The adeno-associated virus (AAV) is a small, nonpathogenic parvovirus, which depends on helper factors to replicate. Those helper factors can be provided by coinfecting helper viruses such as adenoviruses, herpesviruses, or papillomaviruses. We review the basic biology of AAV and its most-studied helper viruses, adenovirus type 5 (AdV5) and herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1). We further outline the direct and indirect interactions of AAV with those and additional helper viruses.

In infected cells rotavirus (RV) replicates in viroplasms, cytosolic structures that require a stabilized microtubule (MT) network for their assembly, maintenance of the structure and perinuclear localization. Therefore, we hypothesized that RV could interfere with the MT-breakdown that takes place in mitosis during cell division. Using synchronized RV-permissive cells, we show that RV infection arrests the cell cycle in S/G2 phase, thus favoring replication by improving viroplasms formation, viral protein translation, and viral assembly. The arrest in S/G2 phase is independent of the host or viral strain and relies on active RV replication. RV infection causes cyclin B1 down-regulation, consistent with blocking entry into mitosis. With the aid of chemical inhibitors, the cytoskeleton network was linked to specific signaling pathways of the RV-induced cell cycle arrest. We found that upon RV infection Eg5 kinesin was delocalized from the pericentriolar region to the viroplasms. We used a MA104-Fucci system to identify three RV proteins (NSP3, NSP5, and VP2) involved in cell cycle arrest in the S-phase. Our data indicate that there is a strong correlation between the cell cycle arrest and RV replication.

Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) depends on the simultaneous presence of a helper virus such as herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) for productive replication. At the same time, AAV2 efficiently blocks the replication of HSV-1, which would eventually limit its own replication by diminishing the helper virus reservoir. This discrepancy begs the question of how AAV2 and HSV-1 can coexist in a cell population. Here we show that in coinfected cultures, AAV2 DNA replication takes place almost exclusively in S/G ₂ -phase cells, while HSV-1 DNA replication is restricted to G ₁ phase. Live microscopy revealed that not only wild-type AAV2 (wtAAV2) replication but also reporter gene expression from both single-stranded and double-stranded (self-complementary) recombinant AAV2 vectors preferentially occurs in S/G ₂ -phase cells, suggesting that the preference for S/G ₂ phase is independent of the nature of the viral genome. Interestingly, however, a substantial proportion of S/G ₂ -phase cells transduced by the double-stranded but not the single-stranded recombinant AAV2 vectors progressed through mitosis in the absence of the helper virus. We conclude that cell cycle-dependent AAV2 rep expression facilitates cell cycle-dependent AAV2 DNA replication and inhibits HSV-1 DNA replication. This may limit competition for cellular and viral helper factors and, hence, creates a biological niche for either virus to replicate. IMPORTANCE Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) differs from most other viruses, as it requires not only a host cell for replication but also a helper virus such as an adenovirus or a herpesvirus. This situation inevitably leads to competition for cellular resources. AAV2 has been shown to efficiently inhibit the replication of helper viruses. Here we present a new facet of the interaction between AAV2 and one of its helper viruses, herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1). We observed that AAV2 rep gene expression is cell cycle dependent and gives rise to distinct time-controlled windows for HSV-1 replication. High Rep protein levels in S/G ₂ phase support AAV2 replication and inhibit HSV-1 replication. Conversely, low Rep protein levels in G ₁ phase permit HSV-1 replication but are insufficient for AAV2 replication. This allows both viruses to productively replicate in distinct sets of dividing cells.

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) genome replication only occurs in the presence of a co-infecting helper virus such as adenovirus type 5 (AdV5) or herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1). AdV5-supported replication of the AAV genome has been described to occur in a strand-displacement rolling hairpin replication (RHR) mechanism initiated at the AAV 3’ inverted terminal repeat (ITR) end. It has been assumed that the same mechanism applies to HSV-1-supported AAV genome replication. Using Southern analysis and nanopore sequencing as a novel, high-throughput approach to study viral genome replication we demonstrate the formation of double-stranded head-to-tail concatemers of AAV genomes in the presence of HSV-1, thus providing evidence for an unequivocal rolling circle replication (RCR) mechanism. This stands in contrast to the textbook model of AAV genome replication when HSV-1 is the helper virus.

Rotaviruses (RVs) are important enteric pathogens of newborn humans and animals, causing diarrhea and in rare cases death, especially in very young individuals. Rotavirus vaccines presently used are modified live vaccines that lack complete biological safety. Previous work from our laboratory suggested that vaccines based on in situ produced, non-infectious rotavirus-like particles (RVLPs) are efficient while being entirely safe. However, using either vaccine, active mucosal immunization cannot induce protective immunity in newborns due to their immature immune system. We therefore hypothesized that offspring from vaccinated dams are passively immunized either by transfer of maternal antibodies during pregnancy or by taking up antibodies from milk. Using a codon optimized polycistronic gene expression cassette packaged into herpesvirus particles, the simultaneous expression of the RV capsid genes led to the intracellular formation of RVLPs in various cell lines. Vaccinated dams developed a strong RV specific IgG antibody response determined in sera and milk of both mother and pups. Moreover, sera of naïve pups nursed by vaccinated dams also had RV specific antibodies suggesting a lactogenic transfer of antibodies. Although full protection of pups was not achieved in this mouse model, our observations are important for the development of improved vaccines against RV in humans as well as in various animal species.