Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Investigating host-virus interaction mechanism and phylogenetic analysis of viral proteins involved in the pathogenesis

  • Ahmad Abu Turab Naqvi,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Department of Computer Science, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India

    ⨯
  • Farah Anjum,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Software, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Alaa Shafie,

    Roles Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Sufian Badar,

    Roles Formal analysis, Investigation, Software, Validation, Visualization

    Affiliation Department of Computer Science, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India

    ⨯
  • Abdelbaset Mohamed Elasbali,

    Roles Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources

    Affiliation Clinical Laboratory Science, College of Applied Medical Sciences-Qurayyat, Jouf University, Sakakah, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Dharmendra Kumar Yadav ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

    dharmendra30oct@gmail.com (DKY); mihassan@jmi.ac.in (MIH)

    Affiliation College of Pharmacy, Gachon University of Medicine and Science, Hambakmoeiro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon City, South Korea

    ⨯
  • Md. Imtaiyaz Hassan

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing

    dharmendra30oct@gmail.com (DKY); mihassan@jmi.ac.in (MIH)

    Affiliation Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Basic Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi, India

    ⨯

Abstract

Since the emergence of yellow fever in the Americas and the devastating 1918 influenza pandemic, biologists and clinicians have been drawn to human infecting viruses to understand their mechanisms of infection better and develop effective therapeutics against them. However, the complex molecular and cellular processes that these viruses use to infect and multiply in human cells have been a source of great concern for the scientific community since the discovery of the first human infecting virus. Viral disease outbreaks, such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic caused by a novel coronavirus, have claimed millions of lives and caused significant economic damage worldwide. In this study, we investigated the mechanisms of host-virus interaction and the molecular machinery involved in the pathogenesis of some common human viruses. We also performed a phylogenetic analysis of viral proteins involved in host-virus interaction to understand the changes in the sequence organization of these proteins during evolution for various strains of viruses to gain insights into the viral origin’s evolutionary perspectives.

Citation: Naqvi AAT, Anjum F, Shafie A, Badar S, Elasbali AM, Yadav DK, et al. (2021) Investigating host-virus interaction mechanism and phylogenetic analysis of viral proteins involved in the pathogenesis. PLoS ONE 16(12): e0261497. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497

Editor: Timir Tripathi, North-Eastern Hill University, INDIA

Received: October 15, 2021; Accepted: December 2, 2021; Published: December 16, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Naqvi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding: This work was supported by Taif University Researchers Supporting Project Number (TURSP-2020/131), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia. The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors FA and AS, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Since the first virus was discovered in 1898 [1], humans have been curious about this microorganism that causes viral diseases in plants, animals and humans. The recent outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has galvanized human efforts to understand the intricate mechanisms that allow viruses to infect their hosts. The first step in this course of infection that helps viruses invade the host environment is host-virus interaction. Anti-viral drugs and vaccines have been the primary combat tools to cure and safeguard humans from disease-causing viruses.

Advances in biological sciences have increased our understanding of the mechanism by which these viruses infect their hosts and cause disease. However, we are still facing severe limitations in eradicating the possible threats caused by the viruses. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has raised serious questions about the status of therapeutic intervention for viral diseases. [2–7]. Viruses with a relatively minimal amount of molecular machinery compared to other evolved organisms have killed millions of people and caused millions of dollars of economic loss all over the globe. So far, more than 5 million people have died due to COVID-related complications caused by the SARS-COV-2 [8–12].

Here, we investigated the progress made in understanding human viruses and their mode of interaction. In addition, we performed a phylogenetic analysis of the viral proteins that are involved in host-virus interaction. While searching for relevant literature about the phylogenetic analysis of viral proteins that play a crucial role in host-virus interaction, we came across several studies and reviews [13–16] that elaborate on the evolutionary aspects of the viral genomes. Thus, the spectrum of studies is broad and precise for looking for relevant information about viral evolution. Therefore, we summarize the evolutionary aspects of the most frequent human viruses using phylogenetic analysis of their viral proteins, which have pathogenic significance.

Materials and methods

Literature survey

We performed an extensive literature survey to understand the mechanism of virion interactions with the host cells and how far we have reached our current understanding of the host-virus mechanism. For the literature survey, the PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) repository was searched with specific search-strings such as “human viruses," “host-virus interaction,” and “host-virus interaction mechanism,” etc. Then, viruses were selected for the analysis based on results retrieved from the literature survey and the extent of viral disease prevalence in humans. Table 1 summarises these viruses and the different types and diseases they cause.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. An overview of the human viruses, their mode of transmission, pathogenesis, genome and viral proteins.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.t001

Selection of viral proteins

The basis for selecting viral proteins was their role in host-pathogen interactions. Those proteins involved in host receptor interaction, cell binding, and membrane fusion were selected for sequence and phylogenetic analysis.

