Literature DB >> 31781679

Immunoinformatics Approach for Multiepitope Vaccine Prediction from H, M, F, and N Proteins of Peste des Petits Ruminants Virus.

Bothina B M Gaafar1, Sumaia A Ali1,2, Khoubieb Ali Abd-Elrahman3, Yassir A Almofti1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Small ruminant morbillivirus or peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV) is an acute and highly contagious viral disease of goats, sheep, and other livestock. This study aimed at predicting an effective multiepitope vaccine against PPRV from the immunogenic proteins haemagglutinin (H), matrix (M), fusion (F), and nucleoprotein (N) using immunoinformatics tools.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sequences of the immunogenic proteins were retrieved from GenBank of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). BioEdit software was used to align each protein from the retrieved sequences for conservancy. Immune Epitope Database (IEDB) analysis resources were used to predict B and T cell epitopes. For B cells, the criteria for electing epitopes depend on the epitope linearity, surface accessibility, and antigenicity.
RESULTS: Nine epitopes from the H protein, eight epitopes from the M protein, and ten epitopes from each of the F and N proteins were predicted as linear epitopes. The surface accessibility method proposed seven surface epitopes from each of the H and F proteins in addition to six and four epitopes from the M and N proteins, respectively. For antigenicity, only two epitopes 142PPERV146 and 63DPLSP67 were predicted as antigenic from H and M, respectively. For T cells, MHC-I binding prediction tools showed multiple epitopes that interacted strongly with BoLA alleles. For instance, the epitope 45MFLSLIGLL53 from the H protein interacted with four BoLA alleles, while 276FKKILCYPL284 predicted from the M protein interacted with two alleles. Although F and N proteins demonstrated no favorable interaction with B cells, they strongly interacted with T cells. For instance, 358STKSCARTL366 from the F protein interacted with five alleles, followed by 340SQNALYPMS348 and 442IDLGPAISL450 that interacted with three alleles each. The epitopes from the N protein displayed strong interaction with BoLA alleles such as 490RSAEALFRL498 that interacted with five alleles, followed by two epitopes 2 ATLLKSLAL 10 and 304QQLGEVAPY312 that interacted with four alleles each. In addition to that, four epitopes 3TLLKSLALF11 , 356YFDPAYFRL364 , 360AYFRLGQEM368 , and 412PRQAQVSFL420 interacted with three alleles each.
CONCLUSION: Fourteen epitopes were predicted as promising vaccine candidates against PPRV from four immunogenic proteins. These epitopes should be validated experimentally through in vitro and in vivo studies.
Copyright © 2019 Bothina B. M. Gaafar et al.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31781679      PMCID: PMC6875335          DOI: 10.1155/2019/6124030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immunol Res        ISSN: 2314-7156            Impact factor:   4.818


