Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Autophagy and Lipid Metabolism – A Cellular Platform where Molecular and Metabolic Pathways Converge to Explain Dengue Viral Infection

Written By

Elizabeth Orozco-García and Juan Carlos Gallego-Gómez

Submitted: 14 January 2015 Reviewed: 19 August 2015 Published: 20 January 2016

DOI: 10.5772/61305

From the Edited Volume

Cell Biology - New Insights

Edited by Stevo Najman

Chapter metrics overview

2,769 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Dengue virus (DENV) is one of the most prevalent human pathogens worldwide. It causes a huge socioeconomic burden with approximately 400 million infections per year, but yet there is no vaccine or antiviral that is currently effective against the disease. DENV is spread by the mosquitoes Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus, and viral replication within the mosquito vector is required for transmission to human host. During its replication cycle, the virus cause significant changes to the host transcriptome profile, especially in the metabolic and trafficking pathways. Recent studies have shown a strong association between autophagy and lipid metabolism modulation.


  • Autophagy
  • Cellular Platform
  • Dengue Virus
  • Molecular and Metabolic Pathways

1. Introduction

1.1. Dengue Virus (DENV): Some clinic and basic issues

Emergent viruses with major impact in human health include several agents of Flavivirus gender, Flaviviridae family, the most important of these are DENV (Dengue Virus), YFV (Yellow Fever Virus), JEV (Japanese Encephalitis Virus) and WNV (West Nile Virus) [1]. There are nearly 3.6 billion people at risk of infection with DENV in tropical and subtropical countries [2]. In more than 100 endemic countries with an estimated nearly 390 million of DENV infections per year, approximately 100 million of dengue fever cases are estimated annually with over 2 millions cases of potentially fatal dengue hemorrhagic fever [3, 4]. In most cases, the symptoms of DF that include an acute febrile illness with retro-orbital pain, myalgia, arthralgia are self-limited [5]. However, in a proportion of people, the disease progresses to the severe clinical manifestations classified as dengue shock syndrome (DSS), which are characterized by the plasma leakage leading to hypovolemic shock and/or dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF), which are characterized by massive bleeding, thrombocytopenia, evidence of plasma leakage such as pleural effusion and a rise of hematocrit, both of which has a high mortality rate [6-8].

DENV is a positive-single strand RNA virus surrounded by an icosahedral nucleocapsid (C) with approximately 10,700 bases, a unique open reading frame that codify to one polyprotein, which is post-translational cleaved by cellular and viral proteases. The 5’ end contains the region encoding the structural proteins in the following order: core protein (protein C), membrane precursor protein (protein M), and envelope protein (protein E). The remainder of it genome encode for seven non-structural proteins, xlink, NS2A, NS2B, NS3, NS4A, NS4A, and NS5 [9].

DENV exists as a four serotypes (DENV-1, DENV-2, DENV-3, and DENV-4). All of them have a same transmission cycle, which include vertebrate hosts (primate and human) and invertebrate vectors, mosquitoes of the following species: Aedes aegypti, A. albopictus y A. polynesiensis mosquitoes. An infection with one serotype provides lifelong protective immunity to that serotype. But, there is no cross-protective immunity between serotypes [10, 11]. Inside each one of these serotypes, there are several virus groups named genotypes.


2. Autophagy

This is defined in a general form like a catabolic selective process by means of which cytoplasmic material is transported to lysosomes for their degradation [12]. The autophagy is a remarkably conserved cellular process, from yeast to human, responsible for removing damaged organelles and misfolded proteins, and for maintaining cellular homeostasis under both normal and stress conditions [13-15]. Compartmentalization in eukaryotic systems brought numerous evolutionary advantages, but also great and new challenges with it, such as the selective removal of damaged organelles, controlled organelle number and quality, or the utilization of their components as potential energy source during times of starvation. In this way, autophagy represents an evolutionary answer to these challenges. It enables the recycling of intracellular components and allows cells to survive or death [16] (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Functions of autophagy

The primary role of autophagy is to protect cells under stressful conditions. Under this viewpoint, both autophagy and the vertebrate immune system play essential roles to maintain cellular homeostasis in the face of external perturbations [17]. Indeed, several studies have revealed the narrow relationship between autophagy and the vertebrate immune system [18]. Besides, the crosstalk has become evident between autophagy and apoptosis [19-22] because the induction of autophagy has often been linked to inhibition of apoptosis [23].

More than 30 genes have been identified as crucial in the autophagy regulation process in yeast, which are known as ATG (autophagy-related genes). Many of these genes have homologs in mammals and are grouped according to expression and participation in the different stages of the autophagic route [12]. The activation of this pathway depends on the kinase mTOR (mammalian Target of Rapamycin) identified as the main negative regulator when the cell is in the presence of growth factors and abundance of nutrients. Under starvation, mTOR activity is inhibited. And consequently, the autophagy is activated allowing the recruitment of complexes inducers of the route [24, 25]. There are three mechanisms identified for autophagic degradation: macroautophagy, microautophagy, and chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA).

Macroautophagy imply the formation of double membrane vesicles recognized as autophagosomes. It engulfs cytoplasmic components and then are fused to lysosomes, carrying the cytosolic material until the lysosomal lumen where a hydrolases, lipases, and cathepsins degrade it [26, 27]. Therefore, we can divide the pathway into 4 basic steps: initiation, elongation, termination, and fusion. During initiation, the recruitment of protein complexes, such as phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase Class III (PI3K), Vps15, Vps34, and beclin-1, that are critical to the autophagosome formation is given [28]. During the elongation, the assembly occurs. In this stage, the related protein complex ATG5-Atg12-Atg16, the lipid conjugation complex LC3-II- phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), and the respective conjugating enzymes, which act similarly to ubiquitin ligase system, link lipid that allows the growth of the double membrane due to the transformation that undergone LC3-I to LC3-II, which has a PE-binding domain, the main lipid component of autophagosomes. Later, in the termination stage, the double membrane vesicle is closed with the intracytoplasmic content therein, which is possible because the cut that performs Atg-4 enzyme on the binding LC3-II-PE permits the release of the complex into the cytosol preventing the continuation of joining new lipid molecules [28].

Subsequently, the fusion process occurs between autophagosomes and lysosomes, which generate a vesicular structure called autophagolysosome or autolysosome. This process is mediated by the cell membrane fusion proteins, such as integral proteins SNARE (soluble N-Ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor-attachment protein receptor) [29], the Rab family proteins, especially Rab7 and Rab9, that are involved in the transport of the vesicles and fusion with target membranes [30]. And besides, the lysosomal membrane receptor LAMP2 allows the attachment between vesicular membranes and autophagosome contents discharge into the lysosome forming the structure known as autophagolysosome, where protein degradation occurs [31, 32] (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

The Process of Macroautophagy. A portion of cytoplasm (including organelles) is enclosed by a phagophore or isolation membrane to form an autophagosome. The outer membrane of the autophagosome subsequently fuses with the lysosome, and the internal material is degraded in the autolysosome.