Sequence and phylogenetic analysis

Here, we dwell on the phylogeny of these viral proteins to bring forward aspects of evolutionary changes that these viruses follow and change their genomic blueprints to make new and more potential viral proteins. First, FASTA sequences of major proteins involved in viral pathogenesis were downloaded from the Uniport (https://www.uniprot.org/) database. Then, the multiple sequence alignment was performed using MAFFT (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/mafft/). We chose the default parameters set by the MAFFT, which uses the BLOSAM62 scoring matrix for protein sequences and with a gap penalty of 1.53. Alignments retrieved from MAFFT in FASTA format were further processed using JalView (https://www.jalview.org/). MAFFT applies the neighbor-joining method for phylogenetic tree construction for the given alignments. The data for phylogenetic trees obtained from MAFFT was used to generate circular cladograms using iTOL (https://itol.embl.de/).

Results and discussion

For the first time, the existence of viruses was noticed by Russian biologist Dmitry Ivanovsky in 1892 as “non-bacterial pathogens,” as he described them, which were later identified as Tobacco mosaic viruses. This plant virus infects the tobacco leaves, hence the name, and was given in 1898 by Martinus Beijerinck. Since this milestone, discovering viruses has been a center of attraction for biologists worldwide working on these microscopic pathogens. However, human viruses were discovered later when their discovery was fuelled by yellow fever, Influenza outbreaks, etc., [17–19]. Therefore, it may be helpful to briefly discuss the basic biology of viruses before discussing their infection mechanism [20–23].

Viruses are called organisms “on the edge of life” because they can only replicate and grow within a host cell [24, 25]. As a result, they rely entirely on a host body for survival. Viruses are submicroscopic particles known as virions that contain RNA or DNA as their genetic material, encapsulated in a capsid made up of capsid proteins and sometimes an outer lipid layer. The viral genome size ranges from a few kilobytes expressing only two proteins to several megabytes expressing up to 2500 proteins (See Fig 1 for the typical representation of enveloped virus).

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Graphical representation of a typical enveloped virus (center) showing spike projections, capsid and viral genome along with the typical diagrams of human viruses (outer circle).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g001

A virus reaches its host by various means [26–29]. The most notable of these is through a vector (dengue and chikungunya viruses), via infected fecal matter (gastritis), and through the blood and internal fluids of the infected person (HIV/HPV) or air via nasal/cough droplets or aerosols (Influenza or SARS viruses). It takes a virus to pass through six primary stages of infection to reach a host cell, grow and disseminate. These six stages are attachment, fusion, penetration, uncoating, replication, assembly, and release [30, 31]. Fig 2 shows the initial steps of retrovirus host-interaction, elucidating how a virus interacts with the host and subsequently replicates and forms new virion particles released in the host body, searching for new target cells [32]. Therefore, it will be beneficial to briefly overview the known human viruses to develop a sense of the subject before dwelling on how viruses interact with their host and their mechanism to reach their hosts and grow themselves successfully. Table 1 gives an overview of human viruses and their disease.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 2. Diagrammatic representation of host-virus interaction, cell entry, replication, budding and release of the newly formed virus.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g002

An overview of human viruses and their pathogenesis

Around 219 human viruses have been identified as causing diseases in humans ranging from mild to fatal [17, 22, 33–35]. This section provides an overview of these viruses and the diseases they cause in humans. This information is intended to lay the groundwork for subsequent subsections that will discuss the mode of interaction of these viruses with humans and changes in the mode of action and machinery involved in the interaction over time. Table 1 lists the most complex human viruses that cause the most lethal diseases in humans (Fig 1 shows a typical representation of human viruses discussed in this section).

Influenza virus.

Enveloped viruses, which are known for causing seasonal flu pandemics and epidemics, contain ssRNA as their genetic material [36]. Influenza viruses are classified into four types: influenza A, B, C, and the newly discovered type D [37]. Influenza viruses A and B are responsible for most flu cases worldwide. The difference between two surface glycoproteins, hemagglutinin (H1 to H18) and neuraminidase, further divides influenza A virus into subtypes (N1 to N11). Out of 198 possible combinations of Influenza A subtypes, only 138 are found in nature. Following the devastating spread of the Spanish flu in 1918, the H1N1 Influenza A virus caused a pandemic in 2009, killing between 151,700 and 575,400 people worldwide. Furthermore, the annual death toll from seasonal influenza is estimated to be between 290,000 and 645,000 people worldwide [38]. The genome of the Influenza A virus contains eight negative sense segments of ssRNA.

In total, 11 proteins are encoded by eight genes, in addition to surface glycoproteins and structural proteins. Hemagglutinin and neuraminidase are two proteins required by the virus for survival and replication. The Influenza A virus, in particular, uses its hemagglutinin glycoprotein to attach to the host cell. The HA1 and HA2 subdomains aid receptor binding and cell fusion, respectively [39]. The hemagglutinin HA1 monomer’s receptor binding site mediates virus anchoring by attaching to the sialic acid residues of the glycoconjugates present on the host cell surface. The process is then aided by neuraminidase, which assists hemagglutinin in scanning the host cell surface and locating the appropriately isolated receptor [40]. The successful binding and fusion of the virion particle to the host cell leads to the more important and intricate viral infection process, including the transport of the viral genome to the host cell nucleus. Discussing all the processes in detail is beyond the scope of this review. Readers may refer to these articles to better understand the underlying mechanisms [41–44].

