Structure and Function of Glycoprotein D of Herpes Simplex Virus

The domains of glycoprotein D required to block apoptosis depend on whether glycoprotein D is present in the virions carrying herpes simplex virus 1 genome lacking the gene encoding the glycoprotein

An earlier report showed that viruses lacking the open reading frames encoding glycoproteins J and D but containing the glycoprotein D in their envelopes (gD-/+ stocks) and viruses lacking both the open reading frames and the glycoproteins in their envelopes (gD-/- stocks) induce apoptosis (G. Zhou, V. Galvan, G. Campadelli-Fiume, and B. Roizman, J. Virol. 74:11782-11791, 2000). Furthermore, apoptosis was blocked by delivery in trans of genes expressing glycoprotein D or J. Whereas gD-/- stocks attach but cannot initiate productive infection, gD-/+ stocks infect cells and produce gD-/- progeny virus. The difference in the infectivity of these two stocks suggested the possibility that the requirements for blocking apoptosis may be different. To test this hypothesis, we cloned into baculoviruses the entire wild-type glycoprotein D (Bac-gD-WT), the ectodomain only (Bac-gD-A), the ectodomain and the transmembrane domain (Bac-gD-B), the ectodomain and the cytoplasmic domain without the transmembrane domain (Bac-gD-C), or the transmembrane domain and the carboxyl-terminal cytoplasmic domain (Bac-gD-D). We report the following. Apoptosis induced by gD-/+ stocks was blocked by delivery in trans of recombinant baculovirus Bac-gD-WT, Bac-gD-A, Bac-gD-B, or Bac-gD-C but not of Bac-gD. Apoptosis induced by gD-/- stocks was blocked by Bac-gD-WT or by a mixture of Bac-gD-B and Bac-gD-D but not by any baculoviruses expressing truncated glycoprotein D alone or by the mixture of Bac-gD-A and Bac-gD-D. We conclude that the requirements to block apoptosis induced by the two virus stocks are different. The gD ectodomain is sufficient to block apoptosis induced by gD, whereas both the ectodomain and the cytoplasmic domain are required to block apoptosis induced by gD-/- stocks. The results indicate that in the case of gD-/- stocks, the transmembrane domain is required either to deliver the ectodomain to the appropriate intracellular compartment or to form multimeric constructs which virtually reconstitute gD through the interaction of transmembrane domains.

Examination of the kinetics of herpes simplex virus glycoprotein D binding to the herpesvirus entry mediator, using surface plasmon resonance

Previously, we showed that truncated soluble forms of herpes simplex virus (HSV) glycoprotein D (gDt) bound directly to a truncated soluble form of the herpesvirus entry mediator (HveAt, formerly HVEMt), a cellular receptor for HSV. The purpose of the present study was to determine the affinity of gDt for HveAt by surface plasmon resonance and to compare and contrast the kinetics of an expanded panel of gDt variants in binding to HveAt in an effort to better understand the mechanism of receptor binding and virus entry. Both HveAt and gDt are dimers in solution and interact with a 2:1 stoichiometry. With HveAt, gD1(306t) (from the KOS strain of HSV-1) had a dissociation constant (KD) of 3.2 x 10(-6) M and gD2(306t) had a KD of 1.5 x 10(-6) M. The interaction between gDt and HveAt fits a 1:1 Langmuir binding model, i.e., two dimers of HveAt may act as one binding unit to interact with one dimer of gDt as the second binding unit. A gD variant lacking all signals for N-linked oligosaccharides had an affinity for HveAt similar to that of gD1(306t). A variant lacking the bond from cysteine 1 to cysteine 5 had an affinity for HveAt that did not differ from that of the wild type. However, variants with double cysteine mutations that eliminated either of the other two disulfide bonds showed decreased affinity for HveAt. This result suggests that two of the three disulfide bonds of gD are important for receptor binding. Four nonfunctional gDt variants, each representing one functional domain of gD, were also studied. Mutations in functional regions I and II drastically decreased the affinity of gDt for HveAt. Surprisingly, a variant with an insertion in functional region III had a wild-type level of affinity for HveAt, suggesting that this domain may function in virus entry at a step other than receptor binding. A variant with a deletion in functional region IV [gD1(Delta290-299t)] exhibited a 100-fold enhancement in affinity for HveAt (KD = 3.3 x 10(-8) M) due mainly to a 40-fold increase in its kinetic on rate. This agrees with the results of other studies showing the enhanced ability of gD1(Delta290-299t) to block infection. Interestingly, all the variants with decreased affinities for HveAt exhibited decreased kinetic on rates but only minor changes in their kinetic off rates. The results suggest that once the complex between gDt and HveAt forms, its stability is unaffected by a variety of changes in gD.

