ArticlePLoS pathogens2026
African swine fever virus impairs porcine alveolar macrophages bactericidal function by disrupting lysosomal acidification and cathepsin activity.
Article in PLoS pathogens, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
African swine fever virus (ASFV) is a devastating pathogen that poses a severe threat to the global swine industry. ASFV primarily targets the porcine monocyte-macrophage system, which is crucial for defending against bacterial infections via phagocytosis and subsequent intracellular degradation. Clinically, ASFV infection can be complicated by severe secondary bacterial infections. This creates a compelling paradox: while prior in vitro studies indicate that ASFV actually increases the phagocytic activity of porcine alveolar macrophages (PAMs), clinical observations frequently report severe secondary bacterial infections. This contradiction led us to hypothesize that the downstream intracellular bactericidal clearance might be compromised. Here, utilizing an in vitro co-infection model, it was demonstrated that ASFV significantly impairs the bactericidal capacity of PAMs against representative bacteria (Escherichia coli, Glaesserella parasuis, and Streptococcus suis), facilitating their intracellular survival and persistence. Although ASFV infection triggers massive reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, this oxidative stress remains functionally ineffective because phagolysosomal acidification and structural integrity are profoundly impaired. Mechanistically, at the late stage of infection, ASFV launches a multipronged assault on the endolysosomal network. Structurally, ASFV inhibits phagosomal and lysosomal acidification while inducing oxidative stress-driven severe lysosomal membrane permeabilization (LMP), leading to reduced phagolysosome volume and physical depletion of the lysosomal pool. Molecularly, ASFV impairs degradative capacity through the transcriptional suppression and blunted lysosomal enrichment of vacuolar (H+) ATPase (V-ATPase) subunits, alongside the disruption of lysosomal protease cathepsin D (CTSD) maturation. Furthermore, systematic screening identified six core candidate viral proteins, including CP530R, D129R, E183L, O174L, Q706L, and QP509R, that profoundly suppress both ATP6V0D and CTSK transcription, further exacerbating this functional impairment. Collectively, our in vitro findings reveal that ASFV dismantles host phagolysosomal acidification, thereby neutralizing the microbicidal potential of infected macrophages and potentially converting them into a permissive niche for secondary bacterial pathogens. These observations provide critical new mechanistic insights that may help explain ASFV-associated immune dysfunction at the cellular level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.