Influenza A virus is genetically diversified due to the two main viral proteins, hemagglutinin and neuraminidase [45]. These two genes, as observed, have higher mean substitution rates, which are 5.34E−03 for hemagglutinin and 5.21E−03 for neuraminidase [46]. The receptor-binding site of hemagglutinin of the H1N1 strain of influenza A virus is found on the upper distal tip of the receptor-binding domain, which comprises amino acids 111 to 265 [47, 48]. Mutations at the receptor-binding site of the HA1 domain of hemagglutinin broadly affect its specificity and efficiency [49]. Tumpey et al., [50] have demonstrated the effects of amino acid substitutions in the HA1 domain of 1918 Influenza A virus strain, where changes resulted in the switching of binding specificity from human alpha-2,6 receptors to alpha-2,3 sialic acid receptors of the birds. It further resulted in the abolished transmission from air droplets. Vaccine development against Influenza A virus mainly targets the HA1 domain binding site to check the process of receptor binding and membrane fusion [51, 52]. As mentioned, neuraminidase also plays a significant role in viral infection, besides budding, releasing, and disseminating newly formed viral particles in the infected cells [53]. It plays a crucial role in helping the virus target cells by cleaving the sialic acids from the respiratory tract epithelial cells [54]. Neuraminidase is also known for regulating the activity of hemagglutinin. It helps to remove the oligosaccharides clouding the receptor binding site by cleaving the neuraminic acid residues of those oligosaccharides [55]. Some known neuraminidase inhibitors such as zanamivir, oseltamivir, and peramivir have been developed for Influenza infections that restrict its activity [56].

Hepatitis virus.

A group of liver infecting viruses causing viral hepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma consists mainly of five genetically varying (apparently unrelated) viruses: hepatitis A, B, C, D, and E. Of these, hepatitis B viruses contain partially double-stranded DNA in their genomes, while others have single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) as their genetic material [57–59]. Among the types of hepatitis virus type, A and C are of great significance due to their association with chronic liver infection and liver cancer. The Hepatitis B viral genome is enclosed inside an outer lipid envelope and an icosahedral core, which surrounds the genome and includes a DNA polymerase required for virus replication inside the host body. Encoding of four overlapping ORFs is an exciting feature of the virus. The S ORF’s surface envelope proteins encoded by HBsAg are responsible for virus binding to the host cell. ORF C of the viral genome encodes HBcAg, a structural protein involved in capsid formation and replication that contributes to the viral infection. Another significant non-structural HBx protein is involved in viral infection.

The ssRNA containing the hepatitis C virus causes hepatitis C, hence its name, and is also associated with hepatocellular carcinoma. This virus is found with a relatively small molecular machinery with two glycoproteins E1 and E2, embedded in the outer lipid membrane that also help in viral binding and cell entry [60]. Surface glycoproteins E1 and E2 are formed due to the cleavage of a precursor polyprotein [61, 62]. E1 and E2 are found in a non-covalent heterodimeric form on the virus surface, determining factors mediating the virus entry and pathogenicity [62]. Besides, the genetic material is enclosed inside an icosahedral capsid [63]. The viral genome encodes a single polyprotein that further breaks to produce 10 different polypeptides that play a significant role in viral replication and assembly [64].

Hepatitis B virus surface antigen HBsAg plays a significant role in initiating the viral infection and developing antibodies against HBsAg have successfully prevented the Hepatitis B virus infection (Wasley et al. Another protein other than HBsAg besides its role in viral infection and proliferation is HBx which has been extensively studied for its association with Hepatitis B virus-mediated liver cancers [65]. HBx proteins are relatively more highly expressed in hepatocellular carcinomas than other viral proteins [66]. HBx proteins promote hepatocarcinogenesis by meddling with various cellular processes and pathways such as p53 inhibition [67], dysregulating centrosome formation [68], inhibiting apoptosis by activating the p38/MAPK pathway and increasing the expression of the surviving antiapoptotic protein [69], dismantling DNA repair process [70], and by activating Jak1/STAT signaling pathway [71], etc.

Human immunodeficiency virus.

Although two types of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are known, HIV1 and HIV2, the lesser infectivity and low transmission of HIV2 are confined to only West African land [72]. Since HIV1 is more virulent and highly transmittable, it is ubiquitously known as HIV rather than HIV1. HIV can attack the host immune cells and sabotage the host immune system to evade the immune response. It mainly targets the immune system’s cellular machinery, such as CD4+ T cells, dendritic cells, and other macrophages [73]. Unlike sudden pandemic outbreaks of viral infections such as the recent coronavirus pandemic, HIV has been causing a pandemic-like situation since its first emergence in 1981 and has killed an estimated 25 million people worldwide. HIV is a retrovirus with a different virion structure. The HIV genome contains two copies of ssRNAs enveloped inside a conically shaped capsid made of p24 proteins. The genome encodes nine genes that produce the molecular machinery needed to spread the virus inside the host cell.

