Abstract

BackgroundThe Spumaretrovirinae (foamy viruses) and the Orthoretrovirinae (e.g. HIV) share many similarities both in genome structure and the sequences of the core viral encoded proteins, such as the aspartyl protease and reverse transcriptase. Similarity in the gag region of the genome is less obvious at the sequence level but has been illuminated by the recent solution of the foamy virus capsid (CA) structure. This revealed a clear structural similarity to the orthoretrovirus capsids but with marked differences that left uncertainty in the relationship between the two domains that comprise the structure.MethodsWe have applied protein structure comparison methods in order to try and resolve this ambiguous relationship. These included both the DALI method and the SAP method, with rigorous statistical tests applied to the results of both methods. For this, we employed collections of artificial fold ’decoys’ (generated from the pair of native structures being compared) to provide a customised background distribution for each comparison, thus allowing significance levels to be estimated.ResultsWe have shown that the relationship of the two domains conforms to a simple linear correspondence rather than a domain transposition. These similarities suggest that the origin of both viral capsids was a common ancestor with a double domain structure. In addition, we show that there is also a significant structural similarity between the amino and carboxy domains in both the foamy and ortho viruses.ConclusionsThese results indicate that, as well as the duplication of the double domain capsid, there may have been an even more ancient gene-duplication that preceded the double domain structure. In addition, our structure comparison methodology demonstrates a general approach to problems where the components have a high intrinsic level of similarity.

Highlights

  • The Spumaretrovirinae and the Orthoretrovirinae (e.g. HIV) share many similarities both in genome structure and the sequences of the core viral encoded proteins, such as the aspartyl protease and reverse transcriptase

  • There are a number of striking differences including how the Gag precursor is targeted to the cell membrane, the absence of a Major Homology Region and Cys-His box Taylor et al BMC Structural Biology (2017) 17:3 in Foamy viruses and very different patterns of processing during viral maturation [2]

  • Full-length comparison To investigate the structural relationship between the capsid structure of the ortho viruses (HIV, MLV, etc.), and the new structure of the foamy virus capsid [5] (PDB codes: 5m1g, 5m1h), the foamy virus structure was compared to one of the few full double domain ortho virus structures, the HIV capsid with Protein DataBank (PDB) code: 3nte, using the flexible superposition program SAP [6]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The Spumaretrovirinae (foamy viruses) and the Orthoretrovirinae (e.g. HIV) share many similarities both in genome structure and the sequences of the core viral encoded proteins, such as the aspartyl protease and reverse transcriptase. Similarity in the gag region of the genome is less obvious at the sequence level but has been illuminated by the recent solution of the foamy virus capsid (CA) structure. This revealed a clear structural similarity to the orthoretrovirus capsids but with marked differences that left uncertainty in the relationship between the two domains that comprise the structure. The Orthoretrovirinae (orthoretroviruses) and Spumaretrovirinae (spumaviruses) make up the two subfamilies of Retroviridae They share many similarities, including overall genome structures with gag, pol and env genes encoding proteins for replication and life cycles involving reverse transcription and integration into the chromosomes of infected cells. In all Ortho viruses, Gag is proteolytically cleaved to form distinct, well-studied proteins, matrix (MA), capsid (CA) and nucleocapsid (NC), found in mature virions, whilst in spumaviruses Gag processing to remove a C-terminal peptide occurs only in a fraction of the Gag molecules [3]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call