The second possible mechanism is microautophagy. It involves direct lysosomal membrane invaginations production to generate vesicles or tubules capturing surrounding cytoplasm. Microautophagy studies has mainly been developed in yeast, wherein several genes have been found sharing the macroautophagy and microautophagy pathways, but the components and regulation systems are still not well understood [33]. For the CMA mechanism, the cargo is specifically selected by the unique pentapeptide motif present in the amino acid sequence (KFERQ), which is recognized by the chaperone proteins specially Hsc70, in where the membrane receptor LAMP2 (Lysosome associated membrane protein 2] carrying the load into the lysosome lumen for degradation [34].

In the past years, autophagy has emerged as a critical player in the control of viral infection and immunity [35-39]. On one hand, autophagy can serve as a host defense mechanism for some pathogens by clearing them out of the cells [40-42]. On the other hand, many positive-stranded RNA viruses have been reported to subvert this cellular machinery to favor their own replication and release [23]. This issue will be discussed below.


3. Cellular metabolism in viral infections: Rediscovering the other side of the coin

Metabolism is broadly defined as the sum of biochemical processes in living organisms that either produce or consume energy [43]. In the “Golden Age of Biochemistry” (1920s to 1960s), most of the metabolic network in humans and other organisms, which included routes like glycolysis (Embden, Meyerhof, and Parnas), respiration (Warburg), the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) and urea cycles (Krebs), glycogen catabolism (Cori and Cori), oxidative phosphorylation (Mitchell), and the supremacy of ATP in energy transfer reactions (Lippmann) was defined. This research was awarded with about 15 Nobel Prizes in Physiology, Medicine, or Chemistry. All of them were related to energy balance or core metabolic pathways [43].

Richard W. Hanson wrote "By 1970, the writing was on the wall for metabolism; it was largely considered a "mature area", lacking excitement; molecular biology was the area of the future" [44].

"A sure sign of this was that graduate students in biochemistry almost never selected their thesis research in metabolism. The course in intermediary metabolism that I taught was dropped from the curriculum of our graduate education program; our students were expected to learn all they needed to know about metabolism as undergraduates before they attended graduate school. After all, as a graduate student once said to me, "the great problems in metabolic research have been solved". As long as diseases like diabetes, obesity, and atherosclerosis, remain to be cured, there will be no shortage of interest in metabolism" [44].

In this way, the understanding of diseases in light of alterations in metabolic status was dropped and shifted by the search of an explanation based on the nascent era of molecular biology. However, the ongoing exploration of molecular biology and disease complexity has stimulated a revival of interest in intermediary metabolism [45]. In this view, several works propose a new way to arrive the disease: cell metabolism, because it affects cell signaling and modulate protein trafficking, localization, and enzyme activity [43]. For example, Acetyl-CoA plays a central role in intermediary metabolism (carbohydrate, fatty acid, and amino acid oxidation,) and at the same time have tremendous influence on cell signaling and gene expression [46-48]. Recently, it has been demonstrated that some biomarkers of metabolic syndrome are related with any infection, acute or chronic in patients [49].

To reach a deep and elegant comprehension of the role of metabolism in all levels of the human being, it is better to take the exact quotation of DeBerardinis and Thompson: "...the metabolism pervades every aspect of biology from the single-cell to whole organism level. No cellular functions occur independently of metabolism, and a metabolic perturbation at one node has ripple effects that can extend throughout the network and out into other systems. Thus, metabolic disturbances have an extremely long reach, and this extends to disease phenotypes..." [43].

The Warburg effect is a concept used to link metabolism and cancer wherein a disturbance of cellular metabolic activity is at the root of tumor formation and growth [43]. Thereby, dysregulated cellular metabolism is a key feature of cancer [50-53]. This concept could be adapted perfectly to viral infections, because viruses are biological entities that depend on cell metabolism to replicate and spread. Therefore, it would be expected that the success of viruses inside the cell will be dependent on their ability to subrogate the metabolism and put it in his favor.

It had been shown in this sense that tumor cells display increased metabolic autonomy in comparison to non-transformed cells [51]. In the case of viral infections, this "metabolic autonomy" may be triggered by a viral entity in normal cells. Thinking about it, it is not absurd if we take into account that many genes implicated in several signaling/metabolic pathways have also been reported to be modulated and altered in viral infections [54-57]. How these metabolic pathways are regulated in infected cells, including if they fluctuate according to infection stage or at the cell cycle, remains to be a question. It will be important to determine whether viral infection can regulate all aspects of the metabolic dynamics or if any special metabolic pathway implicated in their replication or pathogenicity exists.

Many pathogens have developed sophisticated molecular machinery, which interferes with host cell signaling. Thereby, effector molecules are introduced or released by the pathogens during the invasion of the host [55, 58, 59]. Autophagy is a evolutionarily refined and sophisticated process wherein molecular cell signaling and cellular metabolism regulation converge to regulate the intermediary metabolism (Figure 3) including the lipid metabolism through a process called lipophagy, which modulate the degradation of lipid droplets in triglycerides and free fatty acid that can be used as a fuel to elevate the rate of β-oxidation and consequently of energy production [60-62], which recently has been demonstrated that some pathogenic agents can subvert this cell process to ensure their own survival.

Figure 3.

Autophagy and intermediary metabolism relationship

Recent investigations using genetic, cell biology, and biochemical approaches have led to a better understanding of mechanistic interaction between pathogens and hosts. Based on this, a resource that permit integrate terms of ViralZone, UniProtKB, and GO, has been created, which provide a global view of viral biology and their complex host interactions, based in evasive adaptations and inactivation of antiviral effectors [63]. Advancements in research are now fueled by increasing interests aimed at the discovery of novel therapeutic interventions against major infectious diseases [64]. The cell biology of microbial pathogenesis has opened many doors for future research into the role of lipids in host-pathogen interactions because lipids of both host and pathogen play critical roles in the pathogen stability to replicate and persist in host cells, and these interactions are very complex and dynamic [58].

The metabolic host cost and contribution of lipids (biosynthesis, catabolism, and trafficking) to the formation of replication factories is in the early stages of investigation [65-69], and yet is need to know pathogen and host lipid profiles as a starting point for tests of functional relevance and comparative profiling in several physiological conditions (status before/after infection) to better understand the details of the metabolic role in the different conditions of the disease and dissect the complicated signaling during host-pathogen interactions for developing drugs and disease biomarkers pathways identification [64].


4. Role of autophagy in infectious disease

The intracellular invaders, after million years of evolution, have developed several sophisticated strategies for evading the host defenses like the immune system. In this regard, autophagy is a complex cellular process that can have a dual role in viral infections depending on the pathogenic agent and host [70, 71]. Although it has been extensively cited and reviewed, the role of autophagy in maintaining the cellular homeostasis [12, 13] still remains to be elucidated in terms of what is their precise role in viral infection.