The capsid also contains the enzymes such as reverse transcriptase, ribonuclease, integrase, and proteases, etc., needed for the replication and progression of viral particles. Envelope glycoproteins GP120 and GP41 also play a significant role in virus structure assembly. GP120 is an essential target for HIV vaccine development as it anchors the virus to human CD4 cells [74]. The most essential and foremost step towards HIV infection, which is completed in various intricate cellular processes, is the attachment of virion particles to the target cell, which is achieved by various nonspecific processes [75]. Where the viral envelope comes near the host cell via interaction either with α4β7 integrin [76] or dendritic cell-specific intercellular adhesion molecular 3-grabbing non-integrin (DC-SIGN) [77, 78]. Getting closer to the target cell surface facilitates the viral binding with the receptor CD4 protein via its interaction with the heterodimeric complex of GP41 and GP120 glycoproteins where GP120 is involved in receptor binding and also plays a significant role in host immune response evasion because of its variable loops found on the glycoprotein surface [75]. Other essential processes follow the successful receptor binding for a viral infection, such as cofactor binding, membrane fusion, viral entry, replication, release, etc.

Human papillomavirus.

Due to its ubiquitous and frequent infection, human papillomavirus (HPV) is a grave concern for humankind. HPVs are commonly associated with genital infections that result in genital warts and, in some cases, precancerous lesions [79–81]. Unsafe sexual interactions are the most common cause of HPV transmission. HPVs are also known to contribute to and increase the risk of various cancers in humans, primarily cervical and oropharyngeal cancers [82–84].

The genome of HPV is made of a small circular dsDNA [85]. Two main culprit oncoproteins, namely E6 and E7, help the virus evade the immune system and proliferation and ultimately survive the virus and role in tumorigenesis of cervical cancers [86, 87]. These oncoproteins can inactivate tumor suppressor proteins p53 and pRb [88], where E6 is associated with the inactivation of p53, whereas E7 inactivates pRb. E6 and E7 have also been found to activate WnT signaling pathways in the cancers induced by HPV infection [89]. E6 and E7 oncoproteins dysregulate the proliferation and apoptosis in HeLa cells [90], which are well-known cell lines for studying cervical cancers. These viral oncoproteins have been broadly studied as potential hallmarks of cervical cancer therapy [91].

Human coronavirus.

The recent outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic from Wuhan province of China has shackled the world, causing severe damage to the world population and economy, which is still persistent and threatening the nations despite the fast development of various vaccines claiming to be up to >90% efficacy against the virus [92–94]. Human coronavirus has been linked to mild to severe respiratory tract infections in humans. Among other types of coronaviruses that infect birds and other mammals, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and the novel SARS-CoV-2 have been a severe threat to human beings. Besides, HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-HKU1 have been evident in humans before the emergence of these three newfound human coronaviruses. As discussed, SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the worst pandemics in human history, killing nearly 2.4 million people globally. The genome of the human coronavirus is made up of ssRNA that encodes various structural and non-structural genes. Envelope protein (E), membrane protein (M), and spike protein (S) embedded in lipid bilayers aid the virus in host entry and assimilation [94]. S protein is responsible for virus binding and cell entry into a host body. In addition, it interacts with human ACE2 receptors to allow the virion interaction with the host cell. Due to its significant role in host-virus interaction, spike protein has been widely studied for drug/vaccine development for COVID-19 treatment.

Ebola virus.

The ssRNA genome of the Ebola virus encodes seven genes essential for the survival and growth of the virus [95]. Furthermore, among all the structural (seven) and non-structural proteins (three), two glycoproteins, Gp1 and Gp2 are responsible for infection by helping the virus in host cell binding and cell entry [96, 97]. Thus, the Ebola virus is well equipped with proteins capable of blocking the host cells’ interferon immune system, eventually leading to a successful viral infection that is often lethal [96].

Zika virus.

The ssRNA genome of the Zika virus is found enclosed in an icosahedral capsid. The genome encodes three structural and seven non-structural proteins in the form of an un-cleaved polyprotein, which further breaks down its components [98]. Flavivirus glycoprotein encapsulates the virus and binds the virion to the endosomal host cell membrane [99].

Nipah virus.

The ssRNA genome of the Nipah virus is found enveloped inside a lipid bilayer. It produces six proteins that help the virus infect the host and replicate. Two glycoproteins, namely fusion glycoprotein (F) and attachment glycoprotein (G), are responsible for host cell binding and entry inside the host cell [100]. In addition, the glycoproteins interact with ephrin B2 and B3 of a human host cell for viral binding [101]. Besides, matrix protein (M), phosphoprotein (P), nucleocapsid (N), and a long polymerase (L) are also essential molecular machinery that helps the virus to increase [102].

Dengue virus.

The ssRNA Dengue virus genome encodes a large precursor polyprotein which is comprised of three structural proteins, namely capsid protein (C), membrane protein (prM), and an envelope protein (E). It also contains seven non-structural proteins: NS1, NS2A, NS2B, NS3, NS4A, NS4B, and NS5 [103, 104]. E protein of the dengue virus is essential for its attachment to the host cell [105] by interacting with heparan sulfate receptors highly susceptible to viral infections [106].

Chikungunya virus.

The chikungunya virus contains an encapsulated RNA genome with two open reading frames that encode two precursor polyproteins, one structural polyprotein (which cleaves into one capsid (C) protein, and two glycoproteins E1 and E2), and one non-structural polyprotein [107]. Glycoprotein E2 plays a significant role in viral attachment and entry to the host cell by interacting with the host cell receptors [108].

