Abu Hamza1, Zoya Shafat1, Zahoor Ahmad Parray1, Malik Hisamuddin2, Wajihul Hasan Khan3, Anwar Ahmed4, Fahad N Almajhdi5,4, Mohamed A Farrag5, Arif Ahmed Mohammed4, Asimul Islam1, Shama Parveen1. 1. Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Basic Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi 110025, India. 2. Interdisciplinary Biotechnology Unit, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India. 3. Kusuma School of Biological Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India. 4. Centre of Excellence in Biotechnology Research, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia. 5. Department of Botany and Microbiology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading viral pathogen causing acute lower respiratory tract infection in children. The G protein of RSV is involved in attachment with the host cell. It is a neutralizing antigen and thus a vaccine candidate. Heparan sulfate is a type of glycosaminoglycan (GAG) present on the host cell membrane that is involved in attachment with the G protein of RSV. We describe a novel approach for efficient expression and purification of the ectodomain G protein in the prokaryotic system and its biophysical characterization. The native ectodomain G protein was purified using a two-step process by Ni-NTA and DEAE weak anion-exchange chromatography through the supernatant obtained after cell lysis. In addition, the denatured form of the protein was also purified from the solubilized inclusion bodies (IBs) by Ni-NTA affinity chromatography with a higher yield. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) was performed to confirm the homogeneity of the purified protein. The effect of pH on the stability and structure of the purified protein was studied by circular dichroism (CD), fluorescence, and absorbance spectroscopy techniques. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and microscale thermophoresis (MST) were exploited to demonstrate the interaction of heparan sulfate with the ectodomain G protein. The dynamic light scattering results showed that the purified protein was homogenic and had a well-folded native conformation. Biophysical characterization of the protein revealed that it was stable and had intact secondary and tertiary structures at pH 7.5. CD analysis revealed that the protein showed a loss in the secondary structure at pH values 5.5 and 3.5, while absorbance spectroscopy suggested a stable tertiary structure at pH values 7.5 and 5.5 with a probable aggregation pattern at pH 3.5. This loss in the structure of the ectodomain G protein at low pH can be correlated with its physiological activity. A slight change in pH might play a crucial role in host-pathogen interactions. The fluorescence intensity of the protein decreased on moving toward a lower pH with no spectral shift in emission maxima. In addition, isothermal titration calorimetry and microscale thermophoresis results showed strong binding affinity of the ectodomain G protein with heparan sulfate. The binding of heparan sulfate with protein was probably due to the electrostatic interaction of positively charged amino acid residues of the heparin-binding domain of the protein and the negatively charged group of GAGs. Future studies may involve the development of possible therapeutic agents interacting with the G protein and affecting the overall charge and pH that might hinder the host-pathogen interaction.
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading viral pathogen causing acute lower respiratory tract infection in children. The G protein of RSV is involved in attachment with the host cell. It is a neutralizing antigen and thus a vaccine candidate. Heparan sulfate is a type of glycosaminoglycan (GAG) present on the host cell membrane that is involved in attachment with the G protein of RSV. We describe a novel approach for efficient expression and purification of the ectodomain G protein in the prokaryotic system and its biophysical characterization. The native ectodomain G protein was purified using a two-step process by Ni-NTA and DEAE weak anion-exchange chromatography through the supernatant obtained after cell lysis. In addition, the denatured form of the protein was also purified from the solubilized inclusion bodies (IBs) by Ni-NTA affinity chromatography with a higher yield. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) was performed to confirm the homogeneity of the purified protein. The effect of pH on the stability and structure of the purified protein was studied by circular dichroism (CD), fluorescence, and absorbance spectroscopy techniques. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and microscale thermophoresis (MST) were exploited to demonstrate the interaction of heparan sulfate with the ectodomain G protein. The dynamic light scattering results showed that the purified protein was homogenic and had a well-folded native conformation. Biophysical characterization of the protein revealed that it was stable and had intact secondary and tertiary structures at pH 7.5. CD analysis revealed that the protein showed a loss in the secondary structure at pH values 5.5 and 3.5, while absorbance spectroscopy suggested a stable tertiary structure at pH values 7.5 and 5.5 with a probable aggregation pattern at pH 3.5. This loss in the structure of the ectodomain G protein at low pH can be correlated with its physiological activity. A slight change in pH might play a crucial role in host-pathogen interactions. The fluorescence intensity of the protein decreased on moving toward a lower pH with no spectral shift in emission maxima. In addition, isothermal titration calorimetry and microscale thermophoresis results showed strong binding affinity of the ectodomain G protein with heparan sulfate. The binding of heparan sulfate with protein was probably due to the electrostatic interaction of positively charged amino acid residues of the heparin-binding domain of the protein and the negatively charged group of GAGs. Future studies may involve the development of possible therapeutic agents interacting with the G protein and affecting the overall charge and pH that might hinder the host-pathogen interaction.
Respiratory syncytial
virus (RSV) leads to around 33.8 million
cases across the globe and hospitalization of 2.8–4.3 million
individuals with 66 000–99 000 deaths annually,
and most of the deaths occur in children below 5 years.[1,2] RSV belongs to the genus Orthopneumovirus and family
Pneumoviridae.[3] RSV is an enveloped virus,
and its genome is negative-sense, nonsegmented, single-stranded RNA
of approximately 15.2 kb in length that encodes for 11 proteins. The
nucleocapsid of the RSV is bounded by a lipid envelope where three
transmembrane glycoproteins SH, F, and G are embedded that play an
important role in viral entry, fusion and attachment, respectively.
The G protein of RSV is a type II transmembrane glycoprotein, which
helps in virion attachment to the host cell. It acts as a neutralizing
antigen and hence is a good candidate for vaccine development.[4] The length of G protein may vary from 282 to
321 amino acids.[5] The G protein of RSV
consists of three main domains (Figure ), namely, the cytoplasmic domain (residues 1–37),
transmembrane/anchor domain (residues 38–66), and ectodomain
(residues 67–298).[6] The C-terminal
region of the ectodomain G protein contains two hypervariable segments,
which are accountable for the variability.[7] The ectodomain G protein has a stretch of a centrally conserved
13 amino acid region (164–176aa), which is highly conserved,
among all RSV strains.[8,9] This region has a cluster of four
cysteine residues (173, 176, 182, and 186) that are held together
by two disulfide bonds (between Cys173–Cys186 and Cys176–Cys182)
with the residues spanning the third cysteine (Cys182) and fourth
cysteine (Cys186) forming a CX3C motif. This region forms a cystine
nooselike motif, which facilitates the attachment of RSV to human
airway epithelial (HAE) cells by interaction with CX3CR1 during natural
infection.[10,11] Immediately downstream of the
cystine noose lies the glycosaminoglycan (GAG)/heparan binding region
(HBR) from 184 to 198, encompassing a residue of positively charged
amino acids, which facilitated the attachment to heparan sulfate and
other glycosaminoglycans.[12] GAGs are long,
linear, unbranched polymers of replicating disaccharide units that
form proteoglycans in the extracellular matrix and are covalently
bound to the host cell membrane protein. Generally, GAGs are highly
sulfated and have a negative charge. A recent study indicated that
the HBR in the G protein mediates attachment of RSV to negatively
charged heparan sulfate via basic amino acids.[12,13] Previously, it was shown that heparan sulfate and to some extent
chondritin-4-sulfate had been involved in virion attachment with the
host cell membrane.[14]
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of G glycoprotein showing different regions
that include the cytoplasmic tail, transmembrane domain, and ectodomain.
