{"title":"将经典抗病毒因子重新分配为原病毒效应器","authors":"Cason R King , Andrew Mehle","doi":"10.1016/j.coviro.2022.101271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Under constant barrage by viruses<span><span>, hosts have evolved a plethora of antiviral effectors and defense mechanisms. To survive, viruses must adapt to evade or subvert these defenses while still capturing cellular resources to fuel their replication cycles. Large-scale studies of the antiviral activities of cellular proteins and processes have shown that different viruses are controlled by distinct subsets of antiviral genes. The remaining antiviral genes are either ineffective in controlling infection, or in some cases, actually promote infection. In these cases, classically defined antiviral factors are retasked by viruses to enhance viral replication. This creates a more nuanced picture revealing the contextual nature of antiviral activity. The same protein can exert different effects on replication, depending on multiple factors, including the host, the target cells, and the specific virus infecting it. Here, we review numerous examples of viruses hijacking canonically </span>antiviral proteins<span> and retasking them for proviral purposes.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":11082,"journal":{"name":"Current opinion in virology","volume":"56 ","pages":"Article 101271"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retasking of canonical antiviral factors into proviral effectors\",\"authors\":\"Cason R King , Andrew Mehle\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.coviro.2022.101271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Under constant barrage by viruses<span><span>, hosts have evolved a plethora of antiviral effectors and defense mechanisms. To survive, viruses must adapt to evade or subvert these defenses while still capturing cellular resources to fuel their replication cycles. Large-scale studies of the antiviral activities of cellular proteins and processes have shown that different viruses are controlled by distinct subsets of antiviral genes. The remaining antiviral genes are either ineffective in controlling infection, or in some cases, actually promote infection. In these cases, classically defined antiviral factors are retasked by viruses to enhance viral replication. This creates a more nuanced picture revealing the contextual nature of antiviral activity. The same protein can exert different effects on replication, depending on multiple factors, including the host, the target cells, and the specific virus infecting it. Here, we review numerous examples of viruses hijacking canonically </span>antiviral proteins<span> and retasking them for proviral purposes.</span></span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current opinion in virology\",\"volume\":\"56 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current opinion in virology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879625722000827\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VIROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current opinion in virology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879625722000827","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Retasking of canonical antiviral factors into proviral effectors
Under constant barrage by viruses, hosts have evolved a plethora of antiviral effectors and defense mechanisms. To survive, viruses must adapt to evade or subvert these defenses while still capturing cellular resources to fuel their replication cycles. Large-scale studies of the antiviral activities of cellular proteins and processes have shown that different viruses are controlled by distinct subsets of antiviral genes. The remaining antiviral genes are either ineffective in controlling infection, or in some cases, actually promote infection. In these cases, classically defined antiviral factors are retasked by viruses to enhance viral replication. This creates a more nuanced picture revealing the contextual nature of antiviral activity. The same protein can exert different effects on replication, depending on multiple factors, including the host, the target cells, and the specific virus infecting it. Here, we review numerous examples of viruses hijacking canonically antiviral proteins and retasking them for proviral purposes.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Virology (COVIRO) is a systematic review journal that aims to provide specialists with a unique and educational platform to keep up to date with the expanding volume of information published in the field of virology. It publishes 6 issues per year covering the following 11 sections, each of which is reviewed once a year: Emerging viruses: interspecies transmission; Viral immunology; Viral pathogenesis; Preventive and therapeutic vaccines; Antiviral strategies; Virus structure and expression; Animal models for viral diseases; Engineering for viral resistance; Viruses and cancer; Virus vector interactions. There is also a section that changes every year to reflect hot topics in the field.