Rabies virus.

The RNA genome found enveloped inside a nucleocapsid made of nucleoproteins of the rabies virus encodes five essential structural proteins which help the virus in host attachment and proliferation, mainly targeting the muscular and nerve cells. Other than nucleoprotein (N), phosphoprotein (P), matrix protein (M), L protein, and glycoprotein (G) are essential structural proteins [109, 110]. The spike formed by the trimeric G protein helps the virus anchor to the host cell receptors [111].

Phylogenetic analysis of the viral proteins involved in host-virus interaction

In the previous sections, we have discussed the structural and genomic features of various human viruses while focusing on the viral proteins that are involved in host attachment, binding, membrane fusion, and cell entry help the virus infect a host cell and replicate to infect more and more adjacent cells in the host environment. As we know, these proteins are among the most promising targets for therapeutic interventions. In addition, these proteins have also been studied thoroughly for their variability in different viral strains and isolates.

As discussed, the influenza A virus has two main viral proteins that help infect the host cells and evade the immune system counteracting it. These proteins, hemagglutinin and neuraminidase, have undergone various changes that have given rise to different genotypes of influenza viruses. Fig 3 shows multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) and phylogenetic trees of hemagglutinin and neuraminidase taken from seven different Influenza A H1N1 subtype strains. These strains were selected randomly based on periodic and geographical distribution, including the viral host variability since we also selected two strains from Duck and Swine. The MSA of the hemagglutinin HA1 subdomain (Fig 3A) shows an overall conserved sequence; however, there are visible non-conserved amino acid positions distributed in the receptor-binding area of the HA1 subdomain. The phylogenetic tree for the HA1 subdomain (Fig 3C) shows three strains, i.e., USSR/90/1977, Brazil/11/1978, and India/6263/1980, which have very close evolutionary relationships with very minimal branch lengths. The other four strains on the phylogenetic tree show that the Brevig Mission/1/1918 strain shares the same tree branches with the Duck/Alberta/35/1976 strain with a branch length difference of ~0.059. The Korea/01/2009 strain of H1N1 virus shares nodes with the New Jersey/11/1976 strain isolated from swine.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 3. Phylogenetic profile of viral proteins from H1N1 Influenza A virus.

Multiple Sequence Alignment of HA1 subdomain (A) of the hemagglutinin and active/binding site region of neuraminidase. (B) from different strains of the H1N1 Influenza A virus. (C) Phylogenetic tree of HA1 subdomain. (D) Phylogenetic tree of neuraminidase.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g003

The MSA of functional residues contains the region of neuraminidase (Fig 3B). It shows relatively highly conserved positions where USSR/90/1977, Brazil/11/1978, and India/6263/1980 strains show 97% sequence identity, indicating their origin from the same ancestor during the evolutionary process. However, similar trends are observed on the phylogenetic tree for neuraminidase (Fig 3D), with relatively higher branch lengths depicting a vast evolutionary time scale. Protein X (HBx) of the Hepatitis B virus is known for its role in virus-induced hepatocarcinogenesis and has been widely studied as a potential biomarker.

The MSA of HBx protein (Fig 4A) from various genotypes (Table 2) of Hepatitis B virus shows highly conserved regions except for a few amino acid positions that are non-conserved among all the sequences. In addition, sequences from A1, A2, A3, C, D, and E genotypes share common amino acid substitutions that constitute non-conserved regions. A similar pattern is also observed on the phylogenetic tree (Fig 4B) for these genotypes of the Hepatitis B virus, indicating a common ancestor for these genotypes of the virus. Genotypes B1 and B2 share the bifurcated branch node with these six genotypes, with branch length differences of around 0.019. Genotypes F1, F2, and H, share common nodes, while G is the most distant on the evolutionary tree with a branch length of 0.148. The E1 and E2 glycoproteins of the Hepatitis C virus are significant for its survival and growth and are potential targets for vaccine development. However, the MSA of both these glycoproteins (Fig 4C and 4E) from various genotypes of Hepatitis C virus (Table 2) shows non-conserved positions spread across the sequences, including few stretches are conserved between all the genotypes. Similar patterns are observed on the phylogenetic trees (Fig 4D and 4F). The branch lengths between the parent and child nodes are relatively high, depicting a common ancestry but a higher divergence and substitution rate among the sequences.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 4. Phylogenetic profile of viral proteins from Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C virus.

