Structural Insights into the Interaction of Filovirus Glycoproteins with the Endosomal Receptor Niemann-Pick C1: A Computational Study

• Published in: Viruses Vol. 13; no. 5; p. 913
• Main Authors: Igarashi, Manabu, Hirokawa, Takatsugu, Takadate, Yoshihiro, Takada, Ayato
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 14.05.2021; MDPI
• Subjects: Amino acids; Binding sites; Brain diseases; Computer applications; Crystal structure; drug design; Drug development; Ebolavirus; Energy; filovirus; Genetic disorders; glycoprotein; Glycoproteins; head; Host preferences; humans; Hydrophobicity; Marburgvirus; Metabolic disorders; molecular dynamics; Molecular modelling; Niemann-Pick C1; Niemann-Pick disease; Npc1 protein; Protein structure; proteinases; Simulation; structure; Sudan; Viruses; Sudan
• DOI: 10.3390/v13050913
• ISSN: 1999-4915

Filoviruses, including marburgviruses and ebolaviruses, have a single transmembrane glycoprotein (GP) that facilitates their entry into cells. During entry, GP needs to be cleaved by host proteases to expose the receptor-binding site that binds to the endosomal receptor Niemann-Pick C1 (NPC1) protein. The crystal structure analysis of the cleaved GP (GPcl) of Ebola virus (EBOV) in complex with human NPC1 has demonstrated that NPC1 has two protruding loops (loops 1 and 2), which engage a hydrophobic pocket on the head of EBOV GPcl. However, the molecular interactions between NPC1 and the GPcl of other filoviruses remain unexplored. In the present study, we performed molecular modeling and molecular dynamics simulations of NPC1 complexed with GPcls of two ebolaviruses, EBOV and Sudan virus (SUDV), and one marburgvirus, Ravn virus (RAVV). Similar binding structures were observed in the GPcl–NPC1 complexes of EBOV and SUDV, which differed from that of RAVV. Specifically, in the RAVV GPcl–NPC1 complex, the tip of loop 2 was closer to the pocket edge comprising residues at positions 79–88 of GPcl; the root of loop 1 was predicted to interact with P116 and Q144 of GPcl. Furthermore, in the SUDV GPcl–NPC1 complex, the tip of loop 2 was slightly closer to the residue at position 141 than those in the EBOV and RAVV GPcl–NPC1 complexes. These structural differences may affect the size and/or shape of the receptor-binding pocket of GPcl. Our structural models could provide useful information for improving our understanding the differences in host preference among filoviruses as well as contributing to structure-based drug design.