The ectodomain contains a central conserved domain (CCD), cysteine
noose (Cys noose), CX3C motif, and heparin-binding domain (HBD). The
soluble G protein was produced through another initiation site, Met48.
Schematic representation
of G glycoprotein showing different regions
that include the cytoplasmic tail, transmembrane domain, and ectodomain.
The ectodomain contains a central conserved domain (CCD), cysteine
noose (Cys noose), CX3C motif, and heparin-binding domain (HBD). The
soluble G protein was produced through another initiation site, Met48.The G protein gene of RSV has been extensively
used for phylogenetic
analysis.[15−17] Some of the investigations have attempted cloning
and expression of the RSV G gene in the bacterial system for antigenic
characterization.[18,19] Although information is available
about the function of the G protein, limited data is available that
demonstrates its structural properties. The structural characterization
of G protein and its role in viral infection under physiological conditions
need to be investigated in detail. The ectodomain G-protein-encoding
gene has been cloned, expressed, and purified at suboptimal levels
by our research group in a previous study.[20] In this study, the ectodomain G protein showed expression in the
inclusion bodies (IBs). We solubilized the IBs using 8 M urea followed
by its purification using affinity chromatography. However, the protein
showed minimal expression with a negligible amount of protein in the
soluble form. Therefore, in the present study, we have continued modification
of the expression and purification protocols. We used the same clone
of the ectodomain G protein and have optimized the conditions for
the purification of the protein under native conditions from the supernatant
in a soluble form as well as from the solubilized IBs in a denatured
form. The effect of pH on tertiary and secondary structures of the
ectodomain G protein was evaluated by absorbance, fluorescence, and
circular dichroism spectroscopy techniques. In addition, the binding
studies of the ectodomain G protein with heparan sulfate were carried
out by isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and microscale thermophoresis
(MST). It was interesting to determine the possible capacity of binding
of the ectodomain G protein with the host cell and estimate the importance
of GAGs in host–viral interactions. Moreover, structural characterization
and binding studies of G protein may also facilitate the process of
drug designing and vaccine development, which might assist in preventing
the RSVinfection.
Results
Expression
of Ectodomain G Protein
The recombinant pET-28a vector harboring
the ectodomain G protein
gene was transformed into BL21 (DE3) competent cells of Escherichia coli, and the isolated plasmid was confirmed
by agarose gel electrophoresis with double digestion using BamH1 and Sal 1 endonucleases (Figure A). The cells were
grown in Luria–Bertani (LB) medium with different isopropyl-1-thio-β-d-galactopyranoside (IPTG) concentrations used for optimum expression
of the recombinant ectodomain G protein at 37 °C. No significant
change was observed in the expression of protein beyond the 0.5 mM
IPTG concentration (Figure B). Therefore, the 0.5 mM IPTG concentration was considered
for optimization studies. The expression of ectodomain G proteins
was also checked with 0.5 mM IPTG induction up to a post-induction
period of 5 h at 37 °C. The cells were collected at every 1 h
interval, and the cell lysate was analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and Western blotting. The ectodomain
G protein showed maximal expression after a 4 h post-induction period
(Figure C,D).
Figure 2
(A) Restriction
digestion products of the recombinant pET-28a vector.
Lane 1: released insert [ectodomain G protein gene (748 bp)]; Lane
M: molecular weight marker. (B) SDS-PAGE gel photograph showing the
expression of ectodomain G protein (45 kDa) induced by increasing
the concentration of IPTG at 37 °C. Lane M: molecular mass marker;
Lane 1: vector without insert; Lane 2: un-nduced bacterial pellet;
and Lanes 3–8: pellet induced with 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25,
and 1.50 mM IPTG, respectively. (C) SDS-PAGE gel photograph showing
the expression of ectodomain G protein induced with 0.5 mM IPTG at
37 °C. Lane 1: uninduced pellet; Lanes 2–5: induced pellet
after the 2nd to 5th h, respectively. (D) Western blot showing the
expression of ectodomain G protein at different hours after induction
with 0.5 mM IPTG at 37 °C. Lane 6: uninduced pellet; Lanes 7–10:
induced pellet after the 2nd to 5th h, respectively; and Lane M: molecular
mass marker.
(A) Restriction
digestion products of the recombinant pET-28a vector.
Lane 1: released insert [ectodomain G protein gene (748 bp)]; Lane
M: molecular weight marker. (B) SDS-PAGE gel photograph showing the
expression of ectodomain G protein (45 kDa) induced by increasing
the concentration of IPTG at 37 °C. Lane M: molecular mass marker;
Lane 1: vector without insert; Lane 2: un-nduced bacterial pellet;
and Lanes 3–8: pellet induced with 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25,
and 1.50 mM IPTG, respectively. (C) SDS-PAGE gel photograph showing
the expression of ectodomain G protein induced with 0.5 mM IPTG at
37 °C. Lane 1: uninduced pellet; Lanes 2–5: induced pellet
after the 2nd to 5th h, respectively. (D) Western blot showing the
expression of ectodomain G protein at different hours after induction
with 0.5 mM IPTG at 37 °C. Lane 6: uninduced pellet; Lanes 7–10:
induced pellet after the 2nd to 5th h, respectively; and Lane M: molecular
mass marker.
Purification
of the Ectodomain G Protein in
Native Conditions
The soluble ectodomain G protein was purified
from the bacterial cell extract after lysis and sonication followed
by centrifugation. The protein present in the supernatant was purified
under the native conditions at 4 °C. However, a little amount
of ectodomain G protein was present in a soluble form because a major
fraction of the protein was expressed in inclusion bodies (IBs). Thereafter,
we proceeded for the ectodomain G protein purification using both
native (supernatant) and denatured (IBs) conditions. The native ectodomain
G protein was purified to homogeneity by Ni-NTA affinity and DEAE
ion-exchange chromatography using two different chromatographic steps.
