liver, making it difficult
to estimate
the actual change in the total mass of hepatocytes. These
changes
may have been responsible for the third phase of enrichment by
providing the opportunity for new generations of virus growth.
The lack of wild-type enrichment during a period of stable liver mass,
beginning at day 39, suggested that new rounds of virus
infection and
cccDNA synthesis in the liver were highly restricted,
even though virus
particles were persistently produced. Lack of
new generations of cccDNA
synthesis might be due to the absence
of production of susceptible
cells for infection in the liver
and to the resistance of all the
existing infected cells to superinfection.
If new rounds of virus
replication were strictly dependent on
the production of susceptible
cells in the fully infected livers,
the theoretical expansion of the
cccDNA population required to
produce the observed enrichment should be
quantitatively similar
to the observed increase in liver mass. This
expansion can be
estimated if the relative growth rates of the two
viruses are
known. Therefore, we measured the growth rate of DR1-13
relative
to that of wild-type
virus.
Relative growth rate of DR1-13.
The growth defect of DR1-13
was measured as the relative rate of secretion of DR1-13 virions per
cccDNA molecule in infected primary duck hepatocytes, compared to that
of the wild type. These data were obtained using two approaches. In the
first approach, PDHs were infected with either wild-type or DR1-13
virus and incubated for 8 days postinfection. The medium was removed
from the cells daily and replaced by fresh medium. The amount of virus
secreted by the infected cells each day was measured through day 8 postinfection, and the amount of cccDNA for each plate of infected
cells was determined at day 8. These data were used to determine the
rate of virus production per cccDNA molecule for each virus (Fig.
6).

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
cccDNA and extracellular virus production by DR1-13- or
wild-type-infected PDHs. PDH cultures were infected for 24 h with
approximately 108 viral genomes of DHBV and incubated with
daily medium changes. At the end of 8 days, the cultures were
harvested, and cccDNA was extracted. The DNA for enveloped virus
particles was extracted from each day's medium. (A) Viral DNAs were
mixed with 300 pg of linearized DNA from plasmid pSPDHBV5.1(2X),
containing a head-to-tail dimer of the DHBV genome (std), and assayed
for viral DNA by agarose gel electrophoresis and blot hybridization.
Viral DNA extracted from the 24-h culture medium at the indicated days
for wild-type- and DR1-13-infected cells (virus) is seen in the top
panel, and cccDNA extracted at 8 days postinfection (ccc) is shown in
the bottom panel. The viral DNA yields were calculated by comparison of
the viral DNA bands to the internal standard bands by phosphorimage
analysis. Samples equivalent in the inoculum (in) of each plate of PDHs
were run in each analysis. Each cccDNA sample is that obtained from one
60-mm plate of PDHs, and each viral DNA sample loaded was that obtained
from a 16-ml 24-h culture medium (four plates of PDHs). The mean value
for the amount of cccDNA per each plate is indicated at the bottom of
panel A. (B) DNA from enveloped virus particles in the culture medium
over 8 days postinfection is plotted as the cumulative total DNA per
milliliter (4 ml per plate). The final slope of the curve indicates the
rate of virus release for wild-type- or DR1-13-infected cells. The
calculated relative rate of virus release of DR1-13-infected cells,
normalized to that of cccDNA, 0.69.
|
|
In a second approach, plates were infected by a mixture of both viruses
and incubated with daily medium changes. After 8 days,
the viral DNA in
the medium and the cccDNA in the cells was extracted,
and the ratio of
the two viruses was determined for each fraction
by PCR amplification
and direct sequencing (Fig.
7). Both
experiments
yielded similar results, i.e., the relative rate of
synthesis
of viral DNA from cccDNA by the DR1-13 mutant was 0.64, and
that
of the wild-type virus was 0.69. We used an average of these two
numbers (0.67) in the following calculations.

View larger version (74K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Enrichment of wild-type virus in coinfected PDHs.
Hepatocytes infected with 109 viral genomes of a mixture of
wild-type and DR1-13 viruses were incubated with daily medium changes.