1. Introduction

Small ruminant morbillivirus (previously called peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV)) is one of the most damaging ruminant diseases. It is among the priority diseases indicated in the FAO-OIE Global Framework for the Progressive Control of Transboundary Animal Diseases (GF-TADs) in the 5-year Action Plan [1, 2]. PPRV is one of the top ten diseases in sheep and goats that are having a high impact on the poor rural small ruminant farmers [3]. The disease is considered an acute and highly contagious viral disease with a high morbidity and mortality rate in small ruminants, such as goats and sheep and related wild animals [4, 5]. The disease is characterized by high fever, depression, anorexia, ocular and nasal discharge, pneumonia, necrosis and ulceration of mucous membranes, and inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract leading to severe diarrhea [6, 7]. It causes high death rates in goats and sheep up to 100% and 90%, respectively. However, sheep can be subclinically infected and play a major role in the silent spread of PPRV over large distances and across borders [1]. The disease is widely distributed in Africa, on the Arabian Peninsula, and in the Middle East and Asia [5, 8, 9]. Morbilliviruses are rapidly inactivated at environmental temperature by solar radiation and desiccation. This indicated that the transmission occurred by direct contact with infected animals or their excretions. Transmission of PPRV occurs primarily by droplet infection but may also occur by ingestion of contaminated feed or water [6]. PPRV is an enveloped single strand of negative sense RNA virus, belonging to the genus Morbillivirus, in the family Paramyxoviridae which is closely related to rinderpest virus (RPV), canine distemper virus (CDV), and measles virus (MeV) [5, 10, 11]. The genome of morbilliviruses is organized into six transcriptional units encoding six structural proteins. These structural proteins include the nucleoprotein (N protein), matrix protein (M protein), polymerase or large protein (L protein), phosphoprotein (P protein), and two envelope glycoproteins, the haemagglutinin protein (H protein) and the fusion protein (F protein) [12-14]. The N protein played an important role in the viral life cycle, interacting with both viral and cellular proteins. It also interacted with the viral RNA to form the nucleocapsid structures seen in both the virions and infected cells [13]. The viral L and P proteins interact with the nucleocapsids to form the functional transcription/replication unit of the virion [13]. The C-termini of morbillivirus N proteins also interacted with cellular regulatory proteins such as heat shock protein Hsp72, interferon regulator factor- (IRF-) 3, and a novel cell surface receptor (genetically engineered receptor) [13]. The F protein facilitated the virus penetration of the host cell membrane. This protein is also critical for the induction of an effective protective immune response [15]. The M protein of paramyxoviruses forms an inner coat to the viral envelope and thus serves as a bridge between the surface viral glycoproteins and the ribonucleoprotein core. By virtue of its position, M appeared to play a central role in viral assembly by formation of new virions which were liberated from the infected cell by budding [16, 17]. Interaction of the PPRV H and F proteins with the host plasma membrane led to viral entry by binding of the H protein to receptors [17]. Generally, the protective cell-mediated and humoral immune responses against morbilliviruses are directed mainly against H, F, M, and N proteins. Moreover, PPRV is genetically grouped into four distinct lineages (I, II, III, and IV) based on the analysis of the fusion (F) gene. This classification of PPRV into lineages has broadened the understanding of the molecular epidemiology and worldwide movement of PPR viruses [7, 18–20]. Vaccination is the main tool for controlling and eradicating the PPR virus [12]. Despite the fact that live attenuated vaccines have been widely used to protect small ruminants against circulating PPRV [1, 3, 7], the continuous spread of PPR disease indicated two possible hypotheses. The first is the emergence of new PPRV strains with new genetic makeup and greater fitness in the face of vaccine-elicited protection. The second is the lapses in regulatory control that ultimately lead to movement of diseased/infected individuals across the region/state/country without proper monitoring and surveillance [1]. The advances made in the field of immunoinformatics tools coinciding with the knowledge on the host immune response lead to new disciplines in vaccine design against diseases via computer in silico epitope predictions. The epitope-driven vaccine is a new concept that is being successfully applied in multiple studies, particularly to the development of vaccines targeting conserved epitopes in variable or rapidly mutating pathogens [21-23]. The identification of specific epitopes derived from infectious disease has significantly advanced the development of peptide-based vaccines. Peptides elicited more desirable manipulation of immune response through the use of the B cell epitopes. These epitopes mainly induce antibody production from B cells and cellular response and cytokine secretion from T cells. The approach regarding the molecular basis of antigen recognition and HLA binding motifs to host class I and class II MHC proteins is highly supported by the immunoinformatics which aids in designing epitope-based vaccine motifs that serve as therapeutic candidates for many infectious diseases [24]. The main objective of this study was to analyze multiple immunogenic proteins from the PPR genome for designing a safe multiepitope vaccine using immunoinformatics tools present in the Immune Epitope Database (IEDB). These proteins include haemagglutinin protein (H), matrix protein (M), fusion protein (F), and nucleoprotein (N) sequences of PPRV strains reported in the (NCBI) database.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sequence Retrieval

Four immunogenic protein sequences of PPRV (updated August 2018) were retrieved from GenBank of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/protein) in Oct. 2018. These included 82 sequences from the haemagglutinin protein (H protein), 67 sequences from the matrix protein (M protein), 94 sequences from the fusion protein (F protein), and 80 sequences from the nucleoprotein (N protein). All sequences were retrieved in FASTA format. The retrieved sequences, their accession numbers, and geographical locations are listed in Tables 1–4.
Table 1

Retrieved strains of the H protein of PPRV with their date of collection, accession numbers, and geographical regions.

No.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYear
1AEH25644China201129ATS17278Sierra Leone201757ASN64042China2017
2ABY71271China200830AMX28327India201758ASN64036China2017
3AAS68031India200931AMX28319India201759ASN64030China2017
4ABX75304Cote d'Ivoire200832AMX28311India201760ASN64024China2017
5ABX75312Nigeria200833ANS54233Liberia201661ASN64018China2017
6ADM32488India201234AKT04315Benin201662ASN64012China2017
7AEX61013India201235AKT04307Benin201663ASN64006China2017
8ASY05923Georgia201736AKR81281India201564ASN64000China2017
9ARB50221China201737AKT04323Cote d'Ivoire201565ASN63994China2017
10ANS59483India201638AJT59441Senegal201566ASN63988China2017
11AKQ09544India201539AID07002Ghana201567ASN63982China2017
12AIL54036UAE201440AIN40492Kenya201468ASN63976China2017
13AIL54028Oman201441AHG50444India201469ASN63970China2017
14AIL54020Uganda201442ACQ44671China201170ASN63964China2017
15AIL53996Ethiopia201443ABY61988India200871ASN63867China2017
16AIL54012India201444ABY61986India200872ASN63861China2017
17AIL54004Ethiopia201445CAH61258Turkey200573ASN63855China2017
18CAD54790India200446ANG60369Nigeria201674ASN63849China2017
19AHA58209Iraq201847ANG60361Nigeria201675ART66998Algeria2017
20ARP51875Mongolia201848AJE30413China201576ALM55670China2016
21AOO35467China201849AJE30404China201577ALA65398China2015
22AIL29370Turkey201450AUP34040Nigeria201878AKN58853China2015
23AGG09146Morocco201451ASN64078China201579AJA39814China2015
24ADN03213India201352ASN64072China201780AIK97759China2014
25ACN62119India201553ASN64066China201781AIK19904Senegal2014
26CAJ01700Nigeria200554ASN64060China201782ADX95995Nigeria2011
27YP_133827Turkey201855ASN64054China2017
28AUO30190Bangladesh201856ASN64048China2017
Table 2

Retrieved strains of the matrix protein of PPRV with their date of collection, accession numbers, and geographical regions.

