摘要
目的研究CA16和EV71在4种细胞系中细胞病变作用的差异.方法随机选择滴度相似的EV71轻症、EV71重症和CA16轻症毒株各1株,分别感染RD、Vero、U251和SY5Y细胞,比较3株病毒在细胞病变的形态及程度、感染后的细胞存活率、病毒在细胞中的复制水平和病毒所致凋亡蛋白相关mRNA的表达水平等方面的差别.结果3株病毒的感染在同一细胞系中表现相似.镜下从形态学上无法对三株病毒加以区别;感染后病毒载量均表现为从高到低依次为Vero、RD、SY5Y细胞到U251细胞的顺序;病毒感染后细胞存活率的顺序与细胞内复制水平与相反,两者之间存在类似负相关的趋势.3株病毒的感染在3种细胞系中均有凋亡蛋白caspase-8、9和3相关mRNA的表达,提示可能3种细胞系中凋亡启动的途径相同.结论细胞水平的感染,提示这两种病毒感染所致临床表现的差异性并非单独由病毒所决定.
Objective To investigate the differences ofenterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CA16) infections in different cell lines.Methods Three virus strains with similar titers were used.Vero,RD,U251 and SY5Y cells were infected with these three selected virus strains,respectively.The pathogenicities of EV71 and CA 16 strains in the four types of cells were compared according to characterizes of infected cells in aspects of cell viability,cytopathic effect (CPE),virus loading and mRNA expression ofapoptins.Results Pathogenicities of the three strains within same cell line were similar.The three virus strains cannot be distinguished by their CPEs under microscopy.All of viral loads induced by the three viral infections in Vero cell were the highest one in the four cell lines,followed by RD,SY5Y and U251 cell.The cell viability rates had a trend of negative relationship with virus load,therefore,the order of cell viabilities after viral infections was in contrast to the viral loads.Infections by all of the three virus strains had caused mRNA expression of caspase-8,9 and 3 in the three host cells.The apoptotic pathways in three host cells caused by the three strains had no difference.Conclusions Comparison of infections induced by EV71 and CA16 in vitro suggested that the differences in clinical outcomes of the two viral infections are not determined solely by the virus.
出处
《国际病毒学杂志》
2017年第4期227-234,共8页
International Journal of Virology