Well, look at that!  I had missed that one.  Thank you Dan.

Ahh, those Ig folds.  They are like dougnuts.  Is there anything they can't do?

Interesting that Tan et al. arrived at their conclusions from a very different line of evidence.  They seem to have missed the covariance with the silent site pointed out by Tang et al.?

1xak is from original SARS, and I must say not great statistics despite being at 1.8A.  Still, it is a start.

From the literature cited by Tan et al. it appears ORF8 has been suspected as pathogenic for some time, but for widely different reasons.  One paper says it is a transcription factor that up-regulates chaperones, another says it is a secreted imunosuppressor.

So, my question remains: why haven't we solved it yet?

-James Holton
MAD Scientist

On 3/21/2020 9:12 AM, Rigden, Dan wrote:

Hi James


5o32I is not a homolog of ORF8 - the BLAST e-value is insignificant. In fact, rather than the EGF-like fold of 5o32I, ORF8 has an Ig-like fold similar to ORF7 (for which there is a structure; 1xak).


https://toolkit.tuebingen.mpg.de/jobs/2717885_1


I must say I got quite excited seeing that until I noticed this pre-print which tells the whole story very nicely, including that key position 84....


https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.04.977736v1

Best wishes

Dan

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on behalf of Patrick Shaw Stewart <patr...@douglas.co.uk>
*Sent:* 21 March 2020 15:41:17
*To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
*Subject:* Re: [ccp4bb] CCP4BB vs COVID19

James, this isn't conventional structural biology, but may be of interest, and I haven't been able get any mainstream virologists to think about it.

The protein sequences are obviously of interest, but so are the RNA sequences at both ends of the Covid genome, which have conserved secondary structure.  A few years ago a paper came out suggesting that wild-type influenza has multiple "RNA thermometers", which may play an important role in the tropism of influenza.  Similar mechanisms may exist in other respiratory viruses, including Covid.

My take on this, and the relevant papers, are below.

Good luck to everyone and stay well,

Patrick


    
https://oldwivesandvirologists.blog/Covid-19-and-the-trade-off-model-of-selection/


    My paper in /Medical Hypotheses
    /http://douglas.co.uk/f_ftp1/ShawStewart_final_1-s2.pdf

    Narberhaus, Franz, Torsten Waldminghaus, and Saheli Chowdhury.
    "RNA thermometers." /FEMS microbiology reviews/ 30.1 (2006): 3-16.

    Chursov, Andrey, et al. "Specific temperature-induced
    perturbations of secondary mRNA structures are associated with the
    cold-adapted temperature-sensitive phenotype of influenza A
    virus." /RNA biology/ 9.10 (2012): 1266-1274.

    Yang, Dong, and Julian L. Leibowitz. "The structure and functions
    of coronavirus genomic 3′ and 5′ ends." /Virus research/ 206
    (2015): 120-133.



On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:59 PM James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov <mailto:jmhol...@lbl.gov>> wrote:

    You might think that as a structural biologist you won't be able
    to do
    much about COVID-19 anytime soon, but that is not true. Yes,
    real-world
    therapeutics and vaccines take time, but we have already seen just
    how
    fast we can get started.  There are 21 PDBs already and some even
    have
    bound ligands.  Good job Frank et al. BTW!  And my personal thanks to
    all of you out there who are already hard at work on this.

    I believe this forum is an ideal place to share information and
    ideas on
    the structural biology of SARS-CoV-2 as we move forward. It's a big
    virus, but there are not that many proteins in it.  If all of us
    independently do the same bioinformatics and literature searches
    and end
    up trying exactly the same thing in every lab all over the world,
    then
    that would be more than unfortunate.  To that end, I am personally
    interested on ORF8 for reasons I will go into below.  Has anyone
    tried
    to solve it yet?  What happened?  Didn't express? Bad diffraction?
    What?  Do tell.

    Some of us, as you may have heard, are stuck at home, our
    beamlines and
    labs dark while we shelter-in-place.  That doesn't mean our hands are
    tied.  We are still allowed to think. The fraction of the human race
    that has a snowball's chance in Hades of figuring out this bug is
    very
    very small.  Structure may be your main skill set, but you are
    still a
    biologist.  Do you know how to run a PCR machine?  Do you know how to
    pipette?  You might think that anybody can do it, but that is
    really not
    the case. Ever trained a new student on sterile technique?  How many
    days did that take?  Now remember that your student was no dummy and
    already studying biology.  Everyone reading this will make an
    excellent
    volenteer at the very least.  I'm not saying this to belittle the
    average human, only to say that we scientists, moving in the
    circles we
    do, often forget that we have uncommon capabilities.

    For example, I also believe we can be useful in assay development.
    The
    void left by the dearth and delay of test results has been filled
    with
    fear, and that is a big problem.  The tests, as defined, are
    straightforward, but also extremely regimented like any good
    laboratory
    protocol should be.  The US CDC's instructions for academic labs
    are here:
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/lab/index.html
    My question is: how can this test be made faster, using more
    commonplace
    supplies, in high-throughput mode and still valid?  Not just for
    clinical but for academic use?  I think more than a few people on
    this
    list could be regarded as experts in making a complex biochemical
    task
    faster, more efficient, high-throughput and nonetheless valid.  Yes,
    there are other people who do virus testing for a living, but
    right now
    they are all rather busy.  Maybe if we put our minds to it we can
    help?

    As for why ORF8.  I am basing my interest on the bioinformatics
    done in
    this article: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036
    <https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaa036>.  Search for
    "T8517C" and you will find what I'm talking about.  The authors found
    two "types" of SARS-CoV-2.  They call them "S" and "L" because the
    only
    conserved amino acid change involved is S84L in ORF8.  The "S"
    type is
    believed to be the ancestor of "L".  What is interesting is how
    tightly
    linked this mutation is to a silent mutation on the other end of the
    genome: the "L" type has a faster codon for Ser in ORF1. Such tight
    coupling (r^2=0.945) means there must be significant selective
    pressure
    preventing both of these mutations occurring in the same virus at the
    same time.  That, I believe, is interesting.  Espeically since
    they are
    so far apart I expect this selective pressure might work in trans:
    as in
    a super-infection. That is, the S and L genome types may interfere
    with
    each other.

    The authors fall short of claiming evidence of interference upon
    super-infection, and indeed they have already been criticised for
    calling "L" the "aggressive" type.  But it is still interesting and
    points a finger at ORF8.

    ORF8 has only one homolog in the PDB: 5o32 with 25% identity over a
    stretch of 60 residues.  This homologous region contains the S84L
    site
    (Val I544 in 5o32).  I had a quick look and appears to be a
    cavity-filling mutation to me.  Not very big, but maybe something
    could
    fit in there.  To be sure we'd need a structure of ORF8.

    Good luck to you all, and stay healthy.

    -James Holton
    MAD Scientist

    ########################################################################

    To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
    https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1



--
patr...@douglas.co.uk <mailto:patr...@douglas.co.uk>   Douglas Instruments Ltd.
 Douglas House, East Garston, Hungerford, Berkshire, RG17 7HD, UK
 Directors: Patrick Shaw Stewart, Peter Baldock, Stefan Kolek

http://www.douglas.co.uk
 Tel: 44 (0) 148-864-9090    US toll-free 1-877-225-2034
 Regd. England 2177994, VAT Reg. GB 480 7371 36

------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1


------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1



########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

Reply via email to