No.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYear
1YP_133825Turkey201824APX56396Mali201347AIL54018Uganda2014
2ANS54231Liberia201625APX56395Senegal201548AIL54010India2014
3AKT04313Benin201626APX56394Comoros200549AIL53994Ethiopia2014
4AKT04305Benin201627APX56393Mali201850AIL54002Ethiopia2014
5AMX28325India201728APX56392Mali201851AGO28147India2013
6AMX28317India201729APX56391Mali201847AIL54018Uganda2014
7ANS59481India201630APX56390Algeria201852AGG09144Morocco2013
8AKR81279India201531APX56389Guinea201853AEH25642China2011
9CAJ01698Nigeria200532APX56388Mauritania201854ACQ44669China2011
10ADN03215India201533APX56387Senegal201855ABY61987India2008
11ADN03212India201234APX56386Senegal201856ABY61985India2008
12ADM32486India201235AUO30188Bangladesh201857CAH61256Turkey2005
13ACN62117India201236ATS17276Sierra Leone201758AOO35465China2016
14AEX61011India201237ASY05921Georgia201759ABX75310Nigeria2008
15AWD71674Pakistan201838ARP51873Mongolia201760ABX75302Cote d'Ivoire2008
16AWD71668Pakistan201839AKQ09542India201561AUP34038Nigeria2018
17AWD71662Pakistan201840AKT04321Cote d'Ivoire201562ART66996Algeria2017
18AMX28309India201741AJT59439Senegal201563AIK19902Senegal2014
19APX56401Senegal201842AKG94167India201564ADX95993Nigeria2011
20APX56400Senegal201843AID07000Ghana201565AAS68029India2009
21APX56399Senegal201844AIN40490Kenya201466ANG60367Nigeria2016
22APX56398Senegal201445AIL54034UAE201467ANG60359Nigeria2016
23APX56397Senegal201446AIL54026Oman2014
Table 3

Retrieved strains of the fusion protein of PPRV with their date of collection, accession numbers, and geographical region.

No.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYear
1YP_133821Turkey201828AMQ48343China201655AFC87747Nigeria2012
2AIN40487Kenya201429AMQ48342China201656AFC87741Nigeria2012
3AYA72170India201830AKQ09546India201557AFC87740Nigeria2012
4AYA72169India201831AKG94165India201558AFC87739Nigeria2012
5AYA72168India201832AIL54030UAE201459ABZ81035China2008
6AYA72167India201833AIL54022Oman201460AEX61010India2012
7ACN62116India201234AIL54014Uganda201461AEH25639China2011
8ACN62115India201235AIL53990Ethiopia201462ACQ44667China2011
9AUO30184Bangladesh201836AIL54006India201463CAH61252Turkey2005
10AUB45018China201737AIL53998Ethiopia201464CAD91555Turkey2003
11ATS17282Sierra Leone201738AGJ84027Morocco201365CAA52454Nigeria2005
12ANS54228Liberia201639AFC87764Nigeria201266AMX28321India2017
13AKT04301Benin201640AFC87763Nigeria201267AMX28313India2017
14AKT04317Cote d'Ivoire201541AFC87762Nigeria201268AMX28305India2017
15AJT59435Senegal201542AFC87761Nigeria201269ANS59477India2016
16ABX75299Cote d'Ivoire200843AFC87760Nigeria201270AKT04309Benin2016
17ABY61984India200844AFC87759Nigeria201271AKR81275India2015
18ABX75307Nigeria200845AFC87758Nigeria201272AGG09141Morocco2013
19ART66992Algeria201746AFC87757Nigeria201273ADJ05523China2010
20APD77391China201647AFC87756Nigeria201274AAS68026India2009
21ADN03214India201248AFC87755Nigeria201275ANG60363Nigeria2016
22ADN03211India201249AFC87754Nigeria201276ANG60355Nigeria2016
23ADM32485India201250AFC87753Nigeria201277AUP34034Nigeria2018
24ASY05917Georgia201751AFC87752Nigeria201278AIK19898Senegal2014
25ARP51869India201752AFC87750Nigeria201279ADX95989Nigeria2011
26AOO35463China201753AFC87749Nigeria201280AID07004Ghana2015
27AMQ48344China201654AFC87748Nigeria2012
Table 4

Retrieved strains of the nucleoprotein of PPRV with their date of collection, accession numbers, and geographical regions.

