4.5 Review

Comparative NMR studies demonstrate profound differences between two viroporins: p7 of HCV and Vpu of HIV-1

Journal

BIOCHIMICA ET BIOPHYSICA ACTA-BIOMEMBRANES
Volume 1808, Issue 2, Pages 554-560

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2010.08.005

Keywords

Hepatitis C virus; P7; Membrane protein; Vpu; Human immunodeficiency virus; Nuclear magnetic resonance

Funding

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [R01 EB005161, R01 EB005161-05, R01 EB005161-04S1, P41 EB002031, P41 EB002031-18] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM066978, R01 GM066978-08, R01 GM075877-04, R01 GM075877] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The p7 protein from hepatitis C virus and the Vpu protein from HIV-1 are members of the viroporin family of small viral membrane proteins. It is essential to determine their structures in order to obtain an understanding of their molecular mechanisms and to develop new classes of anti-viral drugs. Because they are membrane proteins, it is challenging to study them in their native phospholipid bilayer environments by most experimental methods. Here we describe applications of NMR spectroscopy to both p7 and Vpu. Isotopically labeled p7 and Vpu samples were prepared by heterologous expression in bacteria, initial isolation as fusion proteins, and final purification by chromatography. The purified proteins were studied in the model membrane environments of micelles by solution NMR spectroscopy and in aligned phospholipid bilayers by solid-state NMR spectroscopy. The resulting structural findings enable comparisons to be made between the two proteins, demonstrating that they have quite different architectures. Most notably, Vpu has one trans-membrane helix and p7 has two trans-membrane helices; in addition, there are significant differences in the structures and dynamics of their internal loop and terminal regions. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available