| Literature DB >> 32851912 |
Rajan Rolta1, Rohitash Yadav2, Deeksha Salaria1, Shubham Trivedi3, Mohammad Imran4, Anuradha Sourirajan1, David J Baumler5, Kamal Dev1.
Abstract
Currently, there is no specific treatment to cure COVID-19. Many medicinal plants have antiviral, antioxidant, antibacterial, antifungal, anticancer, wound healing etc. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to screen for potent inhibitors of N-terminal domain (NTD) of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein of SARS-CoV-2. The structure of NTD of RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein of SARS coronavirus 2 was retrieved from the Protein Data Bank (PDB 6VYO) and the structures of 100 different phytocompounds were retrieved from Pubchem. The receptor protein and ligands were prepared using Schrodinger's Protein Preparation Wizard. Molecular docking was done by using the Schrodinger's maestro 12.0 software. Drug likeness and toxicity of active phytocompounds was predicted by using Swiss adme, admetSAR and protox II online servers. Molecular dynamic simulation of the best three protein- ligand complexes (alizarin, aloe-emodin and anthrarufin) was performed to study the interaction stability. We have identified three potential active sites (named as A, B, C) on receptor protein for efficient binding of the phytocompounds. We found that, among 100 phytocompounds, emodin, aloe-emodin, anthrarufin, alizarine, and dantron of Rheum emodi showed good binding affinity at all the three active sites of RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein of COVID-19.The binding energies of emodin, aloe-emodin, anthrarufin, alizarine, and dantron were -8.299, -8.508, -8.456, -8.441, and -8.322 Kcal mol-1 respectively (site A), -7.714, -6.433, -6.354, -6.598, and -6.99 Kcal mol-1 respectively (site B), and -8.299, 8.508, 8.538, 8.841, and 8.322 Kcal mol-1 respectively (site C). All the active phytocompounds follows the drug likeness properties, non-carcinogenic, and non-toxic. Theses phytocompounds (alone or in combination) could be developed into effective therapy against COVID-19. From MD simulation data, we found that all three complexes of 6VYO with alizarin, aloe-emodin and anthrarufin were stable up to 50 ns. These phytocompounds can be tested further for in vitro or in vivo and used as a potential drug to cure SARS-CoV-2 infection. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.Entities:
Keywords: Active site prediction and MD simulation; COVID-19; Molecular docking; Phytocompounds; RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein; antiviral and toxicity
Year: 2020 PMID: 32851912 PMCID: PMC7484575 DOI: 10.1080/07391102.2020.1804457
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomol Struct Dyn ISSN: 0739-1102
Figure 1.Proposed Binding mechanism of phytocompounds with NTD of nucleocapsid protein RNA binding protein of COVID-19 (Prepared using BioRender).
Figure 3.(A) Secondary structure of NTD (amino acid residues 50-173) of RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein from SARS coronavirus 2 (PDB ID: 6VYO); (B) Topology of secondary structure; and C) The Ramachandran plot describes the favored and disfavored regions of residues. The maximum (92.5%) residues are located in an allowed region.
Figure 2.Schematic of the experiments followed in the current study.
Ramachandran Plot statistics showing favored regions in RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein from SARS coronavirus 2 (PDB ID: 6VYO) (Yadav et al., 2020).
| Properties | RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein from SARS coronavirus 2(6YVO) | |
|---|---|---|
| Residues | % | |
| The Most favored regions | 358 | 92.5 |
| Additional allowed regions | 29 | 7.5 |
| Generously allowed regions | 0 | 0 |
| Disallowed regions | 0 | 0 |
| The End residues (excluding Glycine and Proline) | 8 | – |
| Proline | 64 | – |
| Glycine | 40 | – |
| Total number of residues | 499 | 100 |
Figure 4.(A) Conserved domains of (6 VYO_1) chains A, B, C, D nucleoprotein of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. (B) List of domain hits with E-values.
Figure 5.Active site prediction. 3-D structure representation of tetrameric RNA binding domain (N-terminal domain) of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein from SARS coronavirus 2 (PDB ID: 6VYO) showing three predicted binding sites shown as Active site A, Active site B and Active site C (A). Panel B, C, and D represent tetrameric RNA binding domain showing each active site as indicated.
Amino acids involved in active sites of RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein from SARS coronavirus 2 (PDB ID: 6VYO) (Yadav et al., 2020).
| Active Sites | D Score | Size | Site Score | Chains and amino acid residues numbers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site-A | 1.039 | 216 | 1.009 | |
| Site-B | 0.99 | 196 | 0.98 | |
| Site-C | 1.045 | 183 | 1.039 |
Each amino acid residue is numbered followed by three letter code. Amino acid residues in boldface letters are the phosphorylation sites on Serine and Threonine were predicted by Davidson et al. (2020). Nonstandard amino acids are CL, GOL, HOH, MES, ZN.