No.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYearNo.Accession numberCountryYear
1AHA58208Iraq201833ASN63969China201765AIL54019Uganda2014
2AOO35466China201634ASN63963China201766AIL53995Ethiopia2014
3AGJ84028Morocco201335ASN63872China201767AIK97758China2014
4CAJ01699Nigeria200536ASN63866China201768AIK19903Senegal2014
5AHN53450India201437ASN63860China201769AIL54011India2014
6ADN03216India201238ASN63854China201770AIL54003Ethiopia2014
7ADM32487India201239ASN63848China201771AHG50445India2014
8ACN62118India201240ARP51874Mongolia201772AGP04219Bangladesh2013
9AEX61012India201241AMX28326India201773AGG09145Morocco2013
10ADX95994Nigeria201142AMX28318India201774AFR66765China2012
11YP_133826Turkey201743AMX28310India201775ACV31220India2012
12ATS17277Sierra201744APD77392China201676ACV31219India2012
13ASY05922Georgia201745ANS59482India201677ACQ44670China2011
14ASV72322China201746AHF58487India201678ADJ05518China2010
15ASN64077China201747ALM55669China201679CAH61257Turkey2005
16ASN64071China201748AKT04314Benin201680AXE28383Israel2018
17ASN64065China201749AKT04306Benin201681AWD71675Pakistan2018
18ASN64059China201750ALA65397China201582AWD71669Pakistan2018
19ASN64053China201751AKN58852China201583AWD71663Pakistan2018
20ASN64047China201752AKR81280India201584AUP34039Nigeria2018
21ASN64041China201753AKQ09543India201585AUO30189Bangladesh2018
22ASN64035China201754AKT04322Cote d'Ivoire201586ANG60368Nigeria2016
23ASN64029China201755AJT59440Senegal201587ANG60360Nigeria2016
24ASN64023China201756AKG94168India201588ANS54232Liberia2016
25ASN64017China201757AJA39813China201589ART66997Algeria2017
26ASN64011China201758AID07001Ghana201590ABX75303Cote d'Ivoire2008
27ASN64005China201759AJE30412China201591ABX75311Nigeria2008
28ASN63999China201760AJE30403China201592ABY71270China2008
29ASN63993China201761AJE30396China201593AAS68030India2009
30ASN63987China201762AIN40491Kenya201494AEH25643China2011
31ASN63981China201763AIL54035UAE2014
32ASN63975China201764AIL54027Oman2014

2.2. Phylogenetic Evolution

A phylogenetic tree of the retrieved sequences of each immunogenic protein was constricted using MEGA7.0.26 (7170509) software [25]. Each protein tree was constructed using the maximum likelihood parameter in the software.

2.3. Multiple Sequence Alignment

The complete protein sequences of each immunogenic protein of PPRV were aligned via BioEdit software (version 7.2.5) to generate a multiple sequence alignment (MSA) with the ClustalW tool [26].

2.4. Epitope Prediction

Several immunobioinformatics tools were used for prediction of multiple epitopes from the four immunogenic proteins of PPRV. Tools from the Immune Epitope Database analysis resource (http://www.iedb.org/) [27] were used to analyze the immunogenic proteins. The input was the reference sequences of H protein (YP_133827.2), M protein (YP_133825.1), F protein (YP_133826.1), and N protein (YP_133821.1). They were submitted to Epitope Analysis Resources to predict B and T cell epitopes. The predicted epitopes were further investigated in aligned retrieved sequences for conservancy to identify the proposed candidate epitopes.

2.4.1. B Cell Epitope Prediction

Epitopes that interacted with the B lymphocytes are a discrete part from the antigenic molecule that is recognized by the B cell receptor and elicited immunoglobulin production. These predicted epitopes are characterized by their surface accessibility and their antigenic reactivity with the immunoglobulins of the humoral immunity [24]. Epitope prediction tools of the Immune Epitope Database (IEDB) at http://tools.iedb.org/bcell/ [27] were used for this purpose. Linear B cell epitopes were predicted by BepiPred linear epitope prediction (http://tools.iedb.org/bcell/result/) [28]. The Emini surface accessibility prediction tool was performed to detect the surface accessible epitopes (http://tools.iedb.org/bcell/) [29], while prediction of antigenic epitopes was performed to identify the antigenic determinants on proteins based on the physicochemical properties of amino acid residues using the Kolaskar and Tongaonkar antigenicity method (http://tools.immuneepitope.org/bcell/) [30].

2.4.2. Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Epitope Prediction

IEDB tools (http://tools.iedb.org/mhci/) were used to predict different cytotoxic T cell (CTL) epitopes that bind to the major histocompatibility complex class I alleles (MHC class I) [31]. Analysis was done using cow alleles (BoLA-D18.4, BoLA-HD6, BoLA-JSP.1, BoLA-T2a, BoLA-T2b, and BoLA-T2c). An artificial neural network (ANN) was used to predict the binding affinity [32, 33]. The peptide length for all selected epitopes was set to 9 amino acids (9mers). Percentile rank required for the peptide's binding to the specific MHC-I molecules was set in the range from 1 to 3.

2.5. Homology Modeling

2.5.1. The Three-Dimensional (3D) Structures of the Reference Sequences of PPRV

The prediction of the three-dimensional (3D) structure of H, M, and F protein reference sequences of PPRV was performed using the RaptorX structure prediction server (http://raptorx.uchicago.edu/StructurePrediction/predict/) [34-36], while the N protein sequence was submitted to the SPARKS-X server (http://sparks-lab.org/yueyang/server/SPARKS-X/) [37]. The 3D structure of each protein reference sequence was later treated with Chimera software 1.8 to show the position of proposed epitopes [38].

3. Results and Discussion

The validity and benefits of peptide vaccines designed by bioinformatics tools had been verified by appreciable research [24]. The availability of the complete genome, proteome sequences, and pathogenesis of many pathogenic microorganisms contributed to the production of a vaccine through bioinformatics [24, 39]. In this study, the predicted epitopes from B and T lymphocytes would help in the development of a more effective, reliable, preventive, and therapeutic vaccine against the PPRV than the conventional methods.

