4.6 Article

Structural basis for the receptor binding specificity of norwalk virus

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
Volume 82, Issue 11, Pages 5340-5347

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00135-08

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI055649] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Noroviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that cause acute gastroenteritis. They recognize human histo-blood group antigens as receptors in a strain-specific manner. The structures presented here were analyzed in order to elucidate the structural basis for differences in ligand recognition of noroviruses from different genogroups, the prototypic Norwalk virus (NV; GI-1) and VA387 (GII-4), which recognize the same A antigen but differ in that NV is unable to bind to the B antigen. Two forms of the receptor-binding domain of the norovirus coat protein, the P domain and the P polypeptide, that were previously shown to differ in receptor binding and P-particle formation properties were studied. Comparison of the structures of the NV P domain with and without A trisaccharide and the NV P polypeptide revealed no major ligand-induced changes. The 2.3-angstrom cocrystal structure reveals that the A trisaccharide binds to the NV P domain through interactions with the residues Ser377, Asp327, His329, and Ser380 in a mode distinct from that previously reported for the VA387 P-domain-A-trisaccharide complex. Mutational analyses confirm the importance of these residues in NV P-particle binding to native A antigen. The alpha-GaINAc residue unique to the A trisaccharide is buried deeply in the NV binding pocket, unlike in the structures of A and B trisaccharides bound to VA387 P domain, where the alpha-fucose residue forms the most protein contacts. The A-trisaccharide binding mode seen in the NV P domain complex cannot be sterically accommodated in the VA387 P domain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available