Considering several infectious agents, there are a number of important findings. For example, macrophages can eliminate Legionella pneumophila infection through cholesterol or lipid-raft- rich induction of autophagy [72]. Mycobacteria usurp the host lipid stores for energy production via β- oxidation of fatty acyls, using the glyoxylate cycle enzymes isocitrate lyases for survival and persistence in its human host [73, 74]. Helicobacter pylori have been related with elevated cholesterol levels and metabolic syndrome alterations. However, it remains controversial [75, 76]. In HSV-1 (Herpes Simplex Virus), the virulence factor ICP34.5 inhibits autophagy via inhibition of Beclin 1 and PKR [77], and Us3 acts as a viral Akt surrogate to activate mTORC1 inhibiting host autophagy [78]. Curiously, additional members of the herpes virus family employ similar strategies to inhibit autophagy. Gamma herpes virus 68 (gHV68) encodes a virulence factor vbcl2 (M11), which inhibits host autophagy via interaction with Beclin 1 [79]. Kaposi’s Sarcoma Herpes Viruses (KSHV) interact with ATG3 and inhibit autophagy [80]. Human Cytomegalovirus (HCMV) inhibits autophagy via upstream activation of mTOR signaling [81]. Autophagy functions as an antiviral host defense of central nervous system against Sindbis Virus (SIN) infection [40, 41].

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has a controversial role in lipid metabolism and autophagy. It has shown that this infection is associated with enhanced lipogenesis, reduced β-oxidation, decreased lipoprotein secretion, and increased autophagy counteracting the alterations in lipid metabolism induced by HCV. In this way, a disruption of autophagic process might contribute to develop steatosis (occurs in about 50% or more of patients) in patients with HCV [82, 83].

It has also been described that the infection of human cells with Poliovirus and Rhinovirus induces autophagosome formation, which are used as sites of viral RNA replication [84]. Autophagosome is required for the formation of Coronavirus replication complexes with the formation of the double membrane vesicles significantly enhancing viral replication efficiency [85]. The use of small interfering RNAs against LC3 or Atg12 has shown to reduce both the intracellular and extracellular yields of poliovirus (+ss) [84]. Reduction in the intracellular concentration of Atg7 reduces the amount of viral capsid protein synthesized in Coxsackievirus B3 [86]. Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) infection was found to activate autophagy, and it extends cell survival for the establishment of a successful viral infection [87].

It should be noted that not only RNA virus (poliovirus, etc.) but also DNA virus (Epstein-Barr virus) infection can induce autophagic machinery, and whether the activation of autophagic machinery can enhance viral replication (poliovirus and mouse hepatitis virus) or not (Vaccinia virus and Herpes Simplex Virus type 1 etc.) depends on the type of viruses [84, 85, 88-90] and on cell type infected [91]. Thus, for some areas for research, the development of the specific inducers of autophagy will offer a promise as a novel class of antiviral therapeutics [16], while for others, the design of specific inhibitors of autophagy could provide new therapeutic strategies [92]. Either will serve as a powerful tool to dissect the autophagic process.

In summary, many different viruses and other pathogens can induce the cellular process, such as apoptosis and autophagy, and on the other hand, host cells can also activate the same pathways when they participate in clearance of infectious agent (Figure 4). Thus, although some viruses may encode one or more inhibitors of both these processes, others have been shown to induce autophagosome-like structures and to benefit from their formation, which may be critical for the viral spread within the infected tissues [35]. Although numerous studies support the beneficial role of autophagy in +ssRNA virus replication [23], the induction of this process is not always favorable for them. And drawing the path and explaining this behavior have shown interesting findings for some researchers.

Figure 4.

Viral modulation of autophagy. Several viruses have been shown to block or activate various stages of autophagy process.


5. DENV infection and autophagy: Molecular and metabolic convergences

DENV is a major but neglected global public health problem, and despite many efforts, they are made to understand the mechanisms by which it usurps the host cells and this research field has grown dramatically during the last years with multiple studies in molecular and evolutionary biology [93-96], genome sequencing [97-99], construction of infectious clones [100], and use of these to attempt to dissect the specific role of each viral protein [101, 102], and immunological approaches [103, 104]. All of these have failed to produce results that allow the design of vaccines or drugs effective to cure this disease [105-107], and the secrets of DENV and its pathogenesis remain unclear. However, a recent viewpoint of the disease highlights the relevance of the relationship between both hosts and vector systems with the viruses and assign a key role to energy metabolism alterations during the infection, indicating that the virus reprogram the central carbon metabolism (lipid, glucose, TCA cycle and others) [108-112] in order to facilitate their own replication.

Understanding how DENV can differently infect mammals and insect cells is a very interesting issue. In the last years, there has been a notable increase in the research for mosquito DENV infection, revealing the importance of identifying this dual behavior between the host and vector in order to know the cell biology of viral infection. In the enveloped positive-sense RNA viruses such as DENV, a cytoplasmic replication of its are associated with a dramatic rearrangement of host cellular membranes, the merging of viral and target cell membranes, and endosomal trafficking routes are essential to carry out a successful replication cycle [113], and these virus-induced changes the result in induction of vesicular structures that envelope the virus replication complex [114].

A few years ago, it was postulated that autophagosomes might play a structural role in the replication complex formation, and numerous investigations about the role of autophagy in DENV infection were conduced. In 2008, a researcher group from the National Cheng University in Taiwan was the first to demonstrate that DENV can activate autophagic machinery and induce autophagosome formation to promote viral replication, and ATG5 is directly implicated in this activation process [6]. Also, it has been demonstrated that DENV2 induce autophagy and prevent premature cell death, thus, an inhibition of autophagy abolishes its protective role against cell death providing an unfavorable environment for the viral propagation leading to a reduced viral replication [115]. There were experiments to compare single-cycle infections of murine embryonic fibroblasts derived from autophagy-proficient and autophagy-deficient mice showing clear reductions in the yield of extracellular virus in the absence of a functional autophagy pathway [6]. But in 2009, it was demonstrated that DENV replicates on endoplasmic reticulum (ER) cisternae invaginations and not on classical autophagosomes [116]. From this discovery, scientists kept researching the role of autophagy induction in DENV infection.

In the same year, it was shown that the DENV Capsid structural protein contained determinants for lipid droplets targeting. This association was a determinant for reach DENV yield [117], and this discovery was associated with previous findings that reported liver vacuolization and steatosis in DENV infected mice and fatal human cases of DHF [118-120], suggesting a possible role for lipid metabolism in DENV pathogenesis. That was when researchers reported that autophagy process induced by DENV infection plays an indirect role in DENV replication by the modulation of cellular lipid metabolism. Furthermore, it stimulated a cellular triglycerides depletion that are stored in the lipid droplets, leading to release free fatty acids, increased β-oxidation, and energy production to raise the virus yield [121-125] (Figure 5). Subsequently, it was shown that autophagy is mediated in a cell type specific manner, given that autophagy does not have a significant role in DENV replication in monocytic cells [91]. More recent studies in suckling mice demonstrated that DENV infection induce autophagy mechanism in vivo, and it played an important role in viral replication, clinical symptoms development, and survival rate [126]. Although it has been widely supported that the autophagy role in DENV infection is more related to a metabolic requirement, it also has been shown that the autophagy pathway plays a determinant role in viral maturation [124], which conduce to think that autophagy does not have a unique function in the viral replication cycle.