At 9 days postinfection, the 24-h culture fluids were removed from each
plate, and DNA from enveloped virus particles was extracted. The cccDNA
was extracted from each corresponding plate of PDHs. The amount of
DR1-13 DNA relative to wild-type DNA was determined for each sample by
PCR and direct sequencing. The G and C lanes for each cccDNA (C) sample
and its corresponding virus (V) sample are shown. The amount of DR1-13
in each sample was determined, and these data were used to determine
the relative rate of DR1-13 virus production per cccDNA. The average
relative replication rate for seven matched samples is 0.64 ± 0.08.
|
|
Calculations of virus expansion.
We considered two models of
how new cccDNA synthesis from virus spreading into the growing liver
would be reflected in the serum virus produced by this new cccDNA (Fig.
8). In model 1, new infected hepatocytes
are derived by division of existing infected hepatocytes, resulting in
simple dilution of the intracellular viral DNA forms, including cccDNA.
Virus expansion would consist of a doubling of cccDNA in each progeny
nucleus, followed by a restoration of intracellular replicative
intermediate levels. We further assumed that cccDNA would be produced
by direct conversion of the preexisting double-stranded DNA of the
parental cell, including both linear and rcDNA. The majority of the
progeny cccDNA derived from linear DNA would not be competent for
further DNA synthesis, while that derived from rcDNA would be
replication competent, so the amount of viral DNA produced by the
DR1-13 cccDNA pool would be less than the amount produced by the
wild-type cccDNA pool. In a dividing cell infected by both viruses, the
enrichment of wild-type virus in the serum would reflect this defect
over one generation of viral DNA synthesis from cccDNA; that is, the ratio of DR1-13 to wild-type virus produced by the newly synthesized cccDNA in each progeny cell would be 0.67 of the ratio produced by the
original cccDNA in each progeny cell.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Two models for expansion of virus in the growing liver.
The two models differ in the origin of new liver cells during liver
growth or turnover. Model 1: infected liver cells divide, resulting in
a reduction of cccDNA copy number per nucleus in the progeny cells. New
cccDNA molecules (cccDNA*) are made directly from preexisting rcDNA
and linear DNA in the cytoplasm. The additional virus secreted in the
serum is derived from the new cccDNA molecules. Model 2: new uninfected
hepatocytes are derived from progenitor cells and are infected de novo
by rcDNA- and linear DNA-containing virus in the serum. New cccDNA
molecules (cccDNA*) derived from the infecting virus
constitute a new pool of cccDNA analogous to the cccDNA molecules
synthesized in model 1. rcDNA and linear DNA is synthesized in the
newly infected cells and is used for cccDNA amplification (cccDNA*).
Virus secreted in the serum is derived primarily from the amplified
cccDNA pool. The spread of infection as described in model 1 results in
the secretion of virus that is one generation removed from the previous
virus population. In model 2, virus released in the blood is two
generations removed from the previous virus population. The first and
second generations of virus from cccDNA are indicated as numbered
circles.
|
|
In model 2, new hepatocytes in the growing liver arise from a pool of
uninfected progenitor cells, and these new hepatocytes
are then
infected de novo by extracellular virus. In this case,
virus secreted
in the serum by these newly infected cells would
be derived from two
generations of double-stranded DNA synthesis
from cccDNA: the first
generation occurring during amplification
of new cccDNA derived from
the extracellular virus, and the second
generation occurring during
virus production from the amplified
pool, as indicated in Fig.
8. Thus,
the ratio of DR1-13 to wild-type
virus produced by the newly infected
cells would be (0.67)
2, or 0.45 of that produced by the
resident infected
cells.
Using 0.67 as the relative growth rate of DR1-13 in model 1, or 0.45 as
the rate in model 2, we calculated the expansion of
cccDNA that would
be required to produced the observed enrichments
for each time point
between day 4 postinfection and day 42, the
time of maximum growth of
the liver, according to equation 5 in
Materials and Methods. Assuming
that all virus spread during growth
was due to the division of
mixed-infection cells (model 1), the
virus expansion required for the
enrichment observed during growth
of the liver was two- to threefold
higher than the amount of liver
growth observed (Fig.
9A). In contrast, if all virus spread was
due to new cycles of infection of susceptible cells (model 2),
the
amount of virus expansion required was actually less than
the amount of
liver growth observed (Fig.
9B). Thus, the observed
expansion of liver
mass was intermediate between the values predicted
if either model
alone accounted for the entire amount of virus
expansion in the liver.
