Table 2.
Virus | Outcome of cell culture passage |
---|---|
Sin Nombre hantavirus | Vero-passaged virus is completely attenuated in NHPs, whereas virus propagated in deer mice causes severe disease (Safronetz et al., 2013). |
Puumala hantavirus | Virus passaged in the reservoir (bank vole) causes disease in NHPs, but virus passaged in Vero cells does not (Klingstrom et al., 2002). |
Ebola virus | Accumulation of adenosine residues in the GP gene editing site upon passage in Vero cells leads to attenuation in guinea pigs (Volchkova et al., 2011). |
Measles virus | Cell culture adapted viruses lose pathogenicity in vivo due to a loss in interferon antagonism (Bankamp et al., 2008). |
Passage in Vero cells results in a change in entry receptor usage and a decrease in pathogenicity in vivo (Dörig et al., 1993). |
|
Foot and mouth disease virus |
Passage in culture results in a receptor switch between αvβ3 integrin and heparan sulfate (Martinez et al., 1997). |
Sindbis virus | Virus grown on mosquito cells demonstrated increased infectiousness for human dendritic cells when compared to virus grown on Chinese hamster cells (Klimstra et al., 2003). |
Rift Valley fever virus | Virus passaged on mosquito cells retains virulence, whereas when the virus is passaged on Vero cells, in vivo virulence is lost (Weingartl et al., 2014b). |