Figure 5.

Roles for autophagy during DENV infection From [122].

The discovery of vector factors altered during DENV infection of mosquito may help to identify conserved protein families and pathways that represent both anti-viral mechanisms and requirements for viral life cycle in the vector, and understanding these effects in mosquito vector and correlating it with conserved mammal pathways could help to comprehend the host interactions and development of methods to treat and prevent viral infection and spread. In this way, the mosquito vector, as well as the cell lines, derived from it, was transformed in novel and interesting study models. It has been described in mosquito MAL04 and C6/36 cells that DENV ensures its fusion in late endosomes exploiting cell-controlled differences between lipid compositions of different organelles through interactions between virus and endosomes rich in anionic lipids, protecting against premature release, viral inactivation, or endosome fusion pore opening [127].

The fat body plays a major role in intermediary metabolism, and it is the central storage depot of nutrients and energy reserves essential for the holometabolous insects’ life, which must accumulate at least a minimal amount of nutrients in larval stages to survive during starvation and metamorphosis. Lipids, mainly triglycerides, represent the major component of fat body and are the main source of metabolic fuel, it are stored in the core of lipid droplets, which are mobilized for several purposes as energy provision to flight muscles, ovaries lipids provision and overall maintenance of metabolic activity [128]. The lipolytic machinery identified in insects includes two lipases: TGL and Brummer lipase, and two evolutionarily conserved lipid droplet proteins, Lsd1 and Lsd2 [129]. Current information indicates that insects share with mammals and other organisms, several aspects of the mechanisms of deposition and mobilization of triglycerides. This information validates the use of insect models to investigate basic questions related to the processes of lipid storage and mobilization [130].

DENV drastically alters the lipid profile of mosquito-infected cells, increasing the expression of lipids that have the capacity to change the physical properties of the bilayer such as: bilayer curvature, permeability, and recruitment/assembly of protein complexes in the membrane. Several of the identified molecules also function as bioactive messengers that control signaling and membrane trafficking pathways in the cells [131]. These observations shed light on the emerging role of lipids in shaping the membrane and protein environments during viral infections and suggest membrane organizing principles that may influence virus-induced intracellular membrane architecture [131]. Later, a transcriptome study in Aedes aegypti infected with several flaviviruses (WNV, DENV and YFV) was described and an expression profile was observed with 20 significantly upregulated genes and 15 downregulated genes quite similar among them. Something of these genes were related with the regulation of genic expression (juvenile hormone-inducible protein, core histone H3), genes related with antiviral response were downregulated (Jak-STAT pathway downregulated, Toll pathway) and other genes related to ion binding, ion transport, several metabolic processes and peptidase activity [132].

In [133], a mosquito protein interaction network based on large-scale protein interaction datasets was developed, and 714 putative dengue-associated mosquito proteins (physical interaction assays, RNAi and microarray) were identified and predicted. Subsequent analysis of these proteins highlighted a sub-network, four regions of highly interconnected proteins with closely related functions (replication/transcription/translation (RTT), immunity, transport, and metabolism). 15 out of 23 proteins (65.2%) were highly interconnected in metabolism region. Consequently, the host infected by the virus can experiment dramatic metabolic alterations. These results support the presence of some common host requirement of DENV in humans and mosquitoes.


6. Concluding remarks and perspectives

After reviewing the historical issues about biochemistry with emphases on metabolism, together with the remarkable findings in cell molecular biology of autophagy pathways, it is clear that right now, we have a great open field for research. Curiously, the animal viruses, during several decades, had been studied, but under the viewpoint of virus-host cell interactions wherein the cell and the viruses have been considered isolated entities. Only in the last decade where the Cell Biology of Virus Infection emerged [134] was considered the cell as the structural and functional unit of infection. Therefore, now, the animal viruses play a role in the physiology of the cell, mimicry and using the metabolic and autophagic cell pathways for the completion of their viral cycles.

An overview was shown here for understanding the viral disease and other human pathologies from an integrative perspective including the theoretical framework and methodology of biochemistry fused to the molecular biology in a cellular compartment (autophagosome), which is triggered for several injuries and/or diseases.

It is important to establish the differences in mechanisms of infection. Therefore, in the basic requirements for this process in both vector (mosquito) and host (mammal), it is important to determine whether it alters in a similar way the metabolism in both models, although the molecular signaling through which these metabolic changes are induced to be different for everyone. It is very interesting that all of these recent researches in mosquitoes suggest alterations in JACK / STAT signaling, toll-like receptors, and metabolism (especially lipid). But knowing that autophagy is conserved from yeast to mammals, the role of autophagy has not been reported in DENV infection in mosquitoes. Moreover, there is a recent research which supports that autophagy is not decisive in the infection in monocytes. It appears that the autophagy is dependent on the cell type.

Together the ideas exposed here with the remarkable findings of several researchers give us a whole landscape where it is possible to find some cellular processes or events, which can be modulated by drugs trying to discover new therapeutical tools.



This research was supported by COLCIENCIAS grant 111554531592 from the Colombian government. JCGG was the recipient of a Full-Time Professor Program (Exclusive Dedication) for the Medicine Faculty at the University of Antioquia for 2014–2015.