3.1. Phylogenetic Evolution

A phylogenetic tree was constructed using MEGA7.0.26 (7170509). The evolutionary divergence among each protein was analyzed. As shown in Figure 1, the retrieved strains of the H protein revealed that Asian strains were clustered together as well as the European and African strains. However, strains from the United Arab Emirates and Oman were closely related to African strains (namely to Ethiopian strains). With regard to the phylogeny of the M protein strains, the African strains were also clustered together, but among them, the Oman and United Arab Emirates strains were observed to be close to the Ethiopian strains same as those of the H protein. This result may indicate the transfer of the H and M strain segments between these countries. Also, some European and Turkish strains were clustered together. As shown in Figure 2, the retrieved strains of F and N proteins from the Asian strains were clustered together with molecular divergence among them as well as the strains retrieved from the African countries. Also, the Omanis and Emiratis strains showed close relationship to the African strains. These results indicated that these strain segments were widely distributed in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Arab region.
Figure 1

Phylogenetic tree of retrieved strains of H and M proteins. The retrieved strains demonstrated divergence in their common ancestors.

Figure 2

Phylogenetic tree of retrieved strains of F and N proteins. The retrieved strains demonstrated divergence in their common ancestors.

3.2. Sequence Alignment

Multiple sequence alignment was performed using ClustalW in BioEdit software. As shown in Figure 3, the aligned sequences of each of the four analyzed proteins (H, M, F, and N proteins) showed considerable conservancy among the retrieved strains. However, some regions exhibited differences (mutations) in some amino acids in various sequences.
Figure 3

Multiple sequence alignment (MSA) of the retrieved strains of H, M, F, and N proteins using BioEdit software and ClustalW. Dots indicate the conservancy of the retrieved strains, and letters within the aligned sequences indicate no conservancy (mutation) in the amino acid.

3.3. Prediction of B Cell Epitopes

B cell epitope prediction methods aimed are at identifying the antigens recognized by B lymphocytes to initiate humoral immunity [24]. The important criteria for selecting a potential epitope for vaccine development are surface accessibility, hydrophobicity, flexibility, and antigenicity [40]. The predicted epitopes should be located on the surface of the cells so that it is more accessible for both the humoral and the cellular immune systems. Antigenicity also is one of the important features of an antigen for vaccine development [40]. Depending on binding affinity to B lymphocytes, the BepiPred linear epitope prediction method predicted nine linear epitopes from the H protein, eight epitopes from M proteins, and ten epitopes for each of the F and N proteins. Analysis of these linear epitopes for surface accessibility proposed seven surface epitopes from each of the H and F proteins, six epitopes from the M protein, and four epitopes from the N protein. As shown in Figure 4, the threshold values were 0.350 and 1.000 for all epitopes predicted through the BepiPred linear epitope (conserved epitopes) and Emini prediction methods (surface accessibility), respectively. The antigenicity prediction method proposed only two epitopes for all test immunogenic proteins of PPRV. Also, Figure 4 shows that the antigenic epitopes were predicted from H, M, F, and N proteins using the Kolaskar and Tongaonkar antigenicity method under threshold values of 1.014, 1.037, 1.054, and 1.014, respectively. However, no epitopes successfully passed the threshold for the F and N proteins.
Figure 4

Prediction of B cell epitopes by different IEDB scales (BepiPred linear epitope prediction, Emini surface accessibility, and Kolaskar and Tongaonkar antigenicity prediction) for H, M, F, and N proteins. Regions above the threshold (red line) were proposed as a part of the B cell epitope while regions below the threshold (red line) were not.

Only one epitope from each of the H and M proteins successfully overlapped all the B cell antigenic index prediction methods. Namely, these epitopes were from the H protein and from the M protein. The 3D structure of the four proteins (H, M, F, and N) is shown in Figure 5. The positions of the best B cells that predicted epitopes from the H and M proteins are demonstrated in Figure 6. The overall predicted epitopes from the four proteins are illustrated in Table 5.
Figure 5

The prediction of the three-dimensional (3D) structure of H, M, and F protein reference sequences of PPRV was performed using the RaptorX structure prediction server, while the N protein sequence was submitted to the SPARKS-X server.

Figure 6

The positions of the proposed B cell epitopes in the 3D structure of the reference sequences of PPRV H and M proteins.

Table 5

B cell epitope prediction from H, M, F, and N proteins; the position of peptides is according to the position of amino acids in the protein of the PPR virus.

