ArticleScientific reports2021
Contact residue contributions to interaction energies between SARS-CoV-1 spike proteins and human ACE2 receptors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging Artificial Intelligence and Gene Expression Analysis to Identify Some Potential Bovine Coronavirus (BCoV) Receptors and Host Cell Enzymes Potentially Involved in the Viral Replication and Tissue Tropism.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Computation of the Binding Energies between Human ACE2 and Spike RBDs of the Original Strain, Delta and Omicron Variants of the SARS-CoV-2: A DFT Simulation Approach.Advanced theory and simulations · 2022Article
- Article
- Can CD147 work as a therapeutic target for tumors through COVID-19 infection?International journal of medical sciences · 2022Review
- Metagenomic identification of a new sarbecovirus from horseshoe bats in Europe.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Attractive and repulsive residue fragments at the interface of SARS-CoV-2 and hACE2.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several viruses of the corona family interact, via their spike (S) proteins, with human cellular receptors. Spike proteins of SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 virions, being structurally related but not identical, mediate attachment to the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) receptor in similar but non-identical ways. Molecular-level understanding of interactions between spike proteins and hACE2 can aid strategies for blocking attachment of SARS-CoV-1, a potentially reemerging health threat, to human cells. We have identified dominant molecular-level interactions, some attractive and some repulsive, between the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-1 spike proteins (S-RBD) and hACE2. We performed fragment-based quantum-biochemical calculations which directly relate biomolecular structure to the hACE2...S-RBD interaction energy. Consistent with X-ray crystallography and cryo-EM, the interaction energy between hACE2 and S-RBD ([Formula: see text]26 kcal/mol) corresponds to a net intermolecular attraction which is significantly enhanced by inclusion of dispersion van der Waals forces. Protein fragments at the hACE2...S-RBD interface, that dominate host-virus attraction, have been identified together with their constituent amino acid residues. Two hACE2 fragments which include residues (GLU37, ASP38, TYR41, GLN42) and (GLU329, LYS353, GLY354), respectively, as well as three S-RBD fragments which include residues (TYR436), (ARG426) and (THR487, GLY488, TYR491), respectively, have been identified as primary attractors at the hACE2...S-RBD interface.
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.