The relatively close correspondence in
the magnitude and the time of
virus expansion predicted by either
model to the increase in liver mass
lends support to the notion
that wild-type enrichment was dependent on
the production of new
hepatocytes.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 9.
Relative increase in replication space and liver mass.
The mean log increase in replication space and liver mass, normalized
to day 4 postinfection, is plotted versus the time postinfection. (A)
The calculations assume a relative growth rate for DR1-13 of 0.67 that
of wild-type virus (model 1; see text for details). (B) The calculated
replication space assumes a relative growth rate of
(0.67)2 = 0.45 for DR1-13 (model 2).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Sources of variation.
An unanticipated degree of fluctuation
in the fractions of wild-type virus in the serum was seen in the serial
samples from individual birds, as well between birds during the course
of this experiment. As previously mentioned, these fluctuations were
not inherent in the assay itself. We concluded that variation in the actual ratio of the two viruses in the blood occurred from week to
week. We do not know the source of this variation. Because the
wild-type virus was the DHBV-16 strain and the DR1-13 mutant was
derived from DHBV-3, it is possible that strain differences, independently of relative growth rates, caused the two populations of
virus to be susceptible to the influences of strain-specific factors.
For example, small differences in the two viral envelope proteins might
cause fluctuations in the ratios of circulating viruses in the blood,
independently of the ratio of the two strains in the liver, due to
differentials in the antibody response. Other scenarios are also
possible. The effects of fluctuations seemed to be successfully
subtracted by averaging of the data to produce an enrichment curve that
was subject to our simple interpretation. However, our interpretation
depends on the assumption that fluctuations in the serum were random
with respect to the actual enrichments in the livers.
Relationship between virus growth and enrichment during mixed
infection.
The enrichment of virus strains that compete for spread
to susceptible cells during an initial infection of the liver is
determined by their relative growth rates; i.e., faster replicating
viruses are expected to be enriched over slower replicating viruses.
Similarly, in a single cell simultaneously coinfected by two virus
strains, it is expected that the virus that replicates more rapidly
will be enriched over the slower replicating virus, since it would become more highly represented in the amplified pool of cccDNA. Once
the pool of cccDNA is established, further enrichment would not occur,
since the size of this pool is limited by inhibition of further cccDNA
synthesis. These predictions were supported by our previous results
showing that in vivo enrichment of wild-type virus over a variant with
a partial replication defect occurred rapidly during the spread of
infection, but the rate of enrichment was reduced by a factor of 8 to 9 once the liver was fully infected (28).
Because virus replication occurs according to quasi-first-order
kinetics, the enrichment of one virus strain over another
during growth
in the same environment can be calculated if the
relative growth rate
constants of the two virus strains are known.
In addition, the total
expansion of virus (in this case, the cccDNA
population) that is
required for this enrichment can be calculated
if the starting
fractions of the two virus strains are known.
The magnitude of this
expansion is related quantitatively to the
observed enrichment by
equation 5 in Materials and Methods. Using
this equation, we calculated
the virus expansion during any given
period by measuring the wild-type
enrichment in a representative
sample of the virus
population.
In chronic hepadnavirus infections, net virus expansion cannot occur
indefinitely. The maximum amount of virus, or viral cccDNA,
in the
liver is limited by (i) the number of hepatocytes that
can be infected
and (ii) the maximum number of cccDNA copies per
hepatocyte. In a fully
infected liver, new cccDNA synthesis is
prevented unless uninfected
cells are generated by liver growth
or cell turnover or unless existing
cccDNA molecules are lost
and replaced within the cell. Turnover of
cells or cccDNA thus
provides an opportunity for enrichment of one
virus strain over
another through competitive growth. In the absence of
other selective
factors, any enrichment signifies that an effective
expansion
of virus population has occurred through new generations of
cccDNA
synthesis, even if there is no net increase in the amount of
cccDNA
in the liver. The magnitude of this effective expansion can be
measured as changes in a property of the liver we define here
as
replication
space.
Replication space.