  1. 1. Solomon T, Mallewa M. 2001. Dengue and other emerging flaviviruses. J Infect 42:104-115.
  2. 2. Guzman MG, Halstead SB, Artsob H, Buchy P, Farrar J, Gubler DJ, Hunsperger E, Kroeger A, Margolis HS, Martinez E, Nathan MB, Pelegrino JL, Simmons C, Yoksan S, Peeling RW. 2010. Dengue: a continuing global threat. Nat Rev Microbiol 8:S7-16.
  3. 3. Bhatt S, Gething PW, Brady OJ, Messina JP, Farlow AW, Moyes CL, Drake JM, Brownstein JS, Hoen AG, Sankoh O, Myers MF, George DB, Jaenisch T, Wint GR, Simmons CP, Scott TW, Farrar JJ, Hay SI. 2013. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature 496:504-507.
  4. 4. Gubler DJ. 2012. The Economic Burden of Dengue. Am J Trop Med Hyg 86:743-744.
  5. 5. Low JGH, Ong A, Tan LK, Chaterji S, Chow A, Lim WY, Lee KW, Chua R, Chua CR, Tan SWS, Cheung YB, Hibberd ML, Vasudevan SG, Ng LC, Leo YS, Ooi EE. 2011. The Early Clinical Features of Dengue in Adults: Challenges for Early Clinical Diagnosis, PLoS Negl Trop Dis, vol 5.
  6. 6. Lee YR, Lei HY, Liu MT, Wang JR, Chen SH, Jiang-Shieh YF, Lin YS, Yeh TM, Liu CC, Liu HS. 2008. Autophagic machinery activated by dengue virus enhances virus replication. Virology 374:240-248.
  7. 7. Gubler DJ. 1998. Dengue and dengue hemorrhagic fever. Clin Microbiol Rev 11:480-496.
  8. 8. Kurane I. 2007. Dengue hemorrhagic fever with special emphasis on immunopathogenesis. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 30:329-340.
  9. 9. Lindenbach BD, H.-J. Thiel, C.M. Rice. 2007. “Flaviviridae: The Viruses and Their Replication.” In Howley DMKaPM (ed), Fields Virology, 5th Edition ed. Lippincott-Raven Publishers.
  10. 10. Black WCt, Bennett KE, Gorrochotegui-Escalante N, Barillas-Mury CV, Fernandez-Salas I, de Lourdes Munoz M, Farfan-Ale JA, Olson KE, Beaty BJ. 2002. Flavivirus susceptibility in Aedes aegypti. Arch Med Res 33:379-388.
  11. 11. Bäck AT, Lundkvist Å. 2013. Dengue viruses – an overview. Infect Ecol Epidemiol 3:10.3402/iee.v3403i3400.19839.
  12. 12. Ravikumar B, Sarkar S, Davies JE, Futter M, Garcia-Arencibia M, Green-Thompson ZW, Jimenez-Sanchez M, Korolchuk VI, Lichtenberg M, Luo S, Massey DC, Menzies FM, Moreau K, Narayanan U, Renna M, Siddiqi FH, Underwood BR, Winslow AR, Rubinsztein DC. 2010. Regulation of mammalian autophagy in physiology and pathophysiology. Physiol Rev 90:1383-1435.
  13. 13. Levine B, Kroemer G. 2008. Autophagy in the pathogenesis of disease. Cell 132:27-42.
  14. 14. Mizushima N, Levine B, Cuervo AM, Klionsky DJ. 2008. Autophagy fights disease through cellular self-digestion. Nature 451:1069-1075.
  15. 15. Klionsky DJ. 2007. Autophagy: from phenomenology to molecular understanding in less than a decade. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:931-937.
  16. 16. Yordy B, Iwasaki A. 2011. Autophagy in the control and pathogenesis of viral infection. Curr Opin Virol 1:196-203.
  17. 17. Kelekar A. 2006. Autophagy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1066:259-271.
  18. 18. Levine B, Mizushima N, Virgin HW. 2011. Autophagy in immunity and inflammation. Nature 469:323-335.
  19. 19. Djavaheri-Mergny M, Maiuri MC, Kroemer G. 2010. Cross talk between apoptosis and autophagy by caspase-mediated cleavage of Beclin 1. Oncogene 29:1717-1719.
  20. 20. Levine B, Sinha S, Kroemer G. 2008. Bcl-2 family members: dual regulators of apoptosis and autophagy. Autophagy 4:600-606.
  21. 21. Maiuri MC, Zalckvar E, Kimchi A, Kroemer G. 2007. Self-eating and self-killing: crosstalk between autophagy and apoptosis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:741-752.
  22. 22. Mariño G, Niso-Santano M, Baehrecke EH, Kroemer G. 2014. Self-consumption: the interplay of autophagy and apoptosis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 15:81-94.
  23. 23. Shi J, Luo H. 2012. Interplay between the cellular autophagy machinery and positive-stranded RNA viruses. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai) 44:375-384.
  24. 24. Kamada Y, Funakoshi T, Shintani T, Nagano K, Ohsumi M, Ohsumi Y. 2000. Tor-mediated induction of autophagy via an Apg1 protein kinase complex. J Cell Biol 150:1507-1513.
  25. 25. Suzuki K, Kubota Y, Sekito T, Ohsumi Y. 2007. Hierarchy of Atg proteins in pre-autophagosomal structure organization. Genes Cells 12:209-218.
  26. 26. Epple UD, Suriapranata I, Eskelinen EL, Thumm M. 2001. Aut5/Cvt17p, a putative lipase essential for disintegration of autophagic bodies inside the vacuole. J Bacteriol 183:5942-5955.
  27. 27. Teter SA, Eggerton KP, Scott SV, Kim J, Fischer AM, Klionsky DJ. 2001. Degradation of lipid vesicles in the yeast vacuole requires function of Cvt17, a putative lipase. J Biol Chem 276:2083-2087.
  28. 28. Tanida I. 2011. Autophagy basics. Microbiol Immunol 55:1-11.
  29. 29. Stroupe C. 2011. Autophagy: cells SNARE selves. Curr Biol 21:R697-699.
  30. 30. Chua CE, Gan BQ, Tang BL. 2011. Involvement of members of the Rab family and related small GTPases in autophagosome formation and maturation. Cell Mol Life Sci 68:3349-3358.
  31. 31. He C, Klionsky DJ. 2009. Regulation mechanisms and signaling pathways of autophagy. Annu Rev Genet 43:67-93.
  32. 32. Jager S, Bucci C, Tanida I, Ueno T, Kominami E, Saftig P, Eskelinen EL. 2004. Role for Rab7 in maturation of late autophagic vacuoles. J Cell Sci 117:4837-4848.
  33. 33. Sahu R, Kaushik S, Clement CC, Cannizzo ES, Scharf B, Follenzi A, Potolicchio I, Nieves E, Cuervo AM, Santambrogio L. 2011. Microautophagy of cytosolic proteins by late endosomes. Dev Cell 20:131-139.
  34. 34. Cuervo AM. 2010. Chaperone-mediated autophagy: selectivity pays off. Trends Endocrinol Metab 21:142-150.
  35. 35. Kirkegaard K. 2009. Subversion of the cellular autophagy pathway by viruses. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 335:323-333.
  36. 36. Kudchodkar SB, Levine B. 2009. Viruses and autophagy. Rev Med Virol 19:359-378.
  37. 37. Lee HK, Iwasaki A. 2008. Autophagy and antiviral immunity. Curr Opin Immunol 20:23-29.
  38. 38. Orvedahl A, Levine B. 2009. Autophagy in Mammalian antiviral immunity. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 335:267-285.