The ectodomain G protein purified after Ni-NTA chromatography showed
some nonspecific bands of bacterial proteins. Hence, the eluted protein
was dialyzed extensively, concentrated, and subjected to DEAE anion-exchanger
column chromatography to obtain its pure form. The protein bound to
the column was eluted with a linear gradient of NaCl (1 M NaCl 0–100%).
Three peaks along with an unbound fraction (highest peak) were collected.
The first and second peaks were eluted at a 0.45 and 0.64 M ionic
strength of NaCl, respectively (Figure A). The protein eluted at 0.45 M NaCl clearly showed
a 45 kDa single band on SDS-PAGE, indicating its purity (Figure B). After anion-exchange
chromatography, we were able to recover 0.35 mg mL–1 protein.
Figure 3
Purification of the ectodomain G protein. (A) Elution profile at
280 nm (milli absorbance) versus elution volume (mL) of the weak anion
exchanger (HiTrap DEAE FF). The second (light green) curve indicates
the gradient of sodium chloride (0–100%) where buffer A has
10 mM Tris buffer of pH 8.0 and buffer B has 1.0 M sodium chloride.
(B) SDS-PAGE of the purified native ectodomain G protein. Lanes 1
and 2: peak I of the chromatogram (HiTrap DEAE FF) showing the purified
ectodomain G protein containing 150 and 100 μg of protein; lane
3: peak II; and Lane M: molecular mass marker. (C) SDS-PAGE gel photograph
showing the inclusion bodies (IBs) of the ectodomain G protein (Lane
1). (D) SDS-PAGE showing the elution profile of Ni-NTA column chromatography.
Lane 1: supernatant; lane 2: flow throw; lane 3: washing; and lanes
4–8: elution with 50, 100, 150, 300, and 500 mM imidazole,
respectively. (E) SDS-PAGE of the purified ectodomain G protein. Lane
1: purified ectodomain G protein (45 kDa). (F) Western blot of the
purified ectodomain G protein. (G) Dynamic light scattering profile
of the purified ectodomain G protein. (The X-axis
shows the radius (nm), and the Y-axis represents
the intensity (%)).
Purification of the ectodomain G protein. (A) Elution profile at
280 nm (milli absorbance) versus elution volume (mL) of the weak anion
exchanger (HiTrap DEAE FF). The second (light green) curve indicates
the gradient of sodium chloride (0–100%) where buffer A has
10 mM Tris buffer of pH 8.0 and buffer B has 1.0 M sodium chloride.
(B) SDS-PAGE of the purified native ectodomain G protein. Lanes 1
and 2: peak I of the chromatogram (HiTrap DEAE FF) showing the purified
ectodomain G protein containing 150 and 100 μg of protein; lane
3: peak II; and Lane M: molecular mass marker. (C) SDS-PAGE gel photograph
showing the inclusion bodies (IBs) of the ectodomain G protein (Lane
1). (D) SDS-PAGE showing the elution profile of Ni-NTA column chromatography.
Lane 1: supernatant; lane 2: flow throw; lane 3: washing; and lanes
4–8: elution with 50, 100, 150, 300, and 500 mM imidazole,
respectively. (E) SDS-PAGE of the purified ectodomain G protein. Lane
1: purified ectodomain G protein (45 kDa). (F) Western blot of the
purified ectodomain G protein. (G) Dynamic light scattering profile
of the purified ectodomain G protein. (The X-axis
shows the radius (nm), and the Y-axis represents
the intensity (%)).
Purification
of the Ectodomain G Protein from
Inclusion Bodies
The ectodomain G protein was also purified
under denatured conditions. Purified IBs were isolated from bacterial
cell extracts by washing with lysis buffer and Milli-Q water to eliminate
contamination of proteases, host protein, DNA, endotoxins, and nonspecific
proteins.[21] Purified IBs showed an intense
band at 45 kDa on SDS-PAGE (Figure C). Isolated IBs were solubilized in N-lauroylsarcosine and purified by Ni-NTA affinity chromatography
in a single step with increasing concentrations of imidazole (50–500
mM). SDS-PAGE showed that the desired ectodomain G protein was eluted
at 100 and 200 mM imidazole (Figure D).
Protein Refolding
Protein refolding
is the crucial step to get rid of denaturants and thus provides a
better environment for proteins to refold into their native conformations
spontaneously. The purified proteins were gradually dialyzed against
25 mM Tris buffer, pH 7.5, having 5% glycerol, 100 mM NaCl, and 1
mM redox shuffling agent (reduced and oxidized glutathione), for 24
h at 4 °C to obtain the refolded protein. Subsequently, the protein
was centrifuged and passed through a 0.22 μm membrane filter
to get rid of protein precipitates, which could have formed during
the refolding process. SDS-PAGE and Western blot indicated a single
purified band of the ectodomain G protein (Figure E,F).
Dynamic
Light Scattering
Dynamic
light scattering (DLS) measurements were performed to confirm the
homogeneity and hydrodynamic size (dH)
of the purified ectodomain G protein. This technique has been performed
to recognize the folding, unfolding, and aggregation behaviors of
the proteins.[22] The dH value of the purified ectodomain G protein was found to be
7.4 nm (Figure G).
Analysis of Spectral Measurement
The secondary
structure and backbone orientation of the purified
protein were monitored with different pH values using far-UV circular
dichroism (CD) (200–250 nm) at 25 °C. The far-UV CD spectrum
of the ectodomain G protein at physiological pH 7.5 suggested that
the structure of the protein is a mixture of β-sheet and α-helix
with two ellipticity minima at 208 and 222 nm.[23] We recorded the far-UV CD spectra at 25 and 85 °C
and then again at 25 °C after cooling to check the reversible
nature of the protein. We also observed the behavior of the protein’s
secondary structure content at different pH values. The ectodomain
G protein was stable and reversible at pH 7.5 (Figure A), while it was irreversible after cooling
at pH values 5.5 and 3.5 (Figure B,C). Interestingly, we found a significant decrease
in the intensity of far-UV spectra on moving from pH 7.5 to 3.5 at
25 °C (Figure D). The spectra of ectodomain G protein suggested that it has its
secondary structure content at pH 7.5. In contrast, on moving toward
acidic pH (5.5 and 3.5), the intensity of far-UV spectra decreased
and there was a loss of secondary structure content. Taken together,
our observation suggested that the ectodomain G protein maintains
its secondary structure at physiological pH, whereas it loses most
of the secondary structure at acidic pH values.
Figure 4
Far-UV CD spectra of
the ectodomain G protein. Green, red, and
blue represent spectra at 25, 85, and 25 °C after cooling, respectively.
CD spectra of the ectodomain G protein (A) at pH 7.5, (B) at pH 5.5,
and (C) at pH 3.5. (D) CD spectra of the ectodomain G protein at pH
7.5 (dark green), pH 5.5 (dark blue), and pH 3.5 (dark red). The spectrum
at pH 7.5 is considered as control.
