1. Introduction
Viruses depend on the host cell for replication and constantly evolve in response to host defenses. Various host pattern recognition receptors (PRRs, e.g.., Toll-like receptors (TLRs), retinoic acid-inducible gene 1 (RIG -I)–like receptors, protein kinase R (PKR); interferon-gamma-inducible protein 16 (IFI16), etc.) recognize so-called pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), such as viral capsids, surface glycoproteins, viral genomes and transcripts, and trigger signaling cascades that lead to the establishment of the replication nonpermissive state or initiate cell death (reviewed in [
1,
2,
3]). Although viruses respond to host defenses with their countermeasures (i.e., inhibitors of these signaling pathways), the defense mechanisms and activation of downstream effectors must be precisely balanced to prevent overactivation and damage to the host.
Members of the Adenosine Deaminase Acting on RNA (ADAR) protein family catalyze the conversion of adenosines to inosines (A-to-I editing), one of the most common forms of posttranscriptional RNA modification, provide the molecular mark that distinguishes host RNA from foreign RNA (e.g. viral). They suppress the hyperactivation of dsRNA sensors (such as PKR, RIG-I/MDA5, OAS/RNase L and ZBP1) that would lead to autoimmunity (reviewed in [
4,
5,
6]). On the one hand, A-to-I editing of RNA transcripts can affect multiple cellular processes through various mechanisms, including mRNA translation, splicing, RNA structure, and RNA silencing, and on the other hand, it attenuates dsRNA sensing in an editing-dependent and/or -independent manner (reviewed in [
7]). Viruses may benefit from all of these mechanisms, and there is ample evidence to support this assumption. This review presents all currently published studies on ADAR -mediated post-transcriptional modifications and the potential role of ADARs in herpesvirus infection, major dsDNA viruses that have been largely neglected in A-to-I studies. The activity of ADAR affects several aspects of gene expression and regulation of replication in various herpesviruses, from modulation of miRNA biogenesis and miRNA targeting to complete alteration of the biological properties of edited transcripts. In addition, there are several lines of evidence that the ADAR proteins are required for efficient reactivation and replication of herpesviruses. Studies of diverse and evolutionarily distant herpesviruses, e.g., from human viruses to viruses of marine snail, suggest a fundamental importance of ADAR for replication of these viruses. The role of the ADAR proteins remains largely unexplored, but it is clear that A-to-I editing adds another level of complexity to the biology of herpesviruses.
2. The ADAR protein family in brief
Adenosine deaminases acting on RNA (ADARs) catalyze the C6 deamination of adenosine (A) to inosine (I) in double-stranded RNA (dsRNA), one of the most common post-transcriptional modifications of RNAs, known as A-to-I editing (reviewed in [
8]). Inosine forms base pairs with cytosine (C) instead of uracil (U), which alters the structure, stability, biogenesis, and coding ability of transcripts. The ADAR family includes three genes: ADAR1 (ADAR), ADAR2 (ADARB1), and ADAR3 (ADARB2) (
Figure 1). ADAR1 encodes the constitutively expressed ADAR1 p110, which is localized in the nucleus, and the interferon-inducible ADAR1 p150, which is localized in the cytoplasm and nucleus. ADAR1 is the major RNA editor in humans, and most of its hundreds of millions of editing sites have been found in Alu elements, many of which are located in introns and 3'-untranslated regions [
9,
10].
ADAR1 p150 has two Z-DNA binding domains, in contrast to p110 which has only one, and shows a broader range of targets compared to p110 [
12]. ADAR1 is ubiquitously expressed and is inducible by many viruses, including human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) [
13], Kaposi’s Sarcoma Associated Virus (KSHV)[
14], reoviruses [
15], etc. In mice, ADAR1 deficiency is embryonically lethal [
16], and in humans, dysregulations of ADAR1 activity are associated with a number of diseases, including Aicardi-Goutières syndrome, an autoimmune disorder and interferonopathy [
17]; bilateral striatal necrosis dystonia [
18]; and dyschromatosis symmetrica hereditaria, a skin pigmentation disorder [
19]; and various cancers [
20]. The main role of ADAR1 editing is to prevent sensors (PKR; RIG-I/MDA5, LGP2, ZBP1, OAS/RNase L) from recognizing endogenous dsRNA as non-self and to prevent hyperactivation of downstream signaling [21-25]. In addition, ADAR1 forms a complex with a number of different proteins, including Dicer, to promote miRNA processing and RNA-induced gene silencing [
26].
