Comparative assessment of the replication efficiency of dengue, yellow fever, and chikungunya arboviruses in some insect and mammalian cell lines.

INTRODUCTION: Insect cell cultures play an essential role in understanding arboviral replication. However, the replicative efficiency of some of these viruses such as dengue (DENV), yellow fever (YFV), and chikungunya (CHIKV) in a new cellular substrate (Lulo) and in the other two recognized cell lines has not been comparatively assessed. METHODS: Vero, C6/36, and Lulo cell lines were infected with DENV, YFV, and CHIKV. The viral progeny was quantified through plaque assays and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, while for DENV2, the findings were confirmed by immunofluorescence antibody assay. RESULTS: The higher DENV2 titer (from multiplicity of infection 0.001) was obtained on day four post-infection in C6/36 and on day six in Vero cells, while the Lulo cell line was almost impossible to infect under the same conditions. However, C6/36 showed the highest values of viral RNA production compared to Vero cells, while the quantification of the viral RNA in Lulo cells showed high levels of viral genomes, which had no correlation to the infectious viral particles. CONCLUSIONS: C6/36 was the most efficient cell line in the alpha and flavivirus production, followed by Vero cells. Thus, Lulo cells may be a useful substrate to study the mechanisms by which cells evade viral replication.

Comparative assessment of the replication efficiency of dengue, yellow fever, and chikungunya arboviruses in some insect and mammalian cell lines

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Insect cell cultures play an essential role in understanding arboviral replication. However, the replicative efficiency of some of these viruses such as dengue (DENV), yellow fever (YFV), and chikungunya (CHIKV) in a new cellular substrate (Lulo) and in the other two recognized cell lines has not been comparatively assessed. METHODS: Vero, C6/36, and Lulo cell lines were infected with DENV, YFV, and CHIKV. The viral progeny was quantified through plaque assays and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, while for DENV2, the findings were confirmed by immunofluorescence antibody assay. RESULTS: The higher DENV2 titer (from multiplicity of infection 0.001) was obtained on day four post-infection in C6/36 and on day six in Vero cells, while the Lulo cell line was almost impossible to infect under the same conditions. However, C6/36 showed the highest values of viral RNA production compared to Vero cells, while the quantification of the viral RNA in Lulo cells showed high levels of viral genomes, which had no correlation to the infectious viral particles. CONCLUSIONS: C6/36 was the most efficient cell line in the alpha and flavivirus production, followed by Vero cells. Thus, Lulo cells may be a useful substrate to study the mechanisms by which cells evade viral replication.

Historical Perspective: What Constitutes Discovery (of a New Virus)?

A historic review of the discovery of new viruses leads to reminders of traditions that have evolved over 118 years. One such tradition gives credit for the discovery of a virus to the investigator(s) who not only carried out the seminal experiments but also correctly interpreted the findings (within the technological context of the day). Early on, ultrafiltration played a unique role in "proving" that an infectious agent was a virus, as did a failure to find any microscopically visible agent, failure to show replication of the agent in the absence of viable cells, thermolability of the agent, and demonstration of a specific immune response to the agent so as to rule out duplicates and close variants. More difficult was "proving" that the new virus was the etiologic agent of the disease ("proof of causation")-for good reasons this matter has been revisited several times over the years as technologies and perspectives have changed. One tradition is that the discoverers get to name their discovery, their new virus (unless some grievous convention has been broken)-the stability of these virus names has been a way to honor the discoverer(s) over the long term. Several vignettes have been chosen to illustrate several difficulties in holding to the traditions (vignettes chosen include vaccinia and variola viruses, yellow fever virus, and influenza viruses. Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus, Murray Valley encephalitis virus, human immunodeficiency virus 1, Sin Nombre virus, and Ebola virus). Each suggests lessons for the future. One way to assure that discoveries are forever linked with discoverers would be a permanent archive in one of the universal virus databases that have been constructed for other purposes. However, no current database seems ideal-perhaps members of the global community of virologists will have an ideal solution.

Impact of yellow fever on the developing world.

Yellow fever (YF) has remained a disease of public health importance since it was first described in the fifteenth century. At different periods in human history, YF has caused untold hardship and indescribable misery among populations in the Americas, Europe, and Africa. It brought economic disaster in its wake, constituting a stumbling block to development. Yellow fever is an arboviral infection with three epidemiological transmission cycles between monkeys, mosquitoes, and humans. It is an acute infectious disease characterized by sudden onset, with two phases of development separated by a short period of remission. The clinical spectrum of YF varies from a very mild, nonspecific, febrile illness to a fulminating, sometimes fatal disease with pathognomonic features. In severe cases, jaundice and bleeding diathesis with hepatorenal involvement are common. The fatality rate of severe YF is 50% or higher. Despite landmark achievements in the understanding of the epidemiology of YF and the availability of a safe, efficacious vaccine, YF remains a major public health problem in both Africa and South America, where annually the disease affects an estimated 200,000 persons, causing an estimated 30,000 deaths. Since the 1980s epidemics of YF in Africa have affected predominantly children under the age of 15 years. The failure to control YF arises from a misapplication of public health strategies and insufficient political commitment by governments in YF endemic areas, especially in Africa, to control the disease.