↓ Skip to main content

Structural Basis for Specific Recognition of Substrates by Sapovirus Protease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Structural Basis for Specific Recognition of Substrates by Sapovirus Protease
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00312
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masaru Yokoyama, Tomoichiro Oka, Hirotatsu Kojima, Tetsuo Nagano, Takayoshi Okabe, Kazuhiko Katayama, Takaji Wakita, Tadahito Kanda, Hironori Sato

Abstract

Sapovirus (SaV) protease catalyzes cleavage of the peptide bonds at six sites of a viral polyprotein for the viral replication and maturation. However, the mechanisms by which the protease recognizes the distinct sequences of the six cleavage sites remain poorly understood. Here we examined this issue by computational and experimental approaches. A structural modeling and docking study disclosed two small clefts on the SaV protease cavity that allow the stable and functional binding of substrates to the catalytic cavity via aromatic stacking and electrostatic interactions. An information entropy study and a site-directed mutagenesis study consistently suggested variability of the two clefts under functional constraints. Using this information, we identified three chemical compounds that had structural and spatial features resembling those of the substrate amino acid residues bound to the two clefts and that exhibited an inhibitory effect on SaV protease in vitro. These results suggest that the two clefts provide structural base points to realize the functional binding of various substrates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 47%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 13%
Computer Science 2 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,166,700
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,069
of 24,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,176
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#228
of 317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 317 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.