Far-UV CD spectra of
the ectodomain G protein. Green, red, and
blue represent spectra at 25, 85, and 25 °C after cooling, respectively.
CD spectra of the ectodomain G protein (A) at pH 7.5, (B) at pH 5.5,
and (C) at pH 3.5. (D) CD spectra of the ectodomain G protein at pH
7.5 (dark green), pH 5.5 (dark blue), and pH 3.5 (dark red). The spectrum
at pH 7.5 is considered as control.We also performed absorbance spectroscopy at 25 °C from 240
to 340 nm to estimate the tertiary structure of the protein. The spectra
were observed at three different pH values: 7.5, 5.5, and 3.5. The
tertiary structure was almost similar at pH 7.5 and 5.5. In contrast,
an increase in absorption spectra was noticed without any shifting
of absorption maxima at pH 3.5, suggesting that at this pH the protein
is losing the tertiary structure. In addition, due to the aggregation
at pH 3.5, some of the scatterings were also observed at 320–340
nm (Figure A).
Figure 5
(A) Absorbance
spectra of the ectodomain G protein at pH 7.5 (green),
pH 5.5 (blue), and pH 3.5 (red). Absorbance spectra of the sample
were measured from 340 to 240 nm as a function of pH at 25 °C.
The spectrum at pH 7.5 is considered as control. (B) Representative
curve of thermal denaturation of the ectodomain G protein monitored
at 280 nm and pH 7.5. Denaturation curves were recorded in the temperature
range of 20–90 °C.
(A) Absorbance
spectra of the ectodomain G protein at pH 7.5 (green),
pH 5.5 (blue), and pH 3.5 (red). Absorbance spectra of the sample
were measured from 340 to 240 nm as a function of pH at 25 °C.
The spectrum at pH 7.5 is considered as control. (B) Representative
curve of thermal denaturation of the ectodomain G protein monitored
at 280 nm and pH 7.5. Denaturation curves were recorded in the temperature
range of 20–90 °C.
Analysis of Thermal Denaturation Curves
To observe the effect of heat, we have studied the thermal denaturation
of the ectodomain G protein at 280 nm and pH 7.5. To measure thermodynamic
parameters like melting temperature (Tm) and change in enthalpy (ΔHm)
of the protein, we heated the protein sample from 20 to 90 °C.
The thermal denaturation curve was analyzed to obtain the values of Tm and ΔHm.
The Tm and ΔHm were found to be 56.95 °C and 57.07 (±1.2), respectively
(Figure B).
Fluorescence Measurements
Fluorescence
spectral studies give information about the tertiary structure of
the protein. The intrinsic fluorescence measurements of a protein
are due to the aromatic amino acid residue, which is very sensitive
to its local milieu. The ectodomain G protein has two tyrosine (Tyr)
and one tryptophan (Trp) residues that allowed us to perform the intrinsic
fluorescence measurements to observe the effect of pH on the protein’s
tertiary structure and observe the structural changes of aromatic
amino acids. We monitored the emission spectra in the region of 300–400
nm, and the excitation wavelength of the protein was set at 280 nm.
The change in intrinsic fluorescence of the ectodomain G protein at
three different pH values (pH 7.5, 5.5, and 3.5) is shown in Figure .
Figure 6
Fluorescence spectra
of the ectodomain G protein at three different
pH values. The protein sample was excited at 280 nm, and the emission
spectra were recorded from 300 to 400 nm at 25 °C.
Fluorescence spectra
of the ectodomain G protein at three different
pH values. The protein sample was excited at 280 nm, and the emission
spectra were recorded from 300 to 400 nm at 25 °C.
Isothermal Titration Calorimetry
The thermodynamic binding parameters of the ectodomain G protein
with heparan sulfate were evaluated to analyze the binding affinity
measurements using ITC. Figure A indicates the titration of heparan sulfate against the reaction
cell containing the ectodomain G protein. The upper panel of Figure A shows the thermogram
of raw data in power versus time, and every peak in the binding isotherm
signifies a single injection of ligand, while the lower panel represents
the amount of heat released as a function of the mole ratio of the
ligand to the protein. The origin software (VP-ITC) was used to fit
the profiles of heat change. The parameters like binding enthalpy
(ΔH°), association constant (Ka), and change in entropy (ΔS°)
were used to calculate the Gibbs free-energy change (ΔG°) using eq . The values of thermodynamic binding parameters of these
bimolecular reactions at pH 7.5 and 298 K (25 °C) are given in Table .
Figure 7
(A) Isothermal titration
calorimetry thermograms of the ectodomain
G protein (10 μM) with heparan sulfate (200 μM). The calorimetric
response with a consecutive injection of heparan sulfate added to
the reaction cell (upper panel) and the resulting binding isotherm
(lower panel) are shown at pH 7.5 and 25 °C. (B) Microscale thermophoresis
binding curve of the fluorescently labeled ectodomain G protein with
heparan sulfate at physiological pH 7.5 and 25 °C.
Table 1
Thermodynamic Binding Parameters of
the Ectodomain G Protein with Heparan Sulfate Evaluated from ITC at
pH 7.5 and 298 K (25 °C)
thermodynamic
binding parameters (units)
Ka (M–1)
ΔH° (cal mol–1)
ΔS° (cal mol–1 deg–1)
ΔG° (cal mol–1)
step 1
10.7 × 104 (±2.52 × 103)
–4.62× 104 (±3.19 × 103)
–132
–6.84 × 103
(A) Isothermal titration
calorimetry thermograms of the ectodomain
G protein (10 μM) with heparan sulfate (200 μM). The calorimetric
response with a consecutive injection of heparan sulfate added to
the reaction cell (upper panel) and the resulting binding isotherm
(lower panel) are shown at pH 7.5 and 25 °C. (B) Microscale thermophoresis
binding curve of the fluorescently labeled ectodomain G protein with
heparan sulfate at physiological pH 7.5 and 25 °C.
Microscale Thermophoresis
(MST) Analysis
MST experiments were performed with a constant
concentration of
the NHS-labeled ectodomain G protein, whereas the concentration of
the nonlabeled heparan sulfate was varied. Protein samples were loaded
using MST standard capillaries and analyzed using Monolith NT.115.
A Kd value of 426 nM was obtained with
a signal-to-noise ratio of 13.3. The MST analysis showed a strong
binding affinity of heparan sulfate with the ectodomain G protein
as shown in Figure B.