Replication space is the potential of the
liver to accommodate a replicating virus, in the case of
hepadnaviruses, cccDNA molecules or their equivalent. More precisely,
in an hepadnavirus infection, replication space may be thought of as
occurring in discrete units, each of which may or may not be occupied
by a cccDNA molecule. In this abstract concept of replication space, only one molecule of cccDNA may occupy each unit of space. In a growing
liver, the total number of units of replication space increases, while
during liver cell turnover, units of replication space are destroyed
and are replaced with new unoccupied units of replication space as the
liver regenerates. In effect, synthesis of a new molecule of cccDNA can
occur only if a unit of unoccupied space is available. The concept of
replication space allows us to analyze quantitatively the production of
new generations of virus without knowing whether this new virus is
formed by turnover of infected cells or by virus turnover inside the
infected cells. The production of replication space implies that a
corresponding dynamic state of virus replication, or cccDNA synthesis
in the case of hepadnaviruses, exists at some level in the infected tissue.
Replication space could be created in the liver by an increase in liver
mass, by hepatocyte turnover, and by cccDNA turnover.
However, any
replication space created that was not accessible
to both viruses would
not have been detected as enrichment in
our experiments, even though
new viral cccDNA synthesis may have
occurred. For example, turnover of
cccDNA within a hepatocyte
infected by a single virus genotype would
not allow competition
for the new space created if the cell could not
be superinfected.
Similarly, division of an hepatocyte infected by a
single virus
genotype would not allow competition from another virus if
the
progeny cells could not be superinfected. Superinfection of a
persistently infected cell has been reported to be inefficient
(
18); moreover, it is difficult to imagine how exogenous
virus
particles could compete with endogenous replicative intermediates
for the addition of new molecules to the nuclear pool of
cccDNA.
Replication space and liver growth.
The observed increase in
liver mass during the phase of liver growth was intermediate between
the increase in replication space predicted by two different simple
models for the origin of new liver cells. This result suggests that
normal liver growth may occur by a mixture of mechanisms. In addition,
either model can be complicated by the possibility of segregation of
the two viruses into two populations of hepatocytes or if cell division altered the stability of the virus in the dividing cells. Little is
known about the frequency or stability of dual infection at the
cellular level or how persistent infection may be perturbed by cell division.
However, these experiments suggest at least one aspect of the dynamic
state of DHBV infections, i.e., persistence of the infection
in the
quiescent liver is characterized by very little initiation
of new
rounds of exogenous infection. This implies that a variant
occurring in
a single cell in a persistently infected liver would
be unable to
spread throughout the liver because of a replication
advantage if
replication space were not created in the liver by
destruction of
cccDNA or cells. If these conclusions also apply
to the human liver,
the dependence of enrichment on processes
that create replication space
may explain the long lag period
that occurs before resistant mutants of
HBV emerge in patients
being treated with the antiviral nucleoside
analog lamivudine
(
2,
6,
29). In this case, the enrichment
of such mutants
can be viewed as a measure of the effectiveness of the
antiviral
therapy in eliminating cccDNA of the lamivudine-sensitive
virus
from the liver. More generally, any antiviral measures in which
resistant variants can occur would be predicted to result in the
emergence of such variants, accelerated in proportion to the
effectiveness
of the therapy in eliminating cccDNA and creating
unoccupied replication
space. Our experiments suggest that the
availability of replication
space is the limiting factor for enrichment
of growth
variants.
Replication space as a measure of cell turnover.
The apparent
low dynamic state of the hepadnaviral infection suggests that most
viral variants that emerge in the infected liver do so under conditions
of cell destruction, whether or not such destruction directly selects
for cells infected by the emerging mutant. Thus, a rapidly growing
variant may emerge as a predominant genotype only during periods of
acute inflammation and cell destruction, even if cells infected by the
variant are as equally susceptible to the inflammatory processes as
those infected by the resident virus. This effect can appear as a
correlation between exacerbation of liver disease and the emergence of
a viral variant and can lead to the erroneous conclusion that a
particular variant arising under those conditions is more pathogenic
because it grows more rapidly.
Such an effect may account for the late enrichment of the wild-type
virus, which is nonpathogenic, in five birds in this study
following 2 months of stable ratios of wild-type to mutant virus.
Thus, the
enrichment of a rapidly growing virus in the liver may
be used to
measure the extent of cell turnover during liver disease.