H proteinPeptideStartEndLengthEmini 1.000Kolaskar 1.041
1PHNK161942.6830.969
2SIDHQ838751.1691.03
3PPERV#14214651.9041.047
4TVTL30530840.5051.113
5TLGG33033340.4620.977
6EANWVVPSTDVRDLQ362376151.0221.039
7KTRPPSFCNGTG387398121.3140.982
8GPWSEGRIP40040891.0230.962
9DVSR53053341.291.034

M proteinPeptideStartEndLengthEmini 1.000Kolaskar 1.037
1SAWDV101450.5331.044
2GDRK434642.4780.886
3EDNDPLSP606783.1670.969
4DPLSP#636751.3321.051
5VGRT697240.7951.01
6PEEL879041.4641.004
7DNGYYS16717262.1160.975
8INDD32532841.2030.915

F proteinPeptideStartEndLengthEmini 1.000Kolaskar 1.054
1TGSA343740.8670.965
2SNQA15315641.6910.967
3SLRDP21622052.0581.013
4QEWYT30530952.6250.966
5VFTP33133440.6431.112
6GTVC33633940.2551.144
7GSTKS35736151.8880.947
8QDPDK40240655.4980.948
9VGSREYPD42843582.8371.01
10LKPDLTGTSKS531541113.2690.996

N proteinPeptideStartEndLengthEmini 1.000Kolaskar 1.014
1DKAPTASGSGGAI1628130.2490.981
2IPGDSSI394570.3451.019
3GDPDINGS606780.7350.935
4TDDPDV929761.5690.992
5STRSQS10711262.3970.972
6GADLD12012450.6190.984
7VTAPDTAADS182191100.5941.02
8RTPGNKPR24224984.8530.92
9KFSA32332640.831.024
10RGTGPRQA40841581.690.943

∗Peptides revealed a higher score if they were shortened in all tools. #Epitopes that passed all the B cell prediction methods and were proposed as B cell epitopes.

3.4. Prediction of CTL Epitopes That Interacted with MHC Class I (BoLA Alleles)

CD8+ and CD4+ T cells have a principal role in the stimulation of immune response as well as antigen-mediated clonal expression of the B cell [14]. Unfortunately, the bovine genome project did not assemble a complete sequence of the bovine MHC-II locus [41-43]. Thus, the analysis was completed with BoLA MHC-I alleles only. Cell-mediated immunity induced by cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) is vital for the defense against viral diseases. CTLs are responsible for the immune elimination of intracellular pathogens such as viruses because these cells recognize the presented endogenous antigenic peptides by the MHC class I molecules [44]. In this study, MHC-I binding prediction methods using the IEDB database predicted different CTL epitopes that strongly interacted with various BoLA alleles. The fusion (F) protein proposed a higher number of predicted epitopes with strong interaction with BoLA alleles. Ten epitopes were proposed based on the number of the interacted alleles. The best one was that associated with five alleles, followed by and as they linked to three alleles each. However, seven epitopes, namely, , , , , , , and were predicted to interact with two alleles. The nucleoprotein (N) also displayed strong interaction activity with BoLA alleles. Seven epitopes were proposed with strong interaction with BoLA alleles. The top N protein epitope was which was associated with five alleles, followed by two epitopes, namely, 2ATLLKSLAL10, and that linked to four alleles each. In addition to that, four epitopes , , , and interacted with three bovine alleles each. Surprisingly, these two proteins (F and N) achieved promising results in CTL prediction methods, although they failed to predict any epitope carrying all the ideal traits in B cells. The haemagglutinin (H) protein predicted five CTL epitopes, but one epitope was predicted as the best peptide, , as it linked to four BoLA alleles, followed by four peptides that interacted with two alleles each. They were , , , and . However, this protein showed a somewhat satisfactory result in B and T cell prediction methods. The M protein showed unsatisfactory results in CTL prediction methods different from that predicted by B cell methods. The results suggested only one epitope; interacted with only two alleles. The overall epitopes that were proposed to interact with CTL alleles are illustrated in Table 6 for all proteins. The positions of the best CTL-predicted epitopes in their immunogenic protein structure are shown in Figure 7.
Table 6

Position of CTL epitopes in the H protein, M protein, F protein, and N protein of PPRV that bind with high affinity with the BoLA class I alleles.

PeptideStartEndAllelePercentile rank
H proteinDLVKFISDK113121BoLA-T2a2
BoLA-T2C1.9
FLRVFEIGL251259BoLA-HD61
GRIPAYGVI405413BoLA-D18.42.3
BoLA-T2b2.1
LLAIAGIRL5260BoLA-HD61.5
BoLA-T2b2.3
LSLIGLLAI4755BoLA-T2a2.9
LVKFISDKI114122BoLA-HD61.3
MFLSLIGLL4553BoLA-HD62.1
BoLA-JSP.11.7
BoLA-T2b1.4
BoLA-T2C1.7
VMFLSLIGL4452BoLA-JSP.12.6
BoLA-T2C1.7
WCYHDCLIY578586BoLA-T2a1.2
WSEGRIPAY402410BoLA-JSP.12.2

M proteinSAWDVKGSI1018BoLA-HD61.8
EELLREATE8896BoLA-T2b1
ELLREATEL8997BoLA-HD61.3
PQRFRVVYM152160BoLA-JSP.11.7
HVGNFRRKK220228BoLA-T2a2.4
GGIGGTSLH251259BoLA-T2a2
LHAQLGFKK270278BoLA-T2a1.2
AQLGFKKIL272280BoLA-T2C2.4
FKKILCYPL276284BoLA-D18.41.2
BoLA-HD61.3
EFRVYDDVI316324BoLA-HD62.6