Discussion
In the pediatric age group,
RSV is the most common viral pathogen
of respiratory tract disease. The RSV G protein plays a significant
role in inducing and modulating the host immune response against infection.[24] RSVinfection induces neutralizing antibodies
against the G proteins, which thus act as vaccine candidates.[4,25] The interaction between the G protein and the CX3CR1 receptor is
involved in immune response modulation, which leads to infection aggravation
in the host cell. Hence, the G protein is proficient to suppress the
process of inflammation, adaptive and innate immune responses, and
production of β-interferon and T-lymphocytes.[26−28] A recent study
demonstrated that antibodies raised against the G protein of RSV preserved
the nonglycosylated region, indicating that they could be used as
a prophylactic treatment to prevent RSVinfection. The in
vivo study also revealed that these antibodies promote a
reduction in the infection and viral titer.[29,30] Recently, Fuentes and colleagues showed that the nonglycosylated
G protein produced by bacteria could be used as a safe and effective
vaccine against RSVinfection.[31] Another
recent study has shown the interaction of flavonoids (quercetin and
morin) with the bacterium-expressed ectodomain G protein by fluorescent
quenching.[32] Previous studies have reported
limited information on cloning and expression of the G protein of
RSV.[18,19,33] Hence, the
present study focuses on the production of the ectodomain G protein
in large quantity in a bacterial system and its secondary and tertiary
structure characterization by CD, fluorescence, and absorbance spectroscopy
techniques. The binding studies of the ectodomain G protein with heparan
sulfate were also carried out by isothermal titration calorimetry
and microscale thermophoresis.Different parameters were optimized
for maximal protein expression
including inducer concentration, temperature, and post-induction time
interval. Maximal ectodomain G protein was expressed at 0.5 mM IPTG
in BL21 (DE3) after 4 h of post-induction period. The expression at
16 °C indicates that a considerable amount of the protein was
present in the supernatant as compared to the expression at 37 °C.
Therefore, to obtain the protein in the native condition, the expression
was carried out at 16 °C, whereas to obtain a large amount of
protein, which was aggregated to form inclusion bodies, was processed
at 37 °C.Initially, the protein was purified under native
conditions using
two different steps, Ni-NTA and DEAE ion-exchange chromatography.
Protein obtained after Ni-NTA affinity chromatography showed some
undesirable bands. Thus, the eluted fraction was further subjected
to DEAE ion-exchange chromatography to obtain a pure protein. The
yield of the ectodomain G protein purified under native conditions
was quite low; however, the major portion of the protein aggregated
to form inclusion bodies (IBs). Inclusion bodies may be formed due
to inappropriate folding of the eukaryotic membrane protein in the
prokaryotic system that leads to their misfolding and mistargeting.[34−36] Optimization of protein expression, IB solubilization, and refolding
of the denatured protein are the crucial steps to obtain proteins
in their native form. To solubilize the IBs, 1% N-lauroylsarcosine was used because it seems to allow refolding of
the solubilized protein with less aggregation than that seen with
other denaturants. The IBs were completely solubilized and purified
with a relatively simple purification method. We effectively solubilized
the IBs in 1% N-lauroylsarcosine and purified the
protein by Ni-NTA affinity chromatography using a single-step purification
method. The protein was refolded into a biologically active form through
dialysis, and the yield was about 20 mg L–1. The
protein isolated from the IBs had a similar structure to the protein
obtained from the soluble supernatant. Hence, we got the refolded
protein even from the IBs with higher yields. Dynamic light scattering
(DLS) confirmed the homogeneity of the purified ectodomain G protein.
The DLS analysis revealed a single peak with a hydrodynamic size of
7.4 nm, suggesting a well-folded protein in the native conformation.The attachment of virion to the host cell is arbitrated by the
G protein followed by fusion with the cell membrane, which is assisted
by the fusion protein. This fusion may be mediated by pH-dependent
pathways.[37] To observe the effect of different
pH values on the stability and structure of the ectodomain G protein,
we performed far-UV CD, fluorescence, and absorbance spectroscopy
techniques at different pH values. Far-UV CD spectroscopy is an excellent
method to determine the secondary structural content and conformation
of protein as it provides information about the peptide backbone.
Furthermore, the study of refolding was carried out by CD measurements
with varied values of pH (3.5, 5.5, and 7.5). The spectra of our protein
at different pH values were similar to that of a chymotrypsin-like
fold that has a mixture of β-sheet and α-helical structures
and exhibits two ellipticity minima at 222 nm and 208.[23] The ectodomain G protein spectrum at pH 7.5
was initially measured at 25 °C. The protein was then heated
up to 85 °C, and the spectrum was recorded. The protein was subsequently
cooled down to 25 °C, and the spectrum was remeasured. Comparison
analysis of all three spectra suggested that the ectodomain G protein
showed a substantial gain in the secondary structure after heating.
This indicates the reversible nature of heat-induced denaturation
of the protein at pH 7.5. Similarly, the reversibility measurements
of the protein were also done at pH values 3.5 and 5.5, which were
not as significant as those at pH 7.5. The renaturation studies of
the ectodomain G protein showed that the denatured protein failed
to refold back at acidic pH (pH 3.5 and 5.5), whereas it regained
its secondary structure at physiological pH (7.5). The CD data also
suggested that the protein was stable at pH 7.5, while it lost its
major secondary structure at pH values 5.5 and 3.5 at 25 °C.
The absorbance spectra of the protein were also analyzed at different
pH values (3.5, 5.5, and 7.5) at 25 °C to analyze its tertiary
structure. This analysis suggested that the tertiary structure of
the protein was nearly similar at pH values 7.5 and 5.5, which is
indicative of intact native forms at these two pH values. However,
the absorbance values of the protein at pH 3.5 increased, indicating
the acid-induced loss of the tertiary structure. Thus, the present
spectral studies revealed that the ectodomain G protein is stable
at physiological pH, while it starts losing its structure on moving
toward acidic pH. Therefore, loss of structure of the ectodomain G
protein at acidic pH may be correlated with its biological activity.
These experiments also suggested that the possible mechanism of attachment
of the ectodomain G protein at physiological conditions is pH-specific.