Monoclonal antibodies to distinct sites on herpes simplex virus (HSV) glycoprotein D block HSV binding to HVEM

HVEM (for herpesvirus entry mediator) is a member of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily and mediates entry of many strains of herpes simplex virus (HSV) into normally nonpermissive Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. We used sucrose density centrifugation to demonstrate that purified HSV-1 KOS virions bind directly to a soluble, truncated form of HVEM (HVEMt) in the absence of any other cell-associated components. Therefore, HVEM mediates HSV entry by serving as a receptor for the virus. We previously showed that soluble, truncated forms of HSV glycoprotein D (gDt) bind to HVEMt in vitro. Here we show that antibodies specific for gD, but not the other entry glycoproteins gB, gC, or the gH/gL complex, completely block HSV binding to HVEM. Thus, virion gD is the principal mediator of HSV binding to HVEM. To map sites on virion gD which are necessary for its interaction with HVEM, we preincubated virions with gD-specific monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). MAbs that recognize antigenic sites Ib and VII of gD were the only MAbs which blocked the HSV-HVEM interaction. MAbs from these two groups failed to coprecipitate HVEMt in the presence of soluble gDt, whereas the other anti-gD MAbs coprecipitated HVEMt and gDt. Previous mapping data indicated that site VII includes amino acids 11 to 19 and site Ib includes 222 to 252. The current experiments indicate that these sites contain residues important for HSV binding to HVEM. Group Ib and VII MAbs also blocked HSV entry into HVEM-expressing CHO cells. These results suggest that the mechanism of neutralization by these MAbs is via interference with the interaction between gD in the virus and HVEM on the cell. Group Ia and II MAbs failed to block HSV binding to HVEM yet still neutralized HVEM-mediated entry, suggesting that these MAbs block entry at a step other than HVEM binding.

Glycoprotein D of herpes simplex virus (HSV) binds directly to HVEM, a member of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily and a mediator of HSV entry

Glycoprotein D (gD) is a structural component of the herpes simplex virus (HSV) envelope which is essential for virus entry into host cells. Chinese hamster ovary (CHO-K1) cells are one of the few cell types which are nonpermissive for the entry of many HSV strains. However, when these cells are transformed with the gene for the herpesvirus entry mediator (HVEM), the resulting cells, CHO-HVEM12, are permissive for many HSV strains, such as HSV-1(KOS). By virtue of its four cysteine-rich pseudorepeats, HVEM is a member of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily of proteins. Recombinant forms of gD and HVEM, gD-1(306t) and HVEM(200t), respectively, were used to demonstrate a specific physical interaction between these two proteins. This interaction was dependent on native gD conformation but independent of its N-linked oligosaccharides, as expected from previous structure-function studies. Recombinant forms of gD derived from HSV-1(KOS)rid1 and HSV-1(ANG) did not bind to HVEM(200t), explaining the inability of these viruses to infect CHO-HVEM12 cells. A variant gD protein, gD-1(delta290-299t), showed enhanced binding to HVEM(200t) relative to the binding of gD-1(306t). Competition studies showed that gD-1(delta290-299t) and gD-1(306t) bound to the same region of HVEM(200t), suggesting that the differences in binding to HVEM are due to differences in affinity. These differences were also reflected in the ability of gD-1(delta290-299t) but not gD-1(306t) to block HSV type 1 infection of CHO-HVEM12 cells. By gel filtration chromatography, the complex between gD-1(delta290-299t) and HVEM(200t) had a molecular mass of 113 kDa and a molar ratio of 1:2. We conclude that HVEM interacts directly with gD, suggesting that HVEM is a receptor for virion gD and that the interaction between these proteins is a step in HSV entry into HVEM-expressing cells.