  39. 39. Taylor MP, Jackson WT. 2009. Viruses and arrested autophagosome development. Autophagy 5:870-871.
  40. 40. Liang XH, Kleeman LK, Jiang HH, Gordon G, Goldman JE, Berry G, Herman B, Levine B. 1998. Protection against fatal Sindbis virus encephalitis by beclin, a novel Bcl-2-interacting protein. J Virol 72:8586-8596.
  41. 41. Orvedahl A, MacPherson S, Sumpter R, Jr., Talloczy Z, Zou Z, Levine B. 2010. Autophagy protects against Sindbis virus infection of the central nervous system. Cell Host Microbe 7:115-127.
  42. 42. Tallóczy Z, Jiang W, Virgin HW, Leib DA, Scheuner D, Kaufman RJ, Eskelinen EL, Levine B. 2002. Regulation of starvation- and virus-induced autophagy by the eIF2α kinase signaling pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:190-195.
  43. 43. DeBerardinis RJ, Thompson CB. 2012. Cellular metabolism and disease: what do metabolic outliers teach us? Cell 148:1132-1144.
  44. 44. Hanson RW. 2005. Metabolism in the era of molecular biology. J Biol Chem 280:1705-1715.
  45. 45. McKnight SL. 2010. On getting there from here. Science 330:1338-1339.
  46. 46. Takahashi H, McCaffery JM, Irizarry RA, Boeke JD. 2006. Nucleocytosolic acetyl-coenzyme a synthetase is required for histone acetylation and global transcription. Mol Cell 23:207-217.
  47. 47. Wellen KE, Hatzivassiliou G, Sachdeva UM, Bui TV, Cross JR, Thompson CB. 2009. ATP-citrate lyase links cellular metabolism to histone acetylation. Science 324:1076-1080.
  48. 48. Zhao S, Xu W, Jiang W, Yu W, Lin Y, Zhang T, Yao J, Zhou L, Zeng Y, Li H, Li Y, Shi J, An W, Hancock SM, He F, Qin L, Chin J, Yang P, Chen X, Lei Q, Xiong Y, Guan KL. 2010. Regulation of cellular metabolism by protein lysine acetylation. Science 327:1000-1004.
  49. 49. Sommer P, Sweeney G. 2010. Functional and Mechanistic Integration of Infection and the Metabolic Syndrome. Korean Diabetes J 34:71-76.
  50. 50. DeBerardinis RJ, Lum JJ, Hatzivassiliou G, Thompson CB. 2008. The biology of cancer: metabolic reprogramming fuels cell growth and proliferation. Cell Metab 7:11-20.
  51. 51. Deberardinis RJ, Sayed N, Ditsworth D, Thompson CB. 2008. Brick by brick: metabolism and tumor cell growth. Curr Opin Genet Dev 18:54-61.
  52. 52. DeBerardinis RJ. 2008. Is cancer a disease of abnormal cellular metabolism? New angles on an old idea. Genet Med 10:767-777.
  53. 53. DeBerardinis RJ. 2010. 2010 Keystone Symposium: Metabolism and Cancer Progression. Future Oncol 6:893-895.
  54. 54. Butel JS. 2000. Viral carcinogenesis: revelation of molecular mechanisms and etiology of human disease. Carcinogenesis 21:405-426.
  55. 55. Alto NM, Orth K. 2012. Subversion of cell signaling by pathogens. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 4:a006114.
  56. 56. Meckes DG, Jr., Raab-Traub N. 2011. Microvesicles and viral infection. J Virol 85:12844-12854.
  57. 57. Ali N, Allam H, May R, Sureban SM, Bronze MS, Bader T, Umar S, Anant S, Houchen CW. 2011. Hepatitis C virus-induced cancer stem cell-like signatures in cell culture and murine tumor xenografts. J Virol 85:12292-12303.
  58. 58. Wenk MR. 2006. Lipidomics of host-pathogen interactions. FEBS Lett 580:5541-5551.
  59. 59. Alomairi J, Cellular Stress CdReCdM, INSERM UMR 1068, CNRS UMR 7258, Aix-Marseille University and Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France, Infections GaPL, URMITE-IRD198, INSERM U1095, CNRS UMR7278, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France, Bonacci T, Cellular Stress CdReCdM, INSERM UMR 1068, CNRS UMR 7258, Aix-Marseille University and Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France, Ghigo E, Infections GaPL, URMITE-IRD198, INSERM U1095, CNRS UMR7278, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France, Soubeyran P, Cellular Stress CdReCdM, INSERM UMR 1068, CNRS UMR 7258, Aix-Marseille University and Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France, 2015. Alterations of host cell ubiquitination machinery by pathogenic bacteria. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology 5:7.
  60. 60. Dong H, Czaja MJ. 2011. Regulation of lipid droplets by autophagy. Trends Endocrinol Metab 22:234-240.
  61. 61. Singh R, Kaushik S, Wang Y, Xiang Y, Novak I, Komatsu M, Tanaka K, Cuervo AM, Czaja MJ. 2009. Autophagy regulates lipid metabolism. Nature 458:1131-1135.
  62. 62. Liu K, Czaja MJ. 2013. Regulation of lipid stores and metabolism by lipophagy. Cell Death Differ 20:3-11.
  63. 63. Masson P, Hulo C, de Castro E, Foulger R, Poux S, Bridge A, Lomax J, Bougueleret L, Xenarios I, Le Mercier P. 2014. An integrated ontology resource to explore and study host-virus relationships. PLoS One 9:e108075.
  64. 64. Wenk MR. 2005. The emerging field of lipidomics. Nat Rev Drug Discov 4:594-610.
  65. 65. Alvisi G, Madan V, Bartenschlager R. 2011. Hepatitis C virus and host cell lipids: an intimate connection. RNA Biol 8:258-269.
  66. 66. Diamond DL, Syder AJ, Jacobs JM, Sorensen CM, Walters KA, Proll SC, McDermott JE, Gritsenko MA, Zhang Q, Zhao R, Metz TO, Camp DG, 2nd, Waters KM, Smith RD, Rice CM, Katze MG. 2010. Temporal proteome and lipidome profiles reveal hepatitis C virus-associated reprogramming of hepatocellular metabolism and bioenergetics. PLoS Pathog 6:e1000719.
  67. 67. Munger J, Bennett BD, Parikh A, Feng XJ, McArdle J, Rabitz HA, Shenk T, Rabinowitz JD. 2008. Systems-level metabolic flux profiling identifies fatty acid synthesis as a target for antiviral therapy. Nat Biotechnol 26:1179-1186.
  68. 68. Spencer CM, Schafer XL, Moorman NJ, Munger J. 2011. Human cytomegalovirus induces the activity and expression of acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase, a fatty acid biosynthetic enzyme whose inhibition attenuates viral replication. J Virol 85:5814-5824.
  69. 69. Wang X, Diaz A, Hao L, Gancarz B, den Boon JA, Ahlquist P. 2011. Intersection of the multivesicular body pathway and lipid homeostasis in RNA replication by a positive-strand RNA virus. J Virol 85:5494-5503.