Thus, a slight variation in the pH may lead to inhibition of the attachment
and fusion of the virion that may prevent the viral entry and thus
infection.The fluorescence emission spectra of the protein
at pH 7.5, which
is the native condition of the protein, show an emission maximum peak
at 344 nm. No spectral shift was observed in emission maxima on moving
toward lower pH values (5.5 and 3.5). This analysis revealed that
the microenvironment was not significantly disturbed around the aromatic
amino acid residues at low pH. However, a considerable decrease in
fluorescence intensity was observed on moving toward the acidic pH
values. The decrease in fluorescence intensity was observed at low
pH, as the buried tryptophan exposed to the polar environment, resulting
in the alteration of structural properties of the protein. The decrease
in fluorescence emission at low pH values was also due to the quenching
mechanism. The quenching occurred due to the protonation of acidic
amino acids or water molecules that are in close proximity to tryptophan
residues.Heparan sulfate is the GAG present on the host cell
surface, which
is involved in the attachment with the G protein of RSV. To study
the binding affinity of heparan sulfate with the ectodomain G protein,
isothermal titration calorimetry and microscale thermophoresis analysis
were carried out. ITC provides direct information regarding the interaction
of the protein with the ligand.[38,39] The information obtained
from ITC may help to explain the mechanism of binding of the virion
with the host cell membrane. A one-site binding model was used to
analyze the ITC thermogram data (at pH 7.5 and 298 K), which provided
the best fit. Each peak in the binding isotherm in Figure A represents the single injection
of the ligand (heparin), while the lower panel represents the integration
of the area under each injection peak of the heat profile that helps
in generating a differential curve. The heat profile of ITC at physiological
pH (7.5) is largely exothermic having a negative heat pulse, which
showed a strong binding pattern between the protein and heparan sulfate
(Figure A and Table ). The negative value
of change in enthalpy (ΔH°) = −4.62
× 104 cal mol–1 and Gibbs free-energy
change (ΔG°) = −6.84 × 103 cal mol–1 at pH 7.5 suggested that the
reaction was spontaneous. The negative value of ΔG° and ΔH° suggested that the binding
of the ligand with the protein at this pH was largely driven by the
electrostatic interaction. Moreover, the negative value of the change
in entropy (ΔS°) showed that the bimolecular
reaction was ordered at this pH. The microscale thermophoresis also
showed strong binding between the protein and heparan sulfate with
a Kd value of 426 nM. A previous study
had demonstrated that exothermic binding interactions occurred due
to the interaction of the carboxyl or negatively charged sulfate group
of the heparins with the positively charged amino acid residues of
the protein.[40] In the present study, the
positively charged amino acid residues in the heparin-binding domain
of the ectodomain G protein bind with a negatively charged group of
GAGs, that is, heparan sulfate, through electrostatic interactions,
which results in the formation of the protein–GAG complex.
A previous study has similarly shown that the positively charged amino
acids in the heparin-binding region of the G protein probably interact
with heparan sulfate having a negatively charge present on the host
cells.[12] It has been reported that the
binding of the G protein with host cells is mainly mediated by cellular
proteoglycans containing heparan sulfate, which helps in the attachment.
However, the study also reported that G protein did not show binding
with a mutant cell line lacking heparan sulfate.[14] Another study had shown the binding of the viral G protein
of human metapneumovirus with heparin using the heparin affinity chromatography
technique.[41] However, this is the first
report showing the strong binding affinity of heparan sulfate with
the ectodomain G protein of RSV by isothermal titration calorimetry
and microscale thermophoresis.Any therapeutic attempt to inhibit
the interaction of the virus
with the host cell may exploit this crucial information. The inhibitory
molecules may be designed and synthesized that upon binding to the
ectodomain G protein might affect its overall charge and pH, thus
preventing the interaction of the ectodomain G protein with the host
cell membrane. Hence, to make an effective RSV vaccine or therapeutic
agent, we should understand the molecular mechanism of RSV attachment
and fusion. Thus, the investigation of different viral and host cell
factors using cell culture and structural biology approaches will
provide a comprehensive overview of their possible role in RSV pathogenesis.
Further, structural studies of ectodomain G protein intermediates
at different pH values will also expand our understanding of RSV attachment
and the identification of new targets.
Conclusions
We optimized the conditions for maximum expression of the ectodomain
G protein of RSV in the bacterial system. The purification of protein
was carried out using both the supernatant and IBs. Our study provides
preliminary insight into the structural characteristics of the ectodomain
G protein that is sensitive to pH and charges. These factors might
play an essential role in the investigation of host–pathogen
interactions. Exploration of the interaction of the ectodomain G protein
with the inhibitory molecules based on these findings may obstruct
the efficient host–pathogen interaction. Therefore, this data
might be utilized toward the formulation of possible therapeutic agents
against RSV. This information can also provide a baseline for the
investigation of specific mutations in the protein that might play
a pivotal role in attachment and other aspects of the viral life cycle.
Thus, structural determination and binding studies of the ectodomain
G protein will be a step toward vaccine development, drug designing,
and prevention of viral infection.
Materials
and Methods
Materials
Luria–Bertani (LB)
broth, Luria agar, and kanamycin were purchased from Himedia, India.
Sodium chloride, imidazole, boric acid, Tris–HCl buffer, EDTA,
ethanol, and the Amicon Ultra 10K device were purchased from Merck
(Darmstadt, Germany). Heparan sulfate, sodium dodecyl sulfate, Triton
X-100, and 3,30-diaminobenzidine (DAB) were bought from Sigma, Saint
Louis. All other chemicals used during the experiments were of molecular
biology grade.
Reviving the Clone of the
Ectodomain G Protein
The details of cloning of the ectodomain
G protein gene have been
described in detail by Khan et.al.[20] Briefly,
the full-length G protein gene was codon-optimized (accession No.
KJ690590) and inserted in the pUC57 vector using commercial services.
The ectodomain of the G protein gene (748 bp gene coding for 67–298
amino acids) was amplified from this recombinant vector and was subcloned
into the pET-28a expression vector. This recombinant pET-28a with
the ectodomain G protein gene was revived and was used for the present
study. The recombinant expression vector (pET-28a) with the ectodomain
G protein gene insert was transformed into the DH5α strain.
The plasmid was isolated from the bacterial cell pellet using a commercial
plasmid isolation kit as per the manufacturer’s instruction
and confirmed by agarose gel electrophoresis.
Expression
of the Ectodomain G Protein
The expression vector containing
the ectodomain G protein gene was
transformed into the competent cell of the BL21 (DE3) strain. Transformed
bacterial cells were grown in LB medium with 50 μg mL–1 kanamycin for 2 h at 37 °C and 180 rpm until the optical density
reached 0.6 at 600 nm. Then, 1 mL of the uninduced sample was collected,
and remaining cultures were induced with 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25,
and 1.5 mM isopropyl-1-thio-β-d-galactopyranoside (IPTG)
and incubated for 5 h at 37 °C for confirmation of expression
at a small level. From each induced culture, 1 mL of the sample was
collected and analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) along with the uninduced culture to confirm
the expression of the protein. The large-scale expression was carried
out by inducing with 0.5 mM IPTG and incubating at 16 °C for
18 h and 37 °C for 5 h. The bacterial cultures were harvested
at 4 °C for 10 min at 6000 rpm.