List of hundred major phytocompounds (numbered 1-100) of 10 medicinal plants with pharmacological properties.
| S.No | Medicinal Plants | Pharmacological properties | Major phytocompounds |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Treatment of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) (Ho et al., | (1) Alizarin, (2) Aloe-emodin, (3) Anthraquinone, (4) Anthrarufin, (5) Anthrone, (6) Chryophanol, (7) Clicoemodin, (8) Dantron, (9) Emodin, (10) Gallic acid, (11) Juglone, (12) Physicon, (13) Piceatannol, (14) Quinizarin, (15) Rubiadin | |
| 2. | Antimicrobial, antiviral, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-carcinogenic (Jaric et al., | (16) 3-Octanone, (17) 8-Prenylnaringenin, (18) Apigenin, (19) Apigenin-7-O-glucoside, (20) Bornyl acetate, (21) Camphene, (22) Camphor, (23) Carvacrol, (24) Caryophyllene oxide, (25) Catechin, (26) Eriodictyol, (27) Eriodictyol-7-glucuronide, (28) Geranyl acetate, (29) Linalool, (30) Myrcene, (31) Rutin, (32) Spathulenol, (33) Taxifolin, (34) Thymol, (35) trans-Nerolidol, (36) α-Pinene, (37) β-Bisabolene, (38) β-Caryophyllene, (39) β-Pinene, (40) δ-Cadinene. | |
| 3. | Anti-obesity, anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, anti-nociceptive, anti-oxidants anti-diarrheal, and anti-inflammatory (Singh & Shikha, | (41) Citral alpha, (42) citronellal, (43) Geraniol, (44) lemonene, (45) nerol, (46) terpinolene | |
| 4. | Antimicrobial (Pal et al., | (47) Glucomoringin, (48) Niazinicin A, (49) Niazinin, (50) Pterygospermin | |
| 5. | Antiplasmodial, antiviral, antibacterial and anti-gastric ulcer activity (Sharma et al., | (51) 8-Oxyberberine, (52) Berberine, (53) Jatrorrhizine, (54) Noroxyhydrastinine, (55) Palmatine, (56) Thalicarpine, (57) Thalidasine, (58) Thalirugidine, (59) Thalirugine, (60) Thalisopine, (61) Thalrugosaminine, (62) Thalrugosidine | |
| 6. | Anti-diabetic, anti-microbial, anti-cancer, antilipidemic, anti-HIV, anti-pyretic (Potdar et al., | (63) Berbamine, (64) Columbamine, (65) Isocorydine, (66) Lambertine, (67) Lupeol, (68) Oleanolic acid, (69) Oxyberberine, (70) Oxycanthine, (71) Stigmasterol | |
| 7. | Antimicrobial, antioxidant, anticancer, analgesic, anticonvulsant, neuroprotective, hypoglycemic, hypolipidemic, and anti-inflammatory activities (Takooree et al., | (72) Sabinene, (73) Piperolein B, (74) Piperolein A, (75) Piperine, (76) Piperazine, (77) Guaiol, (78) b-caryophyllene | |
| 8. | Anti-influenza A and B (Fenwick & Hanley, | (79) Vinyllithium, (80) Alliin, (81) Allicin, (82) (Z)-Ajoene, (83) (E)-Ajoene | |
| 9. | Antioxidant, antimicrobial, aphrodisiac, anticancer, hepatoprotective, anti-inflammatory, antidepressant, and cardioprotective activity (Ganjhu et al., | (84) Trimyristin, (85) safrole, (86) Sabinene, (87) myristicin, (88) methoxyeugenol, (89) meso-dihydroguaiaretic acid, (90) isoelemicin, (91) elemicin, (92) camphene, (93) 9-epoxylignan, (94) 4-terpinol | |
| 10. | Antifungal, antibacterial, antiviral, anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant, cardiovascular and immunomodulatory (Singh & Shikha, | (95) β-Sitosterol-β-D-Glucoside, (96) Xanthyletin, (97) Tambulin, (98) Sesamin, (99) Bergapten, (100) Armatamide |
Figure 6.Structures of potential phytocompounds of R. emodi: A) Anthrarufin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Alizarine, (D) Dantron, (E) Emodin.
Interacting amino acids and docking score of phytocompounds with binding site A (1.039) of 6VY0.
| Compound CID no. | Name of Ligand (Plant source) | ΔG Bind (kcal mol-1) | Docking Score | H-bond | Interactive Residues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10207 | Aloe- emodin ( | −25.45 | −8.508 | ||
| 8328 | Anthrarufin ( | −38.099 | −8.456 | ||
| 6293 | Alizarine ( | −31.2891 | −8.441 | ||
| 2950 | Dantron ( | −39. 8129 | −8.322 | ||
| 3220 | Emodin ( | −43.87 | −8.299 |
Each amino acid residue is numbered followed by three letter code. Amino acid residues in boldface letters are the phosphorylation sites on Serine and Threonine were predicted by Davidson et al. (2020).