In humans, ADAR2 is highly expressed in the brain, arteries, lungs, and bladder and is responsible for site-specific editing (reviewed in [
27]). The major physiological function of ADAR2 is attributed to exonic RNA editing of the neuronal glutamate receptor (GluR), a process essential for neuronal homeostasis [
28]. In contrast to ADAR1 and ADAR2, the expression of ADAR3 (ADARB2) is mainly restricted to the nervous system, particularly the hippocampus and amygdala [
29]. Although ADAR3 has two copies of dsRNA-binding domains it does not exhibit catalytic deaminase activity and has an editing regulatory function [
30]. Recently, ADAR3 was shown to also regulate MAVS expression, suggesting that its role extends beyond editing modification [
31]. In mice, genetic ablation of Adar3 does not lead to embryonic lethality, but mice lacking ADAR3 show impaired short- and long-term memory [
32].
The role of ADAR proteins in viral infections has been studied for a great number of RNA and a few DNA viruses, and proviral and antiviral roles have been demonstrated. These studies are discussed in detail elsewhere (reviewed in [
11,
33]), and we will focus only on recent discoveries in herpesviruses below.
5. Discussion
Over the years and through intensive studies, much has been learned about the biology and pathogenesis of herpesviruses, which has not only improved understanding but also enabled treatment of disease and improvement of health. The role of ADAR proteins in dsDNA viruses, including herpesviruses, is a rather neglected area of research. This is somewhat understandable considering that ADARs are dsRNA-binding proteins and that most studies have focused on RNA viruses. The goal of this literature review is to provide clues to another level of herpesvirus complexity that has not been adequately explored. We focus exclusively on the potential role of the ADAR proteins, although other RNA editing proteins, such as the activation-induced cytidine deaminase/apolipoprotein B mRNA-editing enzyme catalytic polypeptide-like’ (AID/APOBEC) protein family also play important roles.
A-to-I editing (ediotome) in herpesvirus infections has been studied in detail in only a few cases. However, current evidence suggests that a substantial amount of editing of viral transcripts occurs during productive and latent infection in all viruses studied. While in RNA viruses editing could affect the genome, contribute to genome diversity and impact fitness (hypermutations) and pathogenesis of the virus (reviewed in [
7,
33], such scenarios are unlikely in dsDNA viruses, and the focus is on editing of coding and non-coding transcripts. It is important to note that increased editing rate usually correlates with increased expression of ADAR proteins, but differential expression of ADAR proteins has only been studied for some herpesviruses. Nonetheless, some important conclusions can be made. First, productive infection (HCMV, OsHV-1, HaHV-1) [13,85-87], including the reactivation process (KSHV) [
82], triggers the expression of ADAR proteins, but not for all herpesviruses (HSV-1 and HSV-2) [
13]. Second, HCVM selectively activates only the p110 promoter but not the interferon-inducible p150 [
13], whereas KSHV induces both forms [
14]. These results strongly suggest that different viruses use different mechanisms and may have different requirements for A-to-I editing at different phases of infection. For example, hyperediting of one of HSV-1 encoded miRNAs (miR-H2-3p), has been found in latently infected human ganglia, and to much lower extent in productively infected cells in culture, clearly indicating a potential importance of this process for latent infection [
53]. One may hypothesize that the lower extent of editing in productive infection compared to latent infection is simply a matter of accessibility. On the other hand, KSHV transcripts and miRNAs are edited to a lesser extent during latency and increase during reactivation. Current evidence indicates that ADAR does not randomly edit viral transcripts, but specifically edits multiple transcripts (e.g. kaposin) and a selection of pri-miRNAs to alter the properties of these gene products and generate different cellular environment required by the virus [
78]. This is probably only one of the mechanisms, but the dramatic loss of kaposin transformation activity strongly suggests its importance.
