Contribution of the Respiratory Syncytial Virus G Glycoprotein and Its Secreted and Membrane-Bound Forms to Virus Replication in Vitro and in Vivo

The surface glycoproteins of viruses can play important roles in viral attachment, entry, and morphogenesis. Here, we investigated the role of the attachment G glycoprotein of human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in viral infection. RSV G is produced both as a complete, transmembrane form and as an N-terminally truncated form that is secreted. Using reverse genetics, we created mutant recombinant RSVs (rRSV) that do not express G (ΔG) or express either the secreted or the membrane-bound form of G only (sG and mG, respectively). In Vero cells, the ΔG virus formed plaques and grew as efficiently as wild-type rRSV and mG. In contrast, ΔG replicated less efficiently and did not form distinct plaques in HEp-2 cells. This defect was primarily at the level of the initiation of infection, with only a minor additional effect at the level of packaging. Replication of ΔG in the respiratory tract of mice was very highly restricted, indicating that G is important in vivo. Although the G protein expressed by the sG virus was confirmed to be secreted, this virus grew at least as efficiently as wild-type in HEp-2 cells and was only moderately attenuated in vivo. Thus, the G protein was important for efficient replication in HEp-2 cells and in vivo, but this function could be supplied in large part by the secreted form and thus does not require the cytoplasmic and transmembrane domains. Amino acids 184–198 have been identified as the major heparin-binding domain of the G protein and were implicated in mediating binding to cells [S. A. Feldman et al., 1999, J. Virol. 73, 6610–6617]. Heparin-like glycosaminoglycans also appeared to be important for infection in vitro by direct clinical isolates of RSV. Deletion of amino acids 187–197 from rRSV did not reduce its sensitivity to neutralization in vitro by incubation with soluble heparin, did not reduce its efficiency of growth in vitro, and resulted in only a modest reduction in vivo. Thus, the putative heparin-binding domain is not the sole determinant of heparin sensitivity and is not a critical functional domain.