  70. 70. Chiramel AI, Brady NR, Bartenschlager R. 2013. Divergent Roles of Autophagy in Virus Infection. Cells 2:83-104.
  71. 71. Dong X, Levine B. 2013. Autophagy and viruses: adversaries or allies? J Innate Immun 5:480-493.
  72. 72. Amer AO, Swanson MS. 2005. Autophagy is an immediate macrophage response to Legionella pneumophila. Cell Microbiol 7:765-778.
  73. 73. Munoz-Elias EJ, McKinney JD. 2005. Mycobacterium tuberculosis isocitrate lyases 1 and 2 are jointly required for in vivo growth and virulence. Nat Med 11:638-644.
  74. 74. Lee W, VanderVen BC, Fahey RJ, Russell DG. 2013. Intracellular Mycobacterium tuberculosis exploits host-derived fatty acids to limit metabolic stress. J Biol Chem 288:6788-6800.
  75. 75. Albaker WI. 2011. Helicobacter pylori Infection and its Relationship to Metabolic Syndrome: Is it a Myth or Fact? Saudi J Gastroenterol 17:165-169.
  76. 76. Feingold KR, Grunfeld C. 2012. Lipids: a key player in the battle between the host and microorganisms. J Lipid Res 53:2487-2489.
  77. 77. Orvedahl A, Alexander D, Talloczy Z, Sun Q, Wei Y, Zhang W, Burns D, Leib DA, Levine B. 2007. HSV-1 ICP34.5 confers neurovirulence by targeting the Beclin 1 autophagy protein. Cell Host Microbe 1:23-35.
  78. 78. Chuluunbaatar U, Roller R, Feldman ME, Brown S, Shokat KM, Mohr I. 2010. Constitutive mTORC1 activation by a herpesvirus Akt surrogate stimulates mRNA translation and viral replication. Genes Dev 24:2627-2639.
  79. 79. Ku B, Woo JS, Liang C, Lee KH, Hong HS, E X, Kim KS, Jung JU, Oh BH. 2008. Structural and biochemical bases for the inhibition of autophagy and apoptosis by viral BCL-2 of murine gamma-herpesvirus 68. PLoS Pathog 4:e25.
  80. 80. Lee JS, Li Q, Lee JY, Lee SH, Jeong JH, Lee HR, Chang H, Zhou FC, Gao SJ, Liang C, Jung JU. 2009. FLIP-mediated autophagy regulation in cell death control. Nat Cell Biol 11:1355-1362.
  81. 81. Chaumorcel M, Souquere S, Pierron G, Codogno P, Esclatine A. 2008. Human cytomegalovirus controls a new autophagy-dependent cellular antiviral defense mechanism. Autophagy 4:46-53.
  82. 82. Syed GH, Amako Y, Siddiqui A. 2010. Hepatitis C virus hijacks host lipid metabolism. Trends Endocrinol Metab 21:33-40.
  83. 83. Vescovo T, Romagnoli A, Perdomo AB, Corazzari M, Ciccosanti F, Alonzi T, Nardacci R, Ippolito G, Tripodi M, Garcia-Monzon C, Lo Iacono O, Piacentini M, Fimia GM. 2012. Autophagy protects cells from HCV-induced defects in lipid metabolism. Gastroenterology 142:644-653.e643.
  84. 84. Jackson WT, Giddings TH, Jr., Taylor MP, Mulinyawe S, Rabinovitch M, Kopito RR, Kirkegaard K. 2005. Subversion of cellular autophagosomal machinery by RNA viruses. PLoS Biol 3:e156.
  85. 85. Prentice E, Jerome WG, Yoshimori T, Mizushima N, Denison MR. 2004. Coronavirus replication complex formation utilizes components of cellular autophagy. J Biol Chem 279:10136-10141.
  86. 86. Wong J, Zhang J, Si X, Gao G, Mao I, McManus BM, Luo H. 2008. Autophagosome supports coxsackievirus B3 replication in host cells. J Virol 82:9143-9153.
  87. 87. Shrivastava S, Raychoudhuri A, Steele R, Ray R, Ray RB. 2011. Knockdown of autophagy enhances the innate immune response in hepatitis C virus-infected hepatocytes. Hepatology 53:406-414.
  88. 88. Alexander DE, Ward SL, Mizushima N, Levine B, Leib DA. 2007. Analysis of the role of autophagy in replication of herpes simplex virus in cell culture. J Virol 81:12128-12134.
  89. 89. Wileman T. 2006. Aggresomes and autophagy generate sites for virus replication. Science 312:875-878.
  90. 90. Zhang H, Monken CE, Zhang Y, Lenard J, Mizushima N, Lattime EC, Jin S. 2006. Cellular autophagy machinery is not required for vaccinia virus replication and maturation. Autophagy 2:91-95.
  91. 91. Panyasrivanit M, Greenwood MP, Murphy D, Isidoro C, Auewarakul P, Smith DR. 2011. Induced autophagy reduces virus output in dengue infected monocytic cells. Virology 418:74-84.
  92. 92. Rubinsztein DC, Codogno P, Levine B. 2012. Autophagy modulation as a potential therapeutic target for diverse diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov 11:709-730.
  93. 93. Usme-Ciro JA, Mendez JA, Tenorio A, Rey GJ, Domingo C, Gallego-Gomez JC. 2008. Simultaneous circulation of genotypes I and III of dengue virus 3 in Colombia. Virol J 5:101.
  94. 94. Mendez JA, Usme-Ciro JA, Domingo C, Rey GJ, Sanchez JA, Tenorio A, Gallego-Gomez JC. 2012. Phylogenetic reconstruction of dengue virus type 2 in Colombia. Virol J 9:64.
  95. 95. Mendez JA, Usme-Ciro JA, Domingo C, Rey GJ, Sanchez JA, Tenorio A, Gallego-Gomez JC. 2010. Phylogenetic history demonstrates two different lineages of dengue type 1 virus in Colombia. Virol J 7:226.
  96. 96. Bartenschlager R, Miller S. 2008. Molecular aspects of Dengue virus replication. Future Microbiol 3:155-165.
  97. 97. Carter JR, Keith JH, Barde PV, Fraser TS, Fraser MJ, Jr. 2010. Targeting of highly conserved Dengue virus sequences with anti-Dengue virus trans-splicing group I introns. BMC Mol Biol 11:84.
  98. 98. Zhao H, Deng YQ, Hong WX, Yu XD, Jiang T, Yu M, Hu FY, Zhu SY, Li XF, Song KY, Qin ED, Zhang FC, Qin CF. 2012. Complete genome sequence of dengue virus serotype 2 Cosmopolitan genotype strain in Guangdong, China. J Virol 86:13808-13809.
  99. 99. Barrero PR, Mistchenko AS. 2004. Complete genome sequencing of dengue virus type 1 isolated in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Virus Res 101:135-145.
  100. 100. Usme-Ciro JA, Lopera JA, Enjuanes L, Almazan F, Gallego-Gomez JC. 2014. Development of a novel DNA-launched dengue virus type 2 infectious clone assembled in a bacterial artificial chromosome. Virus Res 180:12-22.
  101. 101. Hannemann H, Sung PY, Chiu HC, Yousuf A, Bird J, Lim SP, Davidson AD. 2013. Serotype-specific differences in dengue virus non-structural protein 5 nuclear localization. J Biol Chem 288:22621-22635.
  102. 102. de Wispelaere M, Yang PL. 2012. Mutagenesis of the DI/DIII Linker in Dengue Virus Envelope Protein Impairs Viral Particle Assembly. J Virol 86:7072-7083.