(A) Multiple sequence alignment of Protein X from Hepatitis B. (B) Phylogenetic tree of Protein X. (C) Multiple sequence alignment of E1 glycoprotein along with phylogenetic tree (D). (E) Multiple sequence alignment of E2 glycoprotein with the phylogenetic tree (F).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g004

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Viral Protein selected for phylogenetic analysis along with the details of virus subtype/genotype and strain/isolate.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.t002

Fig 5 shows the MSA and phylogenetic tree of GP160 glycoprotein (Surface protein GP160 and transmembrane subunit GP41) from various isolates of HIV subtypes. It is established that the structural and functional variability in viral proteins, especially those involved in host receptor binding, is a significant hurdle in vaccine development. Despite decades’ efforts, there is no effective vaccine against HIV yet. The contributing factor to this is the variation in the structural and functional features of the HIV viral proteins. The MSA of GP160 surface protein (Fig 5A) taken from various isolates of HIV (Table 2) shows highly variable regions in the sequences. Besides, sequence lengths also significantly vary among the subjects. A similar pattern is observed for the GP41 transmembrane subunit (Fig 5C); however, the conserved regions are comparatively higher in the GP41 subunit. Higher differences in the branch lengths of the tip nodes from the root and internal nodes on the phylogenetic trees (Fig 5B and 5D) indicate a high rate of amino acid substitutions among various subtypes of HIV. Phylogenetic analysis of E6 and E7 oncoproteins, responsible for virus-associated cervical cancers, from the human papillomavirus, shows a high divergence among HPV types 16, 31, 33, 35, 52, 58, and 67. In addition, amino acid substitution resulting in non-conserved regions is high in oncoproteins (Fig 6A and 6B). The phylogenetic tree (Fig 6C and 6D) also shows higher divergence among various HPV subtypes. The spike glycoprotein of the coronavirus is responsible for interaction with the host receptor through its receptor-binding domain. The phylogenetic analysis of various coronavirus strains isolated from humans (Table 2) and other organisms (bat coronavirus and bovine coronavirus) shows regions with higher sequence variation in the receptor-binding domain of the spike glycoprotein of the coronavirus.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 5. Phylogenetic profile of GP160 glycoprotein from HIV.

(A) Multiple sequence alignment and (B) phylogenetic tree of surface protein region GP160. (C) Multiple sequence alignment and (D) phylogenetic tree of transmembrane region GP41.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g005

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 6. Phylogenetic profile of E6 and E7 oncoproteins from HPV.

(A) Multiple sequence alignment of E6. (B) Multiple sequence alignment of E7. (C) Phylogenetic tree of E6 and (D) E7 oncoproteins.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g006

It is also noticeable that the sequence lengths of the receptor-binding domains vary significantly between various strains. Fig 7A shows MSA of the receptor-binding domain of Spike proteins depicting highly non-conserved regions. A spike protein is a potential target for vaccine development, and higher sequence variability might be a hurdle in the effectiveness of the vaccines under development or developed so far (Table 1). The divergence between various strains for Spike protein is very high, as observed on the phylogenetic tree (Fig 7B).

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 7. Phylogenetic profile of receptor binding domain of the spike glycoprotein of the coronavirus.

(A) Multiple sequence alignment and (B) phylogenetic tree of the receptor-binding domain.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261497.g007

Despite this, the propensity of non-conserved regions between SARS-CoV and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is very high, even though they share an evolutionary origin (Fig 7B). A higher rate of amino acid substitutions indicates frequently originating viral strains that are more likely to evade immune response with a higher tendency to infect host cells. It happened in the case of the novel coronavirus UK strain, which is more lethal and highly contaminable than previously known strains. Viruses tend to evolve and change their genetic makeup to evade host immune responses.

We have witnessed a remarkable change in the novel coronavirus and the origin of new viral strains that are more powerful than their progenitors. The purpose of phylogenetic analysis of significant viral proteins across strains and isolates was to understand how many changes these viruses have gone through so far. As discussed above, most of these viruses show significant changes in their host-interacting viral proteins since their discovery to current times. We also observed evolutionary changes in viral proteins taken from strains and isolates from various geographical regions.

Conclusion

We investigated the host-virus interaction mechanisms of common human viruses and ran phylogenetic analyses of the viral proteins involved in host cell surface binding. As we have seen, viruses are well-equipped with essential molecular machinery that allows them to infect humans, replicate, and survive in the host environment. Extensive studies on the host-virus interaction mechanism have resulted in significant advances in discovering effective therapeutics for various viral diseases over the last few decades (Influenza vaccines, hepatitis vaccines, rabies vaccines, and recent vaccine development against novel coronavirus). However, in the case of some viruses, medical science is still facing challenges in the development of vaccines. The reason for this appears to be the genomic changes that these viruses go through to infiltrate the host immune response and ensure their survival. Proteins involved in host-virus interaction have significant variations in their sequence structure, as revealed by phylogenetic analysis. The majority of these variations are found in regions that contain host receptor binding motifs. The frequency and prevalence of genomic variations are a barrier to vaccine development. As a result, a thorough understanding of virus interaction mechanisms and genomic variations may aid in developing vaccines with higher efficacy against a wide range of viral strains.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, for the FIST support (FIST program No. SR/FST/LSII/2020/782).

