Conserved in 186 countries the RBD fraction of SARS CoV-2 S-protein with in-silicoT500S mutation strongly blocks ACE2 rejecting the viral spike; A Molecular-docking analysis

  1. Amrita Banerjee
  2. Mehak Kanwar
  3. Dipannita Santra
  4. Smarajit Maiti

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

SARS-CoV-2 developed global-pandemic with millions of infections/deaths. Blocker/inhibitor of ACE2 and viral-spikes Receptor-Binding-Domain RBD-blockers are helpful. Here, conserved RBD (CUTs) from 186-countries were compared with WUHAN-Hu-1 wild-type by CLUSTAL-X2 and Structural-alignment using Pymol. The RBD of ACE2-bound nCOV2 crystal-structure (2.68Å) 6VW1 was analyzed by Haddock-PatchDock. Extensive structural study/trial to introduce point/double/triple mutations in the following locations (Y489S/Y453S/T500S/T500Y)/(Y489S,Y453S/Y489S,T500S/Y489S,T500Y/Y453S,T500S/Y453S, T500Y)/ (Y489S,Y453S,T500S/Y489S,Y453S,T500Y) of CUT4 (most-effective) were tested with Swiss-Model-Expacy. Blind-docking of mutated-CUTs to ACE2 (6VW1) by Haddock-Hawkdock was performed and optimally complete-rejection of nCOV2 to ACE2 was noticed. Further, competitive-docking/binding-analyses were done by PRODIGY. Present results suggest that compared to the wild-spike, CUT4 showed extra LYS31-PHE490/GLN42-GLN498 bonding and lack of TYR41-THR500 interaction (in wild H-bond:2.639Å) with ACE2 RBD. Mutated-CUT4 strongly binds with the ACE2-RBD, promoting TYR41-T500S (H-bond: 2.0Å and 1.8Å)/T500Y (H-bond:2.6Å) interaction and complete inhibition of ACE2 RBD-nCOV2. Mutant combinations T500S,Y489S,T500S and Y489S,Y453S,T500Y mostly blocked ACE2. Conclusively, CUT4-mutant rejects whole glycosylated-nCoV2 pre-dock/post-dock/competitive-docking conditions.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.25.441361: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    BlindingAfter mutation induction, blind docking studies of different mutated CUTs with ACE2 were performed using Haddock 2.4 [12], and Hawkdock [13,14].
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The results were analyzed using Pymol [10].
    Pymol
    suggested: (PyMOL, RRID:SCR_000305)
    (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/).
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
    suggested: (GENSAT at NCBI - Gene Expression Nervous System Atlas, RRID:SCR_003923)

    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 did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on pages 18 and 14. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • No conflict of interest statement was detected. If there are no conflicts, we encourage authors to explicit state so.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.04.25.441361 on bioRxiv