Figure 7.The 2D molecular interactions of best 5 phytocompounds with active site A of 6VYO: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D), Dantron, (E) Emodin.
Figure 8.Surface view of 6VYO (active site A) complex with best 5 compounds of selected medicinal plants: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D), Dantron, (E) Emodin. Phytocompounds are colored in green.
Interacting amino acids and docking score of phytocompounds with binding site B (0.99).
| Compound CID no. | Nameof Ligand (Plant source) | ΔG Bind (kcal mol-1) | Docking Score | H-bond | Interactive Residues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3220 | Emodin ( | −40.60 | −7.714 | ||
| 2950 | Dantron ( | −45.48 | −6.99 | ||
| 6293 | Alizarine ( | −33.59 | −6.598 | ||
| 10207 | Aloe- emodin ( | −36.92 | −6.433 | ||
| 8328 | Anthrarufin ( | −34.9567 | −6.354 |
Each amino acid residue is numbered followed by three letter code. Amino acid residues in boldface letters are the phosphorylation sites on Serine and Threonine predicted by Davidson et al. (2020).
Figure 9.The 2 D molecular interactions of best 5 phytocompounds with active site B of 6VYO: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D) Dantron (E) Emodin.
Figure 10.Surface of 6VYO (active site B) with best 5 compounds: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D) Dantron (E) Emodi. Phytocompounds are colored in green.
Interacting amino acids and docking score of phytocompounds with binding site-C (1.045).
| Compound CID no. | Name of Ligand (Plant source) | ΔG Bind (kcal mol-1) | Docking Score | No. of H-bond | Interactive Residues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8328 | Anthrarufin ( | −39.48 | −8.538 | ||
| 10207 | Aloe- emodin ( | −32.61 | −8.508 | ||
| 6293 | Alizarine ( | −33.84 | −8.441 | ||
| 2950 | Dantron ( | −35.459 | −8.322 | ||
| 3220 | Emodin ( | −32.78 | −8.299 |
Each amino acid residue is numbered followed by three letter code. Amino acid residues in boldface letters are the phosphorylation sites on Serine and Threonine predicted by Davidson et al. (2020).
Figure 11.The 2 D molecular interactions of best 5 phytocompounds with active site C of 6VYO: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe- emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D) Dantron (E) Emodin. Phytocompounds are colored in green.
Figure 12.Surface of 6VYO (active site C) and 5 best compounds complex: (A) Alizarin, (B) Aloe-emodin, (C) Anthrarufin (D) Dantron (E) Emodin. Phytocompounds are colored in green.
ADME properties of selected phytocompounds predicted by SwissADME.
| Compounds | SwissADME | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water Solubility | GI Absorption | Drug likeness Rules | |||||||||
| Lipinski’s rule of 5 | Ghose | Veber | Egan | Muegge | |||||||
| Logp | nON | nOHNH | TPSA (Å2) | MW | |||||||
| Emodin | Soluble | High | 3.01 | 5 | 3 | 94.83 | 270.24 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Anthrarufin | Moderately soluble | High | 3.13 | 4 | 2 | 74.60 | 240.21 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Alizarine | Soluble | High | 2.90 | 4 | 2 | 74.60 | 240.21 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Aloe- emodin | Soluble | High | 2.42 | 5 | 3 | 94.83 | 270.24 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Dantron | Soluble | High | 3.13 | 4 | 2 | 74.60 | 240.21 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Toxicity prediction of active phytocompounds predicted by admetSAR and PROTOX-II software.
| Phytocompounds | admet SAR | Protox II | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carcinogens | Rate Acute toxicity (LD50) kg mol-1 | LD50, (mg kg-1) | Cytotoxicity | |
| Emodin | non-carcinogen | 2.5826 (III) | 5000 (Class 5) | Inactive |
| Anthrarufin | Non-carcinogen | 2.8601 (III) | 5000 (class 5) | Inactive |
| Alizarine | Non-carcinogen | 2.5292 (III) | 7000 (class 5) | Inactive |
| Aloe- emodin | Non-carcinogen | 2.9280 (II) | 5000 (class 5) | Inactive |
| Dantron | Non-carcinogen | 2.8601 (III) | 7000 (class 6) | Inactive |
Figure 13.A) RMSD graph of three protein-ligand complexes for 50 ns. (B) RMSF graph of three ligand-protein complexes for 50 ns.
Figure 14.(A) Number of Intermolecular hydrogen bonds between the ligands and amino acid residues of the target protein for 50 ns. (B) Radius of gyration (RoG) results of the ligand-protein complex for 50 ns.