| Literature DB >> 34337139 |
Kejie Mou1, Mohnad Abdalla2, Dong Qing Wei3,4, Muhammad Tahir Khan5, Madeeha Shahzad Lodhi5, Doaa B Darwish6, Mohamed Sharaf7,8, Xudong Tu9.
Abstract
Structural proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (Entities:
Keywords: Antiviral drugs; Envelope; Genome; Mutations; SARS-CoV-2; Stability
Year: 2021 PMID: 34337139 PMCID: PMC8314890 DOI: 10.1016/j.imu.2021.100675
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inform Med Unlocked ISSN: 2352-9148
Fig. 1Domain organization of E proteins and the location and frequency of most common mutations. TM: transmembrane [15], NTD: N-terminal domain, CTD: C-terminal domain. (B). Pentameric representation of E proteins showing channel (C). Full-length E protein (I-TASSER, E-QHD43418) with most common mutations in the loop region.
Frequency of some common mutations in the CoV-2 E protein.
| Accession | Wild type AA | Position | Mutated AA | Frequency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPI_ISL_476911 | T | 9 | I | 168 | T9I |
| EPI_ISL_424214 | S | 55 | F | 128 | S55F |
| EPI_ISL_538676 | V | 62 | F | 129 | V62F |
| EPI_ISL_448073 | S | 68 | F | ||
| EPI_ISL_452908 | R | 69 | I | 159 | R69I |
| EPI_ISL_577907 | P | 71 | L | 158 | P71L |
| EPI_ISL_660339 | P | 71 | S | ||
| EPI_ISL_478788 | L | 73 | F |
Full list is available in the S1 supplementary file.
; mutations subjected to MD simulations.
Fig. 2RMSD comparison of the WT and MTs E proteins of SARS-CoV-2.
Fig. 3The RMSF of the WT and MTs in the E proteins of SARS-COV-2. CA: Carbon alpha. The RMSF of WT (orange) and MTs. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 4The RMSDs of WT and MTs at different simulation periods. The WT behaves very differently at the CTD.
Fig. 5Comparison of the SSE of the WT and MTs in MD simulation. The plot reports SSE distribution by residue index throughout the protein structure and summarizes the SSE composition for each trajectory frame over the course of the simulation. The plot monitors each residue and its SSE assignment over a certain period of time. (A) The WT residue index and SSE along Y-axis shows differences at the 60–65ns MD simulations period; (B) S68F shows a little variation at 40–55ns; (C) P71S exhibits more variations at 45–68ns; (D) L73F also demonstrates variations when the WT is compared with P71S and S68F.
Fig. 6Comparison of Rg of the WT and MTs E proteins. The WT (blue) exhibited a little difference in folding throughout the 100ns simulation period as compared to the MTs, showing that the folding in both types is stable. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 7Hydrogen bonding of the WT and MTs E proteins.
Fig. 8WT and MTs stability and flexibility.
Fig. 9Interactions of WT and MTs residues with surrounding aa. The type of interactions of WT and MTs residues is colored-coded. S68F, P71S, and L73F MTs have been compared with their WT on the left.
Fig. 10Gibbs free energy landscape. The scale shows the free energy values. Blue and green regions are more stable than red and yellow. MT S68F shows more stability than WT based on the free energy landscape. WT exhibited more stability than P71S and L73F. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)