F proteinAGVALHQSL129137BoLA-T2C1.7
ASVLCKCYT387395BoLA-T2a1.4
AYPTLSEIK280288BoLA-T2a2.9
CSQNALYPM339347BoLA-JSP.12.3
BoLA-T2a2.5
DETSCVFTP326334BoLA-T2b2.7
DLGPAISLE443451BoLA-T2C1.3
EKLDVGTNL451459BoLA-T2b2.7
GSTKSCART357365BoLA-T2a2.6
GTVCSQNAL336344BoLA-JSP.12.5
BoLA-T2b1.6
GVALHQSLM130138BoLA-HD62.1
IAYPTLSEI279287BoLA-HD62.9
BoLA-JSP.12.3
IDLGPAISL442450BoLA-D18.42.1
BoLA-T2b1.4
BoLA-T2C1.2
IQALSYALG227235BoLA-T2b2.7
IQVGSREYP426434BoLA-D18.42.8
KGIKARVTY259267BoLA-D18.41.2
KPDLTGTSK532540BoLA-T2a2.6
LEKLDVGTN450458BoLA-T2b3
LIANCASVL382390BoLA-HD61.6
LSKGNLIAN377385BoLA-T2a3
LSYALGGDI230238BoLA-HD61.8
BoLA-JSP.11.2
NALYPMSPL342350BoLA-T2b1.5
PMSPLLQEC346354BoLA-T2C3
RFILSKGNL374382BoLA-T2b2
SIQALSYAL226234BoLA-T2b1
SLMNSQAIE136144BoLA-D18.43
BoLA-T2C2.5
SQNALYPMS340348BoLA-D18.42.7
BoLA-HD61.7
BoLA-D18.42.3
STKSCARTL358366BoLA-D18.43
BoLA-HD62.7
BoLA-JSP.11.6
BoLA-T2b2.9
BoLA-T2C2.7
TGTSKSYVR536544BoLA-T2a2.9
TKSCARTLV359367BoLA-D18.42.3
TLSEIKGVI283291BoLA-D18.42.4
BoLA-T2C1.8
YVATQGYLI314322BoLA-HD62
BoLA-T2C2.8

N proteinATLLKSLAL210BoLA-D18.41.6
BoLA-JSP.11.3
BoLA-T2a2.6
BoLA-T2b1.9
TLLKSLALF311BoLA-D18.42.6
BoLA-HD63
BoLA-T2C1.3
QQLGEVAPY304312BoLA-HD62.2
BoLA-JSP.13
BoLA-T2a1.4
BoLA-T2b2.9
YFDPAYFRL356364BoLA-JSP.11.3
BoLA-T2b2.4
BoLA-T2C1.5
AYFRLGQEM360368BoLA-HD61.6
BoLA-JSP.12.1
BoLA-T2C2.9
PRQAQVSFL412420BoLA-JSP.11.7
BoLA-T2b2.2
BoLA-T2C2.6
RSAEALFRL490498BoLA-D18.41.2
BoLA-HD61.2
BoLA-T2a1.9
BoLA-T2b2.9
BoLA-T2C2.7
Figure 7

The positions of the predicted T cell epitopes in the 3D structure of the reference sequences of PPRV H, M, F, and N proteins.

Vaccination is considered the most effective way of controlling PPR. The infection by morbillivirus is associated with severe immunosuppression that is characterized by a massive virus-specific immune response. Protection is mediated by cell-mediated and humoral immune responses directed mainly against particular proteins in the viral structure. These proteins included H, F, and N proteins [45-47]. It was reported that the envelope glycoproteins H and F of PPRV demonstrated a protective and neutralizing antibody response [3, 48–50]. In this study, using the immunoinformatics prediction methods, the H protein demonstrated affinity to interact with B cells that was characterized by antibody production. This result coincided with the previously published reports [3, 48–50], while the F protein failed to interact with B cells; i.e., no epitopes from the F protein had passed the threshold of the B cell prediction methods. However, this protein revealed multiple predicted epitopes that demonstrated high affinity to the alleles of CTLs. The M protein which is believed to play a very significant role in morbillivirus assembly and budding by concentrating the F, H, and N proteins at the virus-assembly site [16, 17] showed moderate affinity to B cells. One epitope from the M protein as well as the H protein was predicted as a B cell epitope. Moreover, the M protein revealed multiple epitopes that interacted with CTLs of the cell-mediated immunity. This result indicated that the M protein besides its role in the virus assembly may also contain antigenic determinants that could be elected as vaccine candidates. In addition to that, cell-mediated immunity plays a role in protection against the viral infection. Despite the N protein being the most frequent viral protein in PPRV, it does not induce a neutralizing antibody response in the host [50]. However, it has been found to induce a strong cell-mediated immune response, which is believed to contribute to protection. Here, in this report, the same result was obtained. The N protein demonstrated no affinity to elicit the humoral immune response. However, it showed favorable affinity to interact with a cell-mediated response. It is noteworthy that five out of seven epitopes predicted from the nucleoprotein of PPRV in this study were found to be proposed by another in silico study using mouse alleles and NetMHCI methods [51]. The proposed epitopes from that study were ATLLKSLAL, TLLKSLALF, YFDPAYFRL, AYFRLGQEM, and RSAEALFRL. Thus, the predictions for the different epitopes that bound to different alleles particularly from the N protein of PPRV were somewhat in agreement regardless of the alleles (cow and mouse alleles) and algorithm used (ANN, NetMHCI). In general, epitope-based vaccines that are chemically well-characterized have become desirable candidate vaccines due to their relative ease of production and construction, chemical stability, and lack of infectious potential [52]. Many in silico studies have shown the value of using prediction programs to evaluate the efficiency of binding of putative epitopes to various human and animal alleles [33, 52–55].