For example,
the geometric mean increase in replication space
between day 100 and
224 in our experiment was calculated to be
4- to 25-fold, depending on
our assumptions about the mechanism
of spread. This increase
corresponds to the equivalent of 2 to
4.6 doublings of the liver,
respectively, in a period of about
18 weeks. This amount of liver
growth would correspond to the
regeneration resulting from a hepatocyte
half-life of 63 or 27
days, respectively, during this
period.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Bai Hua Zhang and C. J. Ramey for excellent
technical assistance and W. S. Mason, Fox Chase Cancer Center, for
helpful discussions and for critical reading of the manuscript.
This work was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute,
no. CA42542.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, The University of New Mexico, 900 Camino de Salud, Albuquerque, NM 87131. Phone and fax: (505) 272-8896. E-mail: jsummer{at}unm.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Cattaneo, R.,
H. Will, and H. Schaller.
1984.
Hepatitis B virus transcription in the infected liver.
EMBO J.
3:2191-2196[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Chayama, K.,
Y. Suzuki,
M. Kobayashi,
M. Kobayashi,
A. Tsubota,
M. Hashimoto,
Y. Miyano,
H. Koike,
M. Kobayashi,
I. Koida,
Y. Arase,
S. Saitoh,
N. Murashima,
K. Ikeda, and H. Kumada.
1998.
Emergence and takeover of YMDD motif mutant hepatitis B virus during long-term lamivudine therapy and re-takeover by wild type after cessation of therapy.
Hepatology
27:1711-1716[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Civitico, G. M., and S. A. Locarnini.
1994.
The half-life of duck hepatitis B virus supercoiled DNA in congenitally infected primary hepatocyte cultures.
Virology
203:81-89[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Enders, G. H.,
D. Ganem, and H. Varmus.
1985.
Mapping the major transcripts of ground squirrel hepatitis virus: the presumptive template for reverse transcriptase is terminally redundant.
Cell
42:297-308[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Ganem, D.
1996.
Hepadnaviridae and their replication, p. 2703-2737.
In
B. N. Fields, D. M. Knipe, P. M. Howley, et al. (ed.), Fields Virology, 3rd ed. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, Pa.
|
| 6.
|
Genovesi, E. V.,
L. Lamb,
I. Medina,
D. Taylor,
M. Seifer,
S. Innaimo,
R. J. Colonno,
D. N. Standring, and J. M. Clark.
1998.
Efficacy of the carbocyclic 2'-deoxyguanosine nucleoside BMS-200475 in the woodchuck model of hepatitis B virus infection.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
42:3209-3217[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Kawaguchi, T.,
K. Nomura,
Y. Hirayama, and T. Kitagawa.
1987.
Establishment and characterization of a chicken hepatocellular carcinoma cell line LMH.
Cancer Res.
47:4460-4464[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Lenhoff, R., and J. Summers.
1994.
Construction of avian hepadnavirus variants with enhanced replication and cytopathicity in primary hepatocytes.
J. Virol.
68:5706-5713[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Lenhoff, R., and J. Summers.
1994.
Coordinate regulation of replication and virus assembly by the large envelope protein of an avian hepadnavirus.
J. Virol.
68:4565-4571[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Lenhoff, R. L.,
C. A. Luscombe, and J. Summers.
1999.
Acute liver injury following infection with a cytopathic duck hepatitis B virus.
Hepatology
29:563-571[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Lenhoff, R. L.,
C. A. Luscombe, and J. Summers.
1998.
Competition in vivo between a cytopathic variant and a wild type duck hepatitis B virus.
Virology
251:85-96[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Luscombe, C.,
J. Pedersen,
E. Uren, and S. Locarnini.
1996.
Long-term ganciclovir chemotherapy for congenital duck hepatitis B virus infection in vivo: effect on intrahepatic-viral DNA, RNA, and protein expression.
Hepatology
24:766-773[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Mandart, E.,
A. Kay, and F. Galibert.
1984.
Nucleotide sequence of a cloned duck hepatitis B virus genome: comparison with woodchuck and human hepatitis B virus sequences.
J. Virol.
49:782-792[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Mason, W. S.,
C. Aldrich,
J. Summers, and J. M. Taylor.
1982.
Asymmetric replication of duck hepatitis B virus DNA in liver cells (free minus strand DNA).
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
79:3997-4001[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Moraleda, G.,
J. Saputelli,
C. E. Aldrich,
D. Averett,
L. Condreay, and W. S. Mason.
1997.
