Recent work has identified three distinct classes of viral membrane fusion proteins based on structural criteria. In addition, there are at least four distinct mechanisms by which viral fusion proteins can be triggered to undergo fusion-inducing conformational changes. Viral fusion proteins also contain different types of fusion peptides and vary in their reliance on accessory proteins. These differing features combine to yield a rich diversity of fusion proteins. Yet despite this staggering diversity, all characterized viral fusion proteins convert from a fusion-competent state (dimers or trimers, depending on the class) to a membrane-embedded homotrimeric prehairpin, and then to a trimer-of-hairpins that brings the fusion peptide, attached to the target membrane, and the transmembrane domain, attached to the viral membrane, into close proximity thereby facilitating the union of viral and target membranes. During these conformational conversions, the fusion proteins induce membranes to progress through stages of close apposition, hemifusion, and then the formation of small, and finally large, fusion pores. Clearly, highly divergent proteins have converged on the same overall strategy to mediate fusion, an essential step in the life cycle of every enveloped virus.

Ari Helenius launched the field of enveloped virus fusion in endosomes with a seminal paper in the Journal of Cell Biology in 1980. In the intervening years, a great deal has been learned about the structures and mechanisms of viral membrane fusion proteins as well as about the endosomes in which different enveloped viruses fuse and the endosomal cues that trigger fusion. We now recognize three classes of viral membrane fusion proteins based on structural criteria and four mechanisms of fusion triggering. After reviewing general features of viral membrane fusion proteins and viral fusion in endosomes, we delve into three characterized mechanisms for viral fusion triggering in endosomes: by low pH, by receptor binding plus low pH and by receptor binding plus the action of a protease. We end with a discussion of viruses that may employ novel endosomal fusion‐triggering mechanisms. A key take‐home message is that enveloped viruses that enter cells by fusing in endosomes traverse the endocytic pathway until they reach an endosome that has all of the environmental conditions (pH, proteases, ions, intracellular receptors and lipid composition) to (if needed) prime and (in all cases) trigger the fusion protein and to support membrane fusion.

Using chemical inhibitors and small interfering RNA (siRNA), we have confirmed roles for cathepsin B (CatB) and cathepsin L (CatL) in Ebola virus glycoprotein (GP)-mediated infection. Treatment of Ebola virus GP pseudovirions with CatB and CatL converts GP1 from a 130-kDa to a 19-kDa species. Virus with 19-kDa GP1 displays significantly enhanced infection and is largely resistant to the effects of the CatB inhibitor and siRNA, but it still requires a low-pH-dependent endosomal/lysosomal function. These and other results support a model in which CatB and CatL prime GP by generating a 19-kDa intermediate that can be acted upon by an as yet unidentified endosomal/lysosomal enzyme to trigger fusion.

We showed previously that substitution of the first residue of the influenza hemagglutinin (HA) fusion peptide Gly1 with Glu abolishes fusion activity. In the present study we asked whether this striking phenotype was due to the charge or side-chain volume of the substituted Glu. To do this we generated and characterized six mutants with substitutions at position 1: Gly1 to Ala, Ser, Val, Glu, Gln, or Lys. We found the following. All mutants were expressed at the cell surface, could be cleaved from the precursor (HA0) to the fusion permissive form (HA1-S-S-HA2), bound antibodies against the major antigenic site, bound red blood cells, and changed conformation at low pH. Only Gly, Ala, and Ser supported lipid mixing during fusion with red blood cells. Only Gly and Ala supported content mixing. Ser HA, therefore, displayed a hemifusion phenotype. The hemifusion phenotype of Ser HA was confirmed by electrophysiological studies. Our findings indicate that the first residue of the HA fusion peptide must be small (e.g., Gly, Ala, or Ser) to promote lipid mixing and must be small and apolar (e.g., Gly or Ala) to support both lipid and content mixing. The finding that Val HA displays no fusion activity underscores the idea that hydrophobicity is not the sole factor dictating fusion peptide function. The surprising finding that Ser HA displays hemifusion suggests that the HA ectodomain functions not only in the first stage of fusion, lipid mixing, but also, either directly or indirectly, in the second stage of fusion, content mixing.