  103. 103. Lei HY, Yeh TM, Liu HS, Lin YS, Chen SH, Liu CC. 2001. Immunopathogenesis of dengue virus infection. J Biomed Sci 8:377-388.
  104. 104. Martina BE, Koraka P, Osterhaus AD. 2009. Dengue virus pathogenesis: an integrated view. Clin Microbiol Rev 22:564-581.
  105. 105. Usme-Ciro JA, Mendez JA, Laiton KD, Paez A. 2014. The relevance of dengue virus genotypes surveillance at country level before vaccine approval. Hum Vaccin Immunother 10:2674-2678.
  106. 106. Thomas SJ, Endy TP. 2011. Critical issues in dengue vaccine development. Curr Opin Infect Dis 24:442-450.
  107. 107. Slifka MK. 2014. Vaccine-Mediated Immunity Against Dengue and the Potential for Long-Term Protection Against Disease. Front Immunol 5.
  108. 108. Pando-Robles V, Oses-Prieto JA, Rodriguez-Gandarilla M, Meneses-Romero E, Burlingame AL, Batista CV. 2014. Quantitative proteomic analysis of Huh-7 cells infected with Dengue virus by label-free LC-MS. J Proteomics 111:16-29.
  109. 109. Birungi G, Chen SM, Loy BP, Ng ML, Li SF. 2010. Metabolomics approach for investigation of effects of dengue virus infection using the EA.hy926 cell line. J Proteome Res 9:6523-6534.
  110. 110. Fontaine KA, Sanchez EL, Camarda R, Lagunoff M. 2014. Dengue Virus Induces and Requires Glycolysis for Optimal Replication. J Virol.
  111. 111. Arnold PA, Johnson KN, White CR. 2013. Physiological and metabolic consequences of viral infection in Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 216:3350-3357.
  112. 112. Maynard ND, Gutschow MV, Birch EW, Covert MW. 2010. The Virus as Metabolic Engineer. Biotechnol J 5:686-694.
  113. 113. Joo KI, Tai A, Lee CL, Wong C, Wang P. 2010. Imaging multiple intermediates of single-virus membrane fusion mediated by distinct fusion proteins. Microsc Res Tech 73:886-900.
  114. 114. Gillespie LK, Hoenen A, Morgan G, Mackenzie JM. 2010. The endoplasmic reticulum provides the membrane platform for biogenesis of the flavivirus replication complex. J Virol 84:10438-10447.
  115. 115. McLean JE, Wudzinska A, Datan E, Quaglino D, Zakeri Z. 2011. Flavivirus NS4A-induced autophagy protects cells against death and enhances virus replication. J Biol Chem 286:22147-22159.
  116. 116. Welsch S, Miller S, Romero-Brey I, Merz A, Bleck CK, Walther P, Fuller SD, Antony C, Krijnse-Locker J, Bartenschlager R. 2009. Composition and three-dimensional architecture of the dengue virus replication and assembly sites. Cell Host Microbe 5:365-375.
  117. 117. Samsa MM, Mondotte JA, Iglesias NG, Assuncao-Miranda I, Barbosa-Lima G, Da Poian AT, Bozza PT, Gamarnik AV. 2009. Dengue virus capsid protein usurps lipid droplets for viral particle formation. PLoS Pathog 5:e1000632.
  118. 118. Paes MV, Pinhao AT, Barreto DF, Costa SM, Oliveira MP, Nogueira AC, Takiya CM, Farias-Filho JC, Schatzmayr HG, Alves AM, Barth OM. 2005. Liver injury and viremia in mice infected with dengue-2 virus. Virology 338:236-246.
  119. 119. Huerre MR, Lan NT, Marianneau P, Hue NB, Khun H, Hung NT, Khen NT, Drouet MT, Huong VT, Ha DQ, Buisson Y, Deubel V. 2001. Liver histopathology and biological correlates in five cases of fatal dengue fever in Vietnamese children. Virchows Arch 438:107-115.
  120. 120. Povoa TF, Alves AM, Oliveira CA, Nuovo GJ, Chagas VL, Paes MV. 2014. The pathology of severe dengue in multiple organs of human fatal cases: histopathology, ultrastructure and virus replication. PLoS One 9:e83386.
  121. 121. Heaton NS, Randall G. 2011. Multifaceted roles for lipids in viral infection. Trends Microbiol 19:368-375.
  122. 122. Heaton NS, Randall G. 2011. Dengue Virus and Autophagy. Viruses 3:1332-1341.
  123. 123. Heaton NS, Randall G. 2010. Dengue virus-induced autophagy regulates lipid metabolism. Cell Host Microbe 8:422-432.
  124. 124. Mateo R, Nagamine CM, Spagnolo J, Mendez E, Rahe M, Gale M, Jr., Yuan J, Kirkegaard K. 2013. Inhibition of cellular autophagy deranges dengue virion maturation. J Virol 87:1312-1321.
  125. 125. Fang YT, Wan SW, Lu YT, Yao JH, Lin CF, Hsu LJ, Brown MG, Marshall JS, Anderson R, Lin YS. 2014. Autophagy facilitates antibody-enhanced dengue virus infection in human pre-basophil/mast cells. PLoS One 9:e110655.
  126. 126. Lee YR, Hu HY, Kuo SH, Lei HY, Lin YS, Yeh TM, Liu CC, Liu HS. 2013. Dengue virus infection induces autophagy: an in vivo study. J Biomed Sci 20:65.
  127. 127. Zaitseva E, Yang ST, Melikov K, Pourmal S, Chernomordik LV. 2010. Dengue Virus Ensures Its Fusion in Late Endosomes Using Compartment-Specific Lipids. PLoS Pathog 6.
  128. 128. Arrese EL, Soulages JL. 2010. Insect fat body: energy, metabolism, and regulation. Annu Rev Entomol 55:207-225.
  129. 129. Arrese EL, Patel RT, Soulages JL. 2006. The main triglyceride-lipase from the insect fat body is an active phospholipase A(1): identification and characterization. J Lipid Res 47:2656-2667.
  130. 130. Cheon HM, Shin SW, Bian G, Park JH, Raikhel AS. 2006. Regulation of lipid metabolism genes, lipid carrier protein lipophorin, and its receptor during immune challenge in the mosquito Aedes aegypti. J Biol Chem 281:8426-8435.
  131. 131. Perera R, Riley C, Isaac G, Hopf-Jannasch AS, Moore RJ, Weitz KW, Pasa-Tolic L, Metz TO, Adamec J, Kuhn RJ. 2012. Dengue virus infection perturbs lipid homeostasis in infected mosquito cells. PLoS Pathog 8:e1002584.
  132. 132. Colpitts TM, Cox J, Vanlandingham DL, Feitosa FM, Cheng G, Kurscheid S, Wang P, Krishnan MN, Higgs S, Fikrig E. 2011. Alterations in the Aedes aegypti transcriptome during infection with West Nile, dengue and yellow fever viruses. PLoS Pathog 7:e1002189.
  133. 133. Guo X, Xu Y, Bian G, Pike AD, Xie Y, Xi Z. 2010. Response of the mosquito protein interaction network to dengue infection. BMC Genomics 11:380.
  134. 134. Krijnse-Locker J, Sodeik B, Suomalainen M. 2002. Meeting report from the EMBO workshop "The Cell Biology of Virus Infection", Heidelberg, Germany, 22-26 September 2001. Traffic 3:233-235.

Written By

Elizabeth Orozco-García and Juan Carlos Gallego-Gómez

Submitted: 14 January 2015 Reviewed: 19 August 2015 Published: 20 January 2016