Purification
of the Ectodomain G Protein in
Native (Supernatant) Conditions
The harvested bacterial pellets
were dissolved in lysis buffer: 250 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris buffer pH
8.0, 1 mM 1,4-dithiothretol (DTT), 1.5 mM phenyl methane sulfonyl
fluoride (PMSF), 1% (v/v) Triton X-100, 0.5 mg mL–1 lysozyme, and 5% (v/v) glycerol. Usually, 5 mL of lysis buffer is
used for 100 mL of bacterial culture. Bacterial cell lysates were
sonicated and centrifuged at 4 °C for 30 min and at 12 000
rpm, and the supernatant was collected for purification. The supernatant
was loaded to the Ni-NTA purification column, which was equilibrated
with buffer A: 50 mM Tris buffer pH 8.0, 1 mM DTT, 250 mM NaCl, and
5% (v/v) glycerol. The undesired protein impurities were washed with
buffer A having 10 and 20 mM imidazole. The bound protein was eluted
with 100–150 mM imidazole in buffer A. Eluted fractions were
subjected to dialysis against 100 mM NaCl and 25 mM Tris buffer pH
7.5, and the protein was concentrated with the Amicon Ultra 10K device.
After dialysis, the protein was filtered with a 0.22 μm syringe
filter and further loaded on a HiTrap DEAE FF (1 mL, 7 mm × 25
mm) column that was pre-equilibrated with 50 mM Tris buffer pH 8.0,
which was linked to the Akta purifier (GE Healthcare). An aliquot
of 2 mL of protein was loaded into the ion-exchange column having
2 mL loop at a constant flow rate of 0.5 mL min–1. The chromatography column was washed with 50 mM Tris buffer pH
8.0 to remove the unbound protein until the A280 reached
zero. The bound protein was eluted from the chromatography column
with a linear gradient of NaCl (0–1 M NaCl w/v). The topmost
peak of the eluted fraction was analyzed by SDS-PAGE to confirm the
purity of the protein.
Purification of the Ectodomain
G Protein from
Inclusion Bodies
We purified the protein in the native condition
in a soluble form, but its yield was extremely low. Thus, we used
another method for purification of protein because a significantly
high expression was observed in IBs. Centrifuged E.
coli cell pellets were dissolved in the buffer (100
mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris–HCl (pH 8.0), 20 mM EDTA, 1.5 mM PMSF,
and 1% Triton X-100) and lysed with sonication and centrifugation
at 10 000 rpm for 40 min at 4 °C. Again, the pellet was
washed off 3–4 times with autoclaved Milli-Q water through
centrifugation to remove any impurities. Finally, IBs were dissolved
in 5 mL of Milli-Q water. For purification, IBs were solubilized in
buffer B, which has 100 mM NaCl and 50 mM Tris buffer pH 8.0 having
1% (w/v) N-lauroylsarcosine, for 3–4 h at
25 °C followed by centrifugation at 10 000 rpm and 4 °C
and collection of the supernatant for purification.The purification
was performed by a Ni-NTA column that was pre-equilibrated with buffer
B to facilitate loading of the cleared lysate. The impurities were
washed off with buffer B having 10 and 20 mM imidazole. The bounded
desired protein was eluted with a gradual increase in the concentration
of imidazole (50–500 mM) in buffer B and was subjected to SDS-PAGE
to confirm the purity of the protein. Eluted fractions showing the
desired single band of the protein were subjected to dialysis against
100 mM NaCl and 25 mM Tris buffer pH 7.5 with five consecutive changes
to obtain the refolded protein. The protein concentration was determined
by a Jasco V-660 UV-Vis spectrophotometer at 280 nm using a molar
extinction coefficient of 8730 M–1 cm–1.[42]
Western
Blotting
SDS-PAGE gel of
the purified ectodomain G protein was transferred to the nitrocellulose
membrane using the standard protocol. Blocking was done using 5% BSA
in TBS at 25 °C for 2 h followed by three times washing. The
membrane was incubated with 1:7000 dilution of the mouse anti-His
monoclonal antibody in 1× TBS overnight at 4 °C. The membrane
was washed thrice the next day to remove unbound antibodies. The bound
antibody was incubated with 1:10 000 dilution of the HRP-conjugated
anti-mouse immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody in 1X TBS at 25 °C
for 1 h followed by three times washing. Finally, the blot was developed
with DAB and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) or with
luminal and H2O2 on an X-ray film.
Dynamic Light Scattering
Dynamic
light scattering (DLS) was performed using a Malvern Zetasizer Nano-ZS
instrument at the scattering angle of 173°, equipped with a He–Ne
laser (λ = 632.8 nm). Before experiments were performed, the
sample was filtered through a 0.22 μm syringe filter. The protein
concentration of 10 μM was used to perform the experiments,
and at least three accumulations were taken. The hydrodynamic size
was calculated using Origin 8 software.
Circular
Dichroism Measurements
The
secondary structure of the ectodomain G protein was determined by
a Jasco spectropolarimeter (model J-1500) whose temperature was controlled
by a Peltier device (MCB-100). The far-UV CD spectrum of the ectodomain
G protein was recorded in the range of 250–200 nm using a cell
of a path length 0.1 cm cuvette at 25 ± 0.1 °C. For sample
preparation, 0.3 mg mL–1 protein concentration was
used. Every spectrum scanning was carried out by taking an average
of at least five accumulations. Experimental data of CD was converted
into mean residue ellipticity [θ]λ (degrees
cm2 dmol–1) by the following relationwhere M0 is the
mean residue weight of the protein, [θ]λ is
the observed ellipticity in milli degrees at λ, c is the protein concentration in mg mL–1, and l is the path length of the cell in centimeters. The baseline
was always prepared with the respective buffers for avoiding the signal-to-noise
ratio.
Measurements of Absorbance Spectra
The tertiary structure of the ectodomain G protein was determined
by a Jasco V-660 UV-Vis spectrophotometer whose temperature was controlled
with a Peltier device (ETCS-761). Every spectral measurement was carried
out using a cell of a path length 1.0 cm cuvette in the wavelength
range of 240–340 nm, and the temperature was maintained at
25 ± 0.1 °C. For sample preparation, 0.3 mg mL–1 protein concentration was used. Every measurement was done in triplicate,
and their average was taken for data analysis.
Thermodynamic Protein Stability Measurements
For the
thermal denaturant transition, the sample was heated at
1 C min–1 in the range
of 20–90 C, and the change in
absorbance was recorded as a function of temperature. The heating
rate provides enough time to reach at equilibrium. The thermal denaturation
of the ectodomain G protein was monitored, ε, at 280 nm. The
raw sample data of absorbance was converted into molar extinction
coefficient (Δε) at a given wavelength. Thermal transition
obtained from absorbance measurements was analyzed by Origin 8 software
to determine the thermodynamic parameters like Tm and ΔH.
Fluorescence
Spectroscopy
The intrinsic
spectra of the ectodomain G protein at three different pH values were
recorded by a Jasco spectrofluorometer (FP6200) at 25 ± 1 °C
with a cell of a path length 1.0 cm quartz cuvette, and the temperature
of the protein sample was controlled by a circulating water bath.