References

  1. 1. Lecoq H (2001) [discovery of the first virus, the tobacco mosaic virus: 1892 or 1898?]. C R Acad Sci III 324: 929–933. pmid:11570281
  2. 2. Asrani P, Afzal Hussain KN, AlAjmi MF, Amir S, Sohal SS, et al. (2021) Guidelines and Safety Considerations in the Laboratory Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Prerequisite Study for Health Professionals. Risk management and healthcare policy 14: 379. pmid:33568956
  3. 3. Asrani P, Hasan GM, Sohal SS, Hassan MI (2020) Molecular basis of pathogenesis of coronaviruses: a comparative genomics approach to planetary health to prevent zoonotic outbreaks in the 21st century. Omics: a journal of integrative biology 24: 634–644. pmid:32940573
  4. 4. Fatima U, Rizvi SSA, Raina N, Fatima S, Rahman S, et al. (2020) Therapeutic management of COVID-19 patients: Clinical manifestation and limitations. Current pharmaceutical design.
  5. 5. Choi DH, Jung JY, Suh D, Choi JY, Lee SU, et al. (2021) Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak on Trends in Emergency Department Utilization in Children: a Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study in Seoul Metropolitan Area, Korea. J Korean Med Sci 36: e44. pmid:33527786
  6. 6. Joo JY, Liu MF (2021) Nurses’ barriers to caring for patients with COVID-19: a qualitative systematic review. Int Nurs Rev 68: 202–213. pmid:33420749
  7. 7. Nogueira RG, Abdalkader M, Qureshi MM, Frankel MR, Mansour OY, et al. (2021) Global impact of COVID-19 on stroke care. Int J Stroke 16: 573–584. pmid:33459583
  8. 8. Mohammad T, Shamsi A, Anwar S, Umair M, Hussain A, et al. (2020) Identification of high-affinity inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 main protease: Towards the development of effective COVID-19 therapy. Virus research 288: 198102. pmid:32717346
  9. 9. Naqvi AAT, Fatima K, Mohammad T, Fatima U, Singh IK, et al. (2020) Insights into SARS-CoV-2 genome, structure, evolution, pathogenesis and therapies: Structural genomics approach. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Molecular Basis of Disease: 165878.
  10. 10. Park S, Lee HY, Cho EJ, Sung KC, Kim J, et al. (2020) Is the use of RAS inhibitors safe in the current era of COVID-19 pandemic? Clin Hypertens 26: 11. pmid:32391169
  11. 11. Park YT, Park J, Jeon JS, Kim YJ, Kim KG (2021) Changes in Nurse Staffing Grades of Korean Hospitals during COVID-19 Pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18. pmid:34072829
  12. 12. Phan LMT, Vo TAT, Hoang TX, Selvam SP, Pham HL, et al. (2021) Trending Technology of Glucose Monitoring during COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges in Personalized Healthcare. Adv Mater Technol: 2100020. pmid:34179343
  13. 13. Gorbalenya AE, Lauber C (2017) Phylogeny of Viruses. Reference Module in Biomedical Sciences: B978-970-912-801238-801233.895723–801234. pmid:28078475
  14. 14. Ludmir EB, Enquist LW (2009) Viral genomes are part of the phylogenetic tree of life. Nature Reviews Microbiology 7: 615–615. pmid:19561625
  15. 15. Zhuang Q, Wang S, Liu S, Hou G, Li J, et al. (2019) Diversity and distribution of type A influenza viruses: an updated panorama analysis based on protein sequences. Virology Journal 16: 85. pmid:31242907
  16. 16. Lopes LR, de Mattos Cardillo G, Paiva PB (2020) Molecular evolution and phylogenetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 and hosts ACE2 protein suggest Malayan pangolin as intermediary host. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 51: 1593–1599. pmid:32592038
  17. 17. Woolhouse M, Scott F, Hudson Z, Howey R, Chase-Topping M (2012) Human viruses: discovery and emergence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 367: 2864–2871. pmid:22966141
  18. 18. van Helvoort T (1994) History of virus research in the twentieth century: the problem of conceptual continuity. Hist Sci 32: 185–235. pmid:11639267
  19. 19. Sharp PM (2002) Origins of human virus diversity. Cell 108: 305–312. pmid:11853665
  20. 20. Seong H, Hong JW, Hyun HJ, Yoon JG, Noh JY, et al. (2021) Correlation between the Level of Social Distancing and Activity of Influenza Epidemic or COVID-19 Pandemic: A Subway Use-Based Assessment. J Clin Med 10. pmid:34362150
  21. 21. Shin DH, Kang M, Song KH, Jung J, Kim ES, et al. (2021) A call for antimicrobial stewardship in patients with COVID-19: a nationwide cohort study in Korea. Clin Microbiol Infect 27: 653–655. pmid:33137513
  22. 22. Van Vo G, Bagyinszky E, Park YS, Hulme J, An SSA (2021) SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): Beginning to Understand a New Virus. Adv Exp Med Biol 1321: 3–19. pmid:33656709
  23. 23. Yang D (2021) Application of Nanotechnology in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int J Nanomedicine 16: 623–649. pmid:33531805