4. Conclusion

This study focused mainly on the production of a peptide vaccine against H, M, F, and N proteins of PPRV using immunoinformatics tools. Epitopes that showed conservancy and high binding affinities to many MHC alleles are considered the best candidates for in vitro and in vivo testing. Epitopes that were predicted from B cell prediction methods like and from the H protein and and from the M protein could act as good B cell epitopes to induce humoral immunity. While the F and N proteins failed to fulfill all B cell indexes used in this study for the prediction of promising epitopes, however, these proteins predicted epitopes that interacted with various BoLA MHC-I alleles. For instance, the best epitopes were predicted from F () and N () proteins as they interacted with five MHC-I BoLA alleles, followed by proposed from the H protein and linked with four alleles, while the epitope was predicted from the M protein linked with only two alleles. Although bioinformatics studies have been established to facilitate the peptide design, not all peptides that are predicted in silico are optimally immunogenic in vivo and it remains necessary to test the expected peptides in vivo to ensure that the T cell responses are elicited.
  45 in total

Review 1.  Epitope-driven DNA vaccine design employing immunoinformatics against B-cell lymphoma: a biotech's challenge.

Authors:  Sandra Iurescia; Daniela Fioretti; Vito Michele Fazio; Monica Rinaldi
Journal:  Biotechnol Adv       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 14.227

2.  Geographic distribution and epidemiology of peste des petits ruminants virus.

Authors:  M S Shaila; D Shamaki; M A Forsyth; A Diallo; L Goatley; R P Kitching; T Barrett
Journal:  Virus Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 3.303

Review 3.  Global distribution of peste des petits ruminants virus and prospects for improved diagnosis and control.

Authors:  Ashley C Banyard; Satya Parida; Carrie Batten; Chris Oura; Olivier Kwiatek; Genevieve Libeau
Journal:  J Gen Virol       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 3.891

4.  Immune responses in goats to recombinant hemagglutinin-neuraminidase glycoprotein of Peste des petits ruminants virus: identification of a T cell determinant.

Authors:  G Sinnathamby; G J Renukaradhya; M Rajasekhar; R Nayak; M S Shaila
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2001-09-14       Impact factor: 3.641

5.  Dolphin and porpoise morbilliviruses are genetically distinct from phocine distemper virus.

Authors:  T Barrett; I K Visser; L Mamaev; L Goatley; M F van Bressem; A D Osterhaust
Journal:  Virology       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.616

6.  Current situation of Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) in the Sudan.

Authors:  Intisar K Saeed; Yahia H Ali; AbdelMelik I Khalafalla; E A Rahman-Mahasin
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 1.559

7.  Sequence analysis of the phosphoprotein gene of peste des petits ruminants (PPR) virus: editing of the gene transcript.

Authors:  Madhuchhanda Mahapatra; Satya Parida; Berhe G Egziabher; Adama Diallo; Tom Barrett
Journal:  Virus Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.303

8.  Improved method for predicting linear B-cell epitopes.

Authors:  Jens Erik Pontoppidan Larsen; Ole Lund; Morten Nielsen
Journal:  Immunome Res       Date:  2006-04-24

9.  Sequence-based in silico analysis of well studied hepatitis C virus epitopes and their variants in other genotypes (particularly genotype 5a) against South African human leukocyte antigen backgrounds.

Authors:  Nishi Prabdial-Sing; Adrian J Puren; Sheila M Bowyer
Journal:  BMC Immunol       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 3.615

10.  In silico analysis to identify vaccine candidates common to multiple serotypes of Shigella and evaluation of their immunogenicity.

Authors:  Sapna Pahil; Neelam Taneja; Hifzur Rahman Ansari; G P S Raghava
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  5 in total

1.  Design of a multi-epitope subunit vaccine for immune-protection against Leishmania parasite.

Authors:  Sunita Yadav; Jay Prakash; Harish Shukla; Kanhu Charan Das; Timir Tripathi; Vikash Kumar Dubey
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2020-11-08       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Vaccine design of coronavirus spike (S) glycoprotein in chicken: immunoinformatics and computational approaches.

Authors:  Eman A Awadelkareem; Sumaia A Ali
Journal:  Transl Med Commun       Date:  2020-08-27

3.  Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte elicited vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 employing immunoinformatics framework.

Authors:  Neeraj Kumar; Nikita Admane; Anchala Kumari; Damini Sood; Sonam Grover; Vijay Kumar Prajapati; Ramesh Chandra; Abhinav Grover
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Bioinformatics in Sudan: Status and challenges case study: The National University-Sudan.

Authors:  Sofia B Mohamed; Sumaya Kambal; Sabah A E Ibrahim; Esra Abdalwhab; Abdalla Munir; Arwa Ibrahim; Qurashi Mohamed Ali
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 4.475

5.  Development of multivalent vaccine targeting M segment of Crimean Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus (CCHFV) using immunoinformatic approaches.

Authors:  Maaza Sana; Aneela Javed; Syed Babar Jamal; Muhammad Junaid; Muhammad Faheem
Journal:  Saudi J Biol Sci       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 4.052

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.