ArticleJournal of virology2011
Cytomegalovirus capsid protease: biological substrates are cleaved more efficiently by full-length enzyme (pUL80a) than by the catalytic domain (assemblin).
Article in Journal of virology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibody reveals conformational latch regulating dimerization in β- and γ-herpesvirus proteases.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Antibody Reveals Conformational Latch Controlling Herpesvirus Proteases.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Computational modeling of protracted HCMV replication using genome substrates and protein temporal profiles.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedTaori, Kanchan [added]
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We compared the full-length capsid maturational protease (pPR, pUL80a) of human cytomegalovirus with its proteolytic domain (assemblin) for the ability to cleave two biological substrates, and we found that pPR is more efficient with both. Affinity-purified, refolded enzymes and substrates were combined under defined reaction conditions, and cleavage was monitored and quantified following staining of the resulting electrophoretically separated fragments. The enzymes were stabilized against self-cleavage by a single point mutation in each cleavage site (ICRMT-pPR and IC-assemblin). The substrates were pPR itself, inactivated by replacing its catalytic nucleophile (S132A-pPR), and the sequence-related assembly protein precursor (pAP, pUL80.5). Our results showed that (i) ICRMT-pPR is 5- to 10-fold more efficient than assemblin for all cleavages measured (i.e., the M site of pAP and the M, R, and I sites of S132A-pPR). (ii) Cleavage of substrate S132A-pPR proceeded M>R>I for both enzymes. (iii) Na(2)SO(4) reduced M- and R-site cleavage efficiency by ICRMT-pPR, in contrast to its enhancing effect for both enzymes on I site and small peptide cleavage. (iv) Disrupting oligomerization of either the pPR enzyme or substrate by mutating Leu382 in the amino-conserved domain reduced cleavage efficiency two- to fourfold. (v) Finally, ICRMT-pPR mutants that include the amino-conserved domain, but terminate with Pro481 or Tyr469, retain the enzymatic characteristics that distinguish pPR from assemblin. These findings show that the scaffolding portion of pPR increases its enzymatic activity on biologically relevant protein substrates and provide an additional link between the structure of this essential viral enzyme and its biological mechanism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.