Lack of effect of antiviral therapy in nondividing hepatocyte cultures on the closed circular DNA of woodchuck hepatitis virus.
J. Virol.
71:9392-9399[Abstract].
|
| 16.
|
Moraleda, G.,
T. T. Wu,
A. R. Jilbert,
C. E. Aldrich,
L. D. Condreay,
S. H. Larsen,
J. C. Tang,
J. M. Colacino, and W. S. Mason.
1993.
Inhibition of duck hepatitis B virus replication by hypericin.
Antivir. Res.
20:235-247[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Nassal, M., and H. Schaller.
1996.
Hepatitis B virus replication an update.
J. Viral Hepat.
3:217-226[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Protzer, U.,
M. Nassal,
P. W. Chiang,
M. Kirschfink, and H. Schaller.
1999.
Interferon gene transfer by a hepatitis B virus vector efficiently suppresses wild-type virus infection.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:10818-10823[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Pugh, J. C., and J. Summers.
1989.
Infection and uptake of duck hepatitis B virus by duck hepatocytes maintained in the presence of dimethyl sulfoxide.
Virology
172:564-572[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Ruiz-Opazo, N.,
P. R. Chakraborty, and D. A. Shafritz.
1982.
Evidence for supercoiled hepatitis B virus DNA in chimpanzee liver and serum Dane particles: possible implications in persistent HBV infection.
Cell
29:129-136[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Seeger, C.,
D. Ganem, and H. E. Varmus.
1986.
Biochemical and genetic evidence for the hepatitis B virus replication strategy.
Science
232:477-484[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Staprans, S.,
D. Loeb, and D. Ganem.
1991.
Mutations affecting hepadnavirus plus-strand synthesis dissociate primer cleavage from translocation and reveal the origin of linear viral DNA.
J. Virol.
65:1255-1262[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Summers, J., and W. S. Mason.
1982.
Replication of the genome of hepatitis B-like virus by reverse transcription of an RNA intermediate.
Cell
29:403-415[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Summers, J.,
P. Smith,
M. Huang, and M. Yu.
1991.
Regulatory and morphogenetic effects of mutations in the envelope proteins of an avian hepadnavirus.
J. Virol.
65:1310-1317[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Summers, J.,
P. Smith, and A. L. Horwich.
1990.
Hepadnaviral envelope proteins regulate amplification of covalently closed circular DNA.
J. Virol.
64:2819-2824[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Tuttleman, J.,
C. Pourcel, and J. Summers.
1986.
Formation of the pool of covalently closed circular viral DNA in hepadnavirus-infected cells.
Cell
47:451-460[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Wu, T. T.,
L. Coates,
C. E. Aldrich,
J. Summers, and W. S. Mason.
1990.
In hepatocytes infected with duck hepatitis B virus, the template for viral RNA synthesis is amplified by an intracellular pathway.
Virology
175:255-261[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Zhang, Y.-Y., and J. Summers.
1999.
Enrichment of a precore-minus mutant in mixed infections with duck hepatitis B virus.
J. Virol.
73:3616-3622[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Zhou, T.,
J. Saputelli,
C. E. Aldrich,
M. Deslauriers,
L. D. Condreay, and W. S. Mason.
1999.
Emergence of drug-resistant populations of woodchuck hepatitis virus in woodchucks treated with the antiviral nucleoside lamivudine.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
43:1947-1954[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Journal of Virology, June 2000, p. 5257-5265, Vol. 74, No. 11
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Starkey, J. L., Chiari, E. F., Isom, H. C.
(2009). Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-specific short hairpin RNA is capable of reducing the formation of HBV covalently closed circular (CCC) DNA but has no effect on established CCC DNA in vitro. J. Gen. Virol.
90: 115-126
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Murray, J. M., Wieland, S. F., Purcell, R. H., Chisari, F. V.
(2005). Dynamics of hepatitis B virus clearance in chimpanzees. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
102: 17780-17785
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Anderson, A. L., Banks, K. E., Pontoglio, M., Yaniv, M., McLachlan, A.
(2005). Alpha/Beta Interferon Differentially Modulates the Clearance of Cytoplasmic Encapsidated Replication Intermediates and Nuclear Covalently Closed Circular Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) DNA from the Livers of Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 1{alpha}-Null HBV Transgenic Mice. J. Virol.
