Skip to main content
Infection and Immunity logoLink to Infection and Immunity
. 1974 Apr;9(4):702–707. doi: 10.1128/iai.9.4.702-707.1974

Cytomegalovirus Interference In Vitro

Lowell A Glasgow 1
PMCID: PMC414869  PMID: 4362773

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) was shown to induce a state of viral interference in human embryo fibroblast cultures (HEF). This interference was characterized by: (i) requirement for infectious virus; (ii) a latent period (48 to 96 h) for establishment of the interference; (iii) activity against a representative group of heterologous viruses; (iv) loss of interfering activity when challenged with a high multiplicity of infection; (v) lack of effect on adsorption of virus; (vi) mediation by a soluble product of CMV-cell interaction that it is not blocked by anti-CMV antibody; and (vii) absence of detectable interferon, although the soluble mediator shares a number of characteristics with interferon. This state of interference in HEF cultures could be simulated by extended exposure to subdetectable levels of human interferon. It is postulated that CMV induced the production of a soluble, interferon-like mediator of viral interference and that continuous exposure of the HEF culture to this mediator resulted in the development of resistance to a number of heterologous viruses.

Full text

PDF
702

Images in this article

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Baron S., Levy H. B. Interferon. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1966;20:291–318. doi: 10.1146/annurev.mi.20.100166.001451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. De Clercq E., Merigan T. C. Current concepts of interferon and interferon induction. Annu Rev Med. 1970;21:17–46. doi: 10.1146/annurev.me.21.020170.000313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Glasgow L. A., Hanshaw J. B., Merigan T. C., Petralli J. K. Interferon and cytomegalovirus in vivo and in vitro. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1967 Jul;125(3):843–849. doi: 10.3181/00379727-125-32220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. HO M. Kinetic considerations of the inhibitory action of an interferon produced in chick cultures infected with Sindbis virus. Virology. 1962 Jun;17:262–275. doi: 10.1016/0042-6822(62)90116-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Marcus P. I., Carver D. H. Intrinsic interference: a new type of viral interference. J Virol. 1967 Apr;1(2):334–343. doi: 10.1128/jvi.1.2.334-343.1967. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Osborn J. E., Medearis D. N., Jr Studies of relationship between mouse cytomegalovirus and interferon. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1966 Mar;121(3):819–824. doi: 10.3181/00379727-121-30897. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Osborn J. E., Medearis D. N., Jr Suppression of interferon and antibody and multiplication of Newcastle disease virus in cytomegalovirus infected mice. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1967 Feb;124(2):347–353. doi: 10.3181/00379727-124-31740. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Seto D. S., Carver D. H. Interaction between cytomegalovirus and Newcastle disease virus as mediated by intrinsic interference. J Virol. 1969 Jul;4(1):12–14. doi: 10.1128/jvi.4.1.12-14.1969. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Infection and Immunity are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES