S494 O-glycosylation site on the SARS-CoV-2 RBD affects the virus affinity to ACE2 and its infectivity; a molecular dynamics study

  1. Shadi Rahnama
  2. Maryam Azimzadeh Irani
  3. Mehriar Amininasab
  4. Mohammad Reza Ejtehadi

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

SARS-CoV-2 is a strain of Coronavirus family that caused the ongoing pandemic of COVID-19. Several studies showed that the glycosylation of virus spike (S) protein and the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on the host cell is critical for the virus infectivity. Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations were used to explore the role of a novel mutated O-glycosylation site (D494S) on the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) of S protein. This site was suggested as a key mediator of virus-host interaction. By exploring the dynamics of three O-glycosylated models and the control systems of unglcosylated S4944 and S494D complexes, it was shown that the decoration of S494 with elongated O-glycans results in stabilized interactions on the direct RBD-ACE2. Calculation of the distances between RBD and two major H1, H2 helices of ACE2 and the interacting pairs of amino acids in the interface showed that the elongated O-glycan maintains these interactions by forming several polar contacts with the neighbouring residues while it would not interfere in the direct binding interface. Relative binding free energy of RBD-ACE2 is also more favorable in the O-glycosylated models with longer glycans. The increase of RBD binding affinity to ACE2 depends on the size of attached O-glycan. By increasing the size of O-glycan, the RBD-ACE2 binding affinity will increase. Hence, this crucial factor must be taken into account for any further inhibitory approaches towards RBD-ACE2 interaction.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1038/s41598-021-94602-w
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.12.294504v2 on bioRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.12.294504: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Here we used CaFE pipeline tool32 on 250 frames from the last 10 ns of MD simulations and an ensemble-averaged overall replica of each model.
    CaFE
    suggested: (CAFE, RRID:SCR_005983)
    All the plots were generated by Matplotlib35 library of Python36 and the figures by VMD34 and PyMOL.37
    Python36
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.12.294504v1 on bioRxiv