4.4 Article

Structure of the Triatoma virus capsid

期刊

出版社

INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
DOI: 10.1107/S0907444913004617

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF)
  2. French Ministere de l'Education Nationale et de la Recherche for a graduate student fellowship
  3. UPV/EHU [UPV-IT-461-07]
  4. EMBO (ALTF 230/2002) [ALTF 230/2002]
  5. European Commission [HPMF-CT-2002-01805]
  6. SECYT-UNS [24/F035]
  7. CYTED [209RT0364]
  8. Bizkaia:Xede association
  9. MICINN
  10. CNRS
  11. FBB
  12. supervision of FAR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The members of the Dicistroviridae family are non-enveloped positive-sense single-stranded RNA (+ssRNA) viruses pathogenic to beneficial arthropods as well as insect pests of medical importance. Triatoma virus (TrV), a member of this family, infects several species of triatomine insects (popularly named kissing bugs), which are vectors for human trypanosomiasis, more commonly known as Chagas disease. The potential use of dicistroviruses as biological control agents has drawn considerable attention in the past decade, and several viruses of this family have been identified, with their targets covering honey bees, aphids and field crickets, among others. Here, the crystal structure of the TrV capsid at 2.5 angstrom resolution is reported, showing that as expected it is very similar to that of Cricket paralysis virus (CrPV). Nevertheless, a number of distinguishing structural features support the introduction of a new genus (Triatovirus; type species TrV) under the Dicistroviridae family. The most striking differences are the absence of icosahedrally ordered VP4 within the infectious particle and the presence of prominent projections that surround the fivefold axis. Furthermore, the structure identifies a second putative autoproteolytic DDF motif in protein VP3, in addition to the conserved one in VP1 which is believed to be responsible for VP0 cleavage during capsid maturation. The potential meaning of these new findings is discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据