79: 11045-11052
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhang, Y.-Y., Theele, D. P., Summers, J.
(2005). Age-Related Differences in Amplification of Covalently Closed Circular DNA at Early Times after Duck Hepatitis B Virus Infection of Ducks. J. Virol.
79: 9896-9903
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Walters, K.-A., Joyce, M. A., Addison, W. R., Fischer, K. P., Tyrrell, D. L. J.
(2004). Superinfection Exclusion in Duck Hepatitis B Virus Infection Is Mediated by the Large Surface Antigen. J. Virol.
78: 7925-7937
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wieland, S. F., Spangenberg, H. C., Thimme, R., Purcell, R. H., Chisari, F. V.
(2004). Expansion and contraction of the hepatitis B virus transcriptional template in infected chimpanzees. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
101: 2129-2134
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhang, Y.-Y., Summers, J.
(2004). Rapid Production of Neutralizing Antibody Leads to Transient Hepadnavirus Infection. J. Virol.
78: 1195-1201
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Habig, J. W., Loeb, D. D.
(2003). The Conformation of the 3' End of the Minus-Strand DNA Makes Multiple Contributions to Template Switches during Plus-Strand DNA Synthesis of Duck Hepatitis B Virus. J. Virol.
77: 12401-12411
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhang, Y.-Y., Zhang, B.-H., Theele, D., Litwin, S., Toll, E., Summers, J.
(2003). Single-cell analysis of covalently closed circular DNA copy numbers in a hepadnavirus-infected liver. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
100: 12372-12377
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yang, P. L., Althage, A., Chung, J., Chisari, F. V.
(2002). Hydrodynamic injection of viral DNA: A mouse model of acute hepatitis B virus infection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
99: 13825-13830
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Addison, W. R., Walters, K.-A., Wong, W. W. S., Wilson, J. S., Madej, D., Jewell, L. D., Tyrrell, D. L. J.
(2002). Half-Life of the Duck Hepatitis B Virus Covalently Closed Circular DNA Pool In Vivo following Inhibition of Viral Replication. J. Virol.
76: 6356-6363
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Habig, J. W., Loeb, D. D.
(2002). Small DNA Hairpin Negatively Regulates In Situ Priming during Duck Hepatitis B Virus Reverse Transcription. J. Virol.
76: 980-989
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yamamoto, T., Litwin, S., Zhou, T., Zhu, Y., Condreay, L., Furman, P., Mason, W. S.
(2002). Mutations of the Woodchuck Hepatitis Virus Polymerase Gene That Confer Resistance to Lamivudine and 2'-Fluoro-5-Methyl-{beta}-L-Arabinofuranosyluracil. J. Virol.
76: 1213-1223
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Pult, I., Abbott, N., Zhang, Y.-Y., Summers, J.
(2001). Frequency of Spontaneous Mutations in an Avian Hepadnavirus Infection. J. Virol.
75: 9623-9632
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Loeb, D. D., Tian, R.
(2001). Mutations That Increase In Situ Priming Also Decrease Circularization for Duck Hepatitis B Virus. J. Virol.
75: 6492-6497
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Raney, A. K., Eggers, C. M., Kline, E. F., Guidotti, L. G., Pontoglio, M., Yaniv, M., McLachlan, A.
(2001). Nuclear Covalently Closed Circular Viral Genomic DNA in the Liver of Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 1{alpha}-Null Hepatitis B Virus Transgenic Mice. J. Virol.
75: 2900-2911
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Breiner, K. M., Urban, S., Glass, B., Schaller, H.
(2001). Envelope Protein-Mediated Down-Regulation of Hepatitis B Virus Receptor in Infected Hepatocytes. J. Virol.
75: 143-150
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhu, Y., Yamamoto, T., Cullen, J., Saputelli, J., Aldrich, C. E., Miller, D. S., Litwin, S., Furman, P. A., Jilbert, A. R., Mason, W. S.
(2001). Kinetics of Hepadnavirus Loss from the Liver during Inhibition of Viral DNA Synthesis. J. Virol.
75: 311-322
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Marée, A. F. M., Keulen, W., Boucher, C. A. B., De Boer, R. J.
(2000). Estimating Relative Fitness in Viral Competition Experiments. J. Virol.
74: 11067-11072
[Abstract]
[Full Text]