We monitored the changes in the fluorescence intensity of the protein
with different buffers taking the entrance and exit slit width of
5 nm. The emission spectra of the protein were observed in the wavelength
range of 300–400, and the excitation wavelength was set at
280 nm. All of the spectra at a particular pH value were recorded
in triplicate using the protein concentration of 0.3 mg mL–1.
To analyze the thermodynamic parameters and binding affinity measurements,
a VP-ITC calorimeter was used at 298 K (25 °C). The cell was
injected for titration of the ectodomain G protein (10 μM) against
the ligand (heparan sulfate, 200 μM concentration) in the ratio
of 1:20 (protein:ligand). The ligand aliquots of 10 μL were
loaded for each step in the interval of 300 s through the syringe
along with the buffer as a control. The experiment was carried out
at physiological pH (7.5). The raw data obtained were normalized and
accessed using the MicroCal Origin ITC software. The thermodynamic
parameters like enthalpy change (ΔH°),
entropy change (ΔS°), and the association
constant (Ka) were obtained from the raw
data using Origin 8.0. From the above thermodynamic parameters, the
Gibbs free-energy change was calculated using the following equationwhere R and T are the gas constant and temperature (in kelvins), respectively.
Microscale Thermophoresis (MST)
To measure
the biomolecular interaction, experiments based on changes
in thermophoresis were performed by microscale thermophoresis in the
Monolith NT.115 from NanoTemper Technologies.[43] Experiments were performed with MST power of 60%, LED power of 40%,
and capillaries having a hydrophobic coating at standard conditions.
In a typical label MST experiment, 20 μM ectodomain G protein
was labeled with NT-647 (fluorescent dye) as per the manufacturer’s
instructions using the Monolith NT protein labeling kit. The fluorescence-labeled
ectodomain G protein concentration was kept constant, and a serial
dilution of the nonlabeled ligand, heparan sulfate, was prepared with
Tris buffer. The highest concentration in the dilution series was
chosen to be at least 20 times greater than the expected binding constant
(Kd). Then, 10 μL of the nonlabeled
ligand was mixed with 10 μL of the diluted fluorescent-labeled
protein in the serial dilution experiment, and samples were loaded
into Monolith NT.115 glass capillaries. As a result of titration,
a gradual change had been observed in thermophoresis, which was plotted
as ΔFnorm to find out the binding
curve from which the value of the Kd was
derived.
Authors: Tatiana Chirkova; Songbai Lin; Antonius G P Oomens; Kelsey A Gaston; Seyhan Boyoglu-Barnum; Jia Meng; Christopher C Stobart; Calvin U Cotton; Tina V Hartert; Martin L Moore; Assem G Ziady; Larry J Anderson Journal: J Gen Virol Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 3.891
Authors: Ting Shi; David A McAllister; Katherine L O'Brien; Eric A F Simoes; Shabir A Madhi; Bradford D Gessner; Fernando P Polack; Evelyn Balsells; Sozinho Acacio; Claudia Aguayo; Issifou Alassani; Asad Ali; Martin Antonio; Shally Awasthi; Juliet O Awori; Eduardo Azziz-Baumgartner; Henry C Baggett; Vicky L Baillie; Angel Balmaseda; Alfredo Barahona; Sudha Basnet; Quique Bassat; Wilma Basualdo; Godfrey Bigogo; Louis Bont; Robert F Breiman; W Abdullah Brooks; Shobha Broor; Nigel Bruce; Dana Bruden; Philippe Buchy; Stuart Campbell; Phyllis Carosone-Link; Mandeep Chadha; James Chipeta; Monidarin Chou; Wilfrido Clara; Cheryl Cohen; Elizabeth de Cuellar; Duc-Anh Dang; Budragchaagiin Dash-Yandag; Maria Deloria-Knoll; Mukesh Dherani; Tekchheng Eap; Bernard E Ebruke; Marcela Echavarria; Carla Cecília de Freitas Lázaro Emediato; Rodrigo A Fasce; Daniel R Feikin; Luzhao Feng; Angela Gentile; Aubree Gordon; Doli Goswami; Sophie Goyet; Michelle Groome; Natasha Halasa; Siddhivinayak Hirve; Nusrat Homaira; Stephen R C Howie; Jorge Jara; Imane Jroundi; Cissy B Kartasasmita; Najwa Khuri-Bulos; Karen L Kotloff; Anand Krishnan; Romina Libster; Olga Lopez; Marilla G Lucero; Florencia Lucion; Socorro P Lupisan; Debora N Marcone; John P McCracken; Mario Mejia; Jennifer C Moisi; Joel M Montgomery; David P Moore; Cinta Moraleda; Jocelyn Moyes; Patrick Munywoki; Kuswandewi Mutyara; Mark P Nicol; D James Nokes; Pagbajabyn Nymadawa; Maria Tereza da Costa Oliveira; Histoshi Oshitani; Nitin Pandey; Gláucia Paranhos-Baccalà; Lia N Phillips; Valentina Sanchez Picot; Mustafizur Rahman; Mala Rakoto-Andrianarivelo; Zeba A Rasmussen; Barbara A Rath; Annick Robinson; Candice Romero; Graciela Russomando; Vahid Salimi; Pongpun Sawatwong; Nienke Scheltema; Brunhilde Schweiger; J Anthony G Scott; Phil Seidenberg; Kunling Shen; Rosalyn Singleton; Viviana Sotomayor; Tor A Strand; Agustinus Sutanto; Mariam Sylla; Milagritos D Tapia; Somsak Thamthitiwat; Elizabeth D Thomas; Rafal Tokarz; Claudia Turner; Marietjie Venter; Sunthareeya Waicharoen; Jianwei Wang; Wanitda Watthanaworawit; Lay-Myint Yoshida; Hongjie Yu; Heather J Zar; Harry Campbell; Harish Nair Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sara M Johnson; Beth A McNally; Ioannis Ioannidis; Emilio Flano; Michael N Teng; Antonius G Oomens; Edward E Walsh; Mark E Peeples Journal: PLoS Pathog Date: 2015-12-11 Impact factor: 6.823
Authors: Michael J Adams; Elliot J Lefkowitz; Andrew M Q King; Balázs Harrach; Robert L Harrison; Nick J Knowles; Andrew M Kropinski; Mart Krupovic; Jens H Kuhn; Arcady R Mushegian; Max Nibert; Sead Sabanadzovic; Hélène Sanfaçon; Stuart G Siddell; Peter Simmonds; Arvind Varsani; Francisco Murilo Zerbini; Alexander E Gorbalenya; Andrew J Davison Journal: Arch Virol Date: 2016-07-16 Impact factor: 2.574