Despite major progress in elucidating how Tetherin interacts with retroviral pathogens
in vitro, the demonstration of Tetherin as a potent innate restriction factor
in vivo remains controversial. In fact, several studies suggested that Tetherin could facilitate cell-to-cell virus spread
[8]–
[10]. In this study, we identified a
Tetherin SNP in NZW mice that significantly enhanced Tetherin cell-surface expression, providing the first significant association between
Tetherin genomic variation and innate retrovirus restriction
in vivo.
Interrogating the role of the
Tetherin SNP is not feasible with a straightforward knock-out mouse approach. We therefore utilized a classical genetic backcrossing approach that takes into account the major resistance and susceptibility genes mapped in the FV model
[36] and the dominance of the B6 Tetherin cell surface expression phenotype. Our results revealed a direct correlation between
Tetherin genotype, phenotype, and retroviral restriction. These backcross results excluded contributions by any gene not closely linked to
Tetherin. While genes tightly linked to
Tetherin may still contribute to the resistance phenotype, we argue that this is unlikely based on several lines of evidence. First of all, the
in vivo restriction phenotype was consistent with the
in vitro phenotype of NZW Tetherin more potently inhibiting FV virion release compared to B6 Tetherin. Furthermore, there was a strong correlation between Tetherin cell surface expression levels mediated by the
Tetherin SNP and FV replication
in vivo. Finally, none of the genes flanking
Tetherin have previously been identified as retrovirus restriction factors (Figure S1A in
Text S1). It is most likely that the phenotypes observed were mediated primarily by the
Tetherin SNP.
While this manuscript was being prepared, a study using
Tetherin deficient B6 mice revealed that
Tetherin acts as a resistance gene to counteract Moloney MLV and a pathogenic MLV strain known as LP-BM5
in vivo
[13]. In Moloney MLV infection of newborn mice, treatment with poly(I:C), a potent inducer of IFN-α, was required to unmask the antiretroviral activity of Tetherin. On the other hand, the impact of
Tetherin was not observed until after 8 weeks following pathogenic LP-BM5 infection, a timepoint when IFN-α was induced, but fits within the chronic stage of infection and adaptive immune responses. Our results in the FV model were obtained during acute FV infection (7 dpi) and did not require exogenous administration of poly(I:C). Interestingly, the FV stock used in this study, as well as studies that identified the
Fv1, Fv2, Rfv1 and
Rfv3 restriction genes and their molecular counterparts
[36], contained Lactate Dehydrogenase-elevating virus (LDV)
[42], a potent inducer of Type I IFNs
[43]–
[44]. Thus, our findings are consistent with the notion that Type I IFN induction is necessary for Tetherin antiretroviral activity
in vivo. However, our findings differ from
[13] in that Type I IFN induction was not sufficient to reveal the antiviral effect of Tetherin. Even with LDV co-infection (and by inference, Type I IFN induction
[43]–
[44]), the protective effect of NZW Tetherin was not observed in the context of B6 Apobec3/
Rfv3 resistance. Thus, Apobec3 is dominant and not additive with Tetherin restriction
in vivo. We hypothesize that in addition to the lack of Type I IFN induction, the presence of a potent B6
Apobec3 gene could explain the weak antiviral effect of B6
Tetherin observed in acute Moloney MLV and LP-BM5 infections
[13]. Follow-up studies on
Tetherin retrovirus restriction will likely be more informative in
Rfv3 susceptible genetic backgrounds.
We speculate that the lack of synergy between B6 Apobec3 and NZW Tetherin could be due to mechanistic incompatibility: Apobec3 activity results in the release of non-infectious virions
[31], while Tetherin activity prevents virion release
[1]–
[2]. This model mirrors restriction factor hierarchies that have been observed in the FV model. For example,
Fv1 is dominant over
Fv2 (a B-tropic virus will not efficiently infect
Fv2 susceptible mice that are
Fv1n/n), while
Fv2 is dominant over
Rfv3 (
Fv2 resistant B6 mice lacking
Apobec3 are expected to recover). The current study suggests the existence of pathways that cross-regulate Apobec3 and Tetherin during acute retrovirus infection
in vivo.
The finding that NZW Tetherin is a more potent inhibitor of FV infection than B6 Tetherin suggests that high cell surface expression is a key parameter for Tetherin retroviral restriction
in vivo. This result may be unexpected if Tetherin is viewed primarily as a restriction factor since NZW Tetherin has lost the YxY endocytosis motif that is present in most mammalian Tetherins
[20]. Thus, from an evolutionary standpoint, Tetherins with a functional YxY motif should be a more effective configuration for retroviral restriction
in vivo if this restriction is its primary function. However, Tetherin (or PDCA-1) is a marker of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDC) and may have biological functions independent of retroviral restriction, such as the transport of cytokines
[34] and regulating the Type I interferon response
[45]. Thus, the Tetherin endocytosis motif may have been conserved for these physiological functions and retroviral restriction is part of a dual function. Surprisingly,
Tetherin deficient mice did not harbor perturbations in pDC function
[13]. Further analysis of congenic mice with a canonical (B6), NZW and null Tetherin may yet uncover critical physiological roles for Tetherin
in vivo.
Studies implicating Tetherin as a modulator of cell-to-cell spread
[8]–
[10] predict that the higher cell-surface expression of NZW Tetherin should enhance virological synapse formation, retroviral cellular spread and pathogenesis. Moreover, a study demonstrating that Tetherin shuttles virions into endosomal compartments for degradation
[25] predict that NZW Tetherin should have weaker antiretroviral activity. Reconciling these studies with our seemingly contradictory results will require tracking the fate of Tetherin-restricted FV virions in congenic mice encoding B6 versus NZW Tetherin. However, we note that most studies on Tetherin were performed
in vitro, under conditions that lack immune mediators that are present
in vivo. Aggregation of protein antigens has been known to improve vaccine immunogenicity
[46], and Tetherin mediated aggregation of viral particles may confer a similar effect. The ability of a retrovirus restriction factor to promote immune responses is not unprecedented: noninfectious particle release due to B6 Apobec3 activity primed a more effective IgG response directed against intact virions
[31]. Future investigations should therefore determine whether cells expressing surface-tethered virion aggregates are more efficiently targeted for innate immune killing and whether NZW Tetherin activity could prime a more effective adaptive immune response.