ACE2 glycans preferentially interact with the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 over SARS-CoV
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
We report a distinct difference in the interactions of the glycans of the host-cell receptor, ACE2, with SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV S-protein receptor-binding domains (RBDs). Our analysis demonstrates that the ACE2 glycan at N90 may offer protection against infections of both coronaviruses, while the ACE2 glycan at N322 enhances interactions with the SARS-CoV-2 RBD. The interactions of the ACE2 glycan at N322 with SARS-CoV RBD are blocked by the presence of the RBD glycan at N357 of the SARS-CoV RBD. The absence of this glycosylation site on SARS-CoV-2 RBD may enhance its binding with ACE2.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.29.442038: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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: …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.29.442038: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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: 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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
-
-