Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33311634›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Structural and functional comparison of SARS-CoV-2-spike receptor binding domain produced in Pichia pastoris and mammalian cells.

Argentinian AntiCovid Consortium

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Production of isotope-labeled nanobody KN035 inMagnetic resonance letters · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Production of high-affinity glycosylated anti-mouse conjugated nanobodies inFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Backstage Heroes-Yeast in COVID-19 Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Argentinian AntiCovid Consortium
University of Buenos Aires · ARFundación Ciencias Exactas y Naturales · ARConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARHospital César Milstein · ARInstituto de Química y Fisicoquímica Biológicas · ARArgentine Antarctic Institute · ARNational University of General San Martín · AR

Funding

Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation, Argentina | Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica (National Agency for Science and Technology, Argentina) IP-COVID-19-234
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The yeast Pichia pastoris is a cost-effective and easily scalable system for recombinant protein production. In this work we compared the conformation of the receptor binding domain (RBD) from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) Spike protein expressed in P. pastoris and in the well established HEK-293T mammalian cell system. RBD obtained from both yeast and mammalian cells was properly folded, as indicated by UV-absorption, circular dichroism and tryptophan fluorescence. They also had similar stability, as indicated by temperature-induced unfolding (observed T

Indexed as

HumansProtein DomainsRecombinant ProteinsSaccharomycetalesSARS-CoV-2Spike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusRecombinant ProteinsSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33311634
PMCPMC7732851
OpenAlexW4250333371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.