In herpesviruses, the functional consequences of editing are best seen in miRNAs. Editing of both KSHV and EBV miRNA precursor transcripts (pri-miRNAs) negatively affects DROSHA processivity, limiting the amounts of these miRNAs and deregulating their direct targets [
68,
69,
79]. Moreover, EBV miR-BART3 and –BART6 directly regulate Dicer, so editing of these miRNAs has a global effect on the RNA-interreference (RNAi) system [
68,
69]. Whether, the precursor of hyperedited HSV-1 miR-H2 inherits impaired processivity by DROSHA is not known, but 50% rate of miR-H2 editing suggests that it is not [
48,
53]. Furthermore, there is evidence that edited miR-H2 is loaded onto Ago as efficiently as non-edited miRNA, in contrast to edited miR-BART6 where editing also suppresses RISC loading [
53]. It is important to mention that editing- mediated alterations of miRNA biology is not unique to viruses, rather well noted for cellular miRNAs (i.e. editing effects biogenesis, loading, re-targeting and stability of miRNAs).
There are other transcripts with dsRNA structure, but miRNAs, found edited in VZV, Ga-HV-2, KSHV, OsHV-1 and HaHV-1 infections, however clear evidences for relevant biological role are far less obvious [
56,
71,
79,
86].
Editing (in)dependent functions of ADAR. The role of ADAR1, primarily ADAR p150, in suppressing antiviral signaling has been demonstrated for several RNA viruses (MeV, VSV, IV, HCV, CoV, etc.)[
7]. However, it is not clear whether A-to-I editing is always required for suppressive function or whether it depends only on dsRNA binding and interaction with RNA sensors. There is ample evidence that the absence of ADAR1 p150 leads to overactivation of PKR (e.g., MeV, VSV, EMCV, HIV), but in some viruses other sensing pathways take over (e.g., the OAS pathway in CoV, RIG -I in IV), and sometimes activation of PKR can even be beneficial to the virus (HCV) [
7,
88]. Therefore, it is very interesting that ADAR1 mediates the immunosuppression required for efficient reactivation via the MDA5 pathway during KSHV reactivation [
82]. It is now known whether other sensing pathways are involved in this process. It will be very exciting to learn whether the ADAR1/MDA5 axis is also required for other herpesviruses or whether other pathways are more important.
Some open question. The studies described have given us only a small glimpse of the possible role of ADAR proteins and the complexity they bring to herpesvirus infection. There is still a large gap in basic knowledge about the editome in infected cells. For example, editing of many viruses, including HSV1 and HSV-2, is unknown, and the dynamics of editing during reactivation are unexplored for most viruses. Editing can affect the processing (biogenesis), stability, interactome, and function of RNAs, so uncovering editing will contribute to a better understanding of the basic biological properties of transcripts and their functions. The contribution of the two ADAR proteins ADAR1 and ADAR2 to a variety of replication strategies, latency niches, and hosts remains to be better defined. In addition, how expression of the ADAR proteins is regulated during infection remains to be better understood (e.g., KSHV and HCMV induce ADAR1 expression during productive infection but different protein forms, whereas HSV-1 does not affect ADAR1 levels).
On the other hand, a body of evidence suggests that ADAR p150, the interferon-stimulated form of ADAR, is solely responsible for suppressing cytoplasmic sensors (PKR, RIG -I/MDA5, ZBP1, OAS) and attenuating their antiviral response. However, which signaling pathways are involved (different in different herpesviruses? Do all signaling pathways contribute?); what are the exact triggers of the signaling pathways; how these triggers link ADAR1 and dsRNA sensors; what is a role of various posttranscriptional and posttranslational modifications? and many other questions remain to be addressed.
Finally, no herpesvirus gene product has yet been identified that mimics or directly affects the functions of ADAR, such as the VAI transcript of AdV [
89], the NS1 protein of influenza virus [
90], and the E3L protein of vaccinia virus [
91],.
All in all, the biology of herpes viruses has been studied in great detail, but there is still much to learn, and the complexity of these viruses always offers new surprises.