  24. 24. Rybicki EP (1990) The classification of organisms at the edge of life or problems with virus systematics. South African Journal of Science 86: 182–186.
  25. 25. Koonin EV, Starokadomskyy P (2016) Are viruses alive? The replicator paradigm sheds decisive light on an old but misguided question. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 59: 125–134. pmid:26965225
  26. 26. Ju MJ, Oh J, Choi YH (2021) Changes in air pollution levels after COVID-19 outbreak in Korea. Sci Total Environ 750: 141521. pmid:32829258
  27. 27. Jung J (2020) Epidemiologic Evaluation and Risk Communication Regarding the Recent Reports of Sudden Death after Influenza Vaccination in the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Korean Med Sci 35: e378. pmid:33107233
  28. 28. Jung J (2021) A Long Way to the Recovery: COVID-19 Will Not Disappear. J Korean Med Sci 36: e231. pmid:34402229
  29. 29. Kang HS, Kim BN (2021) The Role of Event-Related Rumination and Perceived Social Support on Psychological Distress during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from Greater Daegu Region in South Korea. Psychiatry Investig 18: 392–399. pmid:33910327
  30. 30. Kielian M, Jungerwirth S (1990) Mechanisms of enveloped virus entry into cells. Mol Biol Med 7: 17–31. pmid:2182968
  31. 31. Dimitrov DS (2004) Virus entry: molecular mechanisms and biomedical applications. Nat Rev Microbiol 2: 109–122. pmid:15043007
  32. 32. Nisole S, Saib A (2004) Early steps of retrovirus replicative cycle. Retrovirology 1: 9. pmid:15169567
  33. 33. Kim JH, Roh YH, Ahn JG, Kim MY, Huh K, et al. (2021) Respiratory syncytial virus and influenza epidemics disappearance in Korea during the 2020–2021 season of COVID-19. Int J Infect Dis 110: 29–35. pmid:34245886
  34. 34. Park S, Choi JS, Kim Y (2018) Prevention of Zika virus infection: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant women in Korea. Health Care Women Int 39: 1209–1220. pmid:30592701
  35. 35. Won EJ, Thai DA, Duong DD, Lee NY, Song YJ (2021) Microfluidic electrical cell lysis for high-throughput and continuous production of cell-free varicella-zoster virus. J Biotechnol 335: 19–26. pmid:34090951
  36. 36. Arbeitskreis Blut U (2009) Influenza Virus. Transfus Med Hemother 36: 32–39. pmid:21048819
  37. 37. Park BJ, Park MS, Lee JM, Song YJ (2021) Specific Detection of Influenza A and B Viruses by CRISPR-Cas12a-Based Assay. Biosensors (Basel) 11. pmid:33808752
  38. 38. Iuliano AD, Roguski KM, Chang HH, Muscatello DJ, Palekar R, et al. (2018) Estimates of global seasonal influenza-associated respiratory mortality: a modelling study. Lancet 391: 1285–1300. pmid:29248255
  39. 39. Voskarides K, Christaki E, Nikolopoulos GK (2018) Influenza Virus-Host Co-evolution. A Predator-Prey Relationship? Front Immunol 9: 2017. pmid:30245689
  40. 40. Dou D, Revol R, Ostbye H, Wang H, Daniels R (2018) Influenza A Virus Cell Entry, Replication, Virion Assembly and Movement. Front Immunol 9: 1581. pmid:30079062
  41. 41. Gamblin SJ, Skehel JJ (2010) Influenza hemagglutinin and neuraminidase membrane glycoproteins. J Biol Chem 285: 28403–28409. pmid:20538598
  42. 42. Hamilton BS, Whittaker GR, Daniel S (2012) Influenza virus-mediated membrane fusion: determinants of hemagglutinin fusogenic activity and experimental approaches for assessing virus fusion. Viruses 4: 1144–1168. pmid:22852045
  43. 43. Eisfeld AJ, Neumann G, Kawaoka Y (2015) At the centre: influenza A virus ribonucleoproteins. Nat Rev Microbiol 13: 28–41. pmid:25417656
  44. 44. Fodor E (2013) The RNA polymerase of influenza a virus: mechanisms of viral transcription and replication. Acta Virol 57: 113–122. pmid:23600869
  45. 45. Johnson KEE, Song T, Greenbaum B, Ghedin E (2017) Getting the flu: 5 key facts about influenza virus evolution. PLoS Pathog 13: e1006450. pmid:28837690
  46. 46. Su YCF, Bahl J, Joseph U, Butt KM, Peck HA, et al. (2015) Phylodynamics of H1N1/2009 influenza reveals the transition from host adaptation to immune-driven selection. Nat Commun 6: 7952. pmid:26245473
  47. 47. Gamblin SJ, Haire LF, Russell RJ, Stevens DJ, Xiao B, et al. (2004) The structure and receptor binding properties of the 1918 influenza hemagglutinin. Science 303: 1838–1842. pmid:14764886
  48. 48. Sriwilaijaroen N, Suzuki Y (2012) Molecular basis of the structure and function of H1 hemagglutinin of influenza virus. Proc Jpn Acad Ser B Phys Biol Sci 88: 226–249. pmid:22728439
  49. 49. Stevens J, Blixt O, Glaser L, Taubenberger JK, Palese P, et al. (2006) Glycan microarray analysis of the hemagglutinins from modern and pandemic influenza viruses reveals different receptor specificities. J Mol Biol 355: 1143–1155. pmid:16343533
  50. 50. Tumpey TM, Maines TR, Van Hoeven N, Glaser L, Solorzano A, et al. (2007) A two-amino acid change in the hemagglutinin of the 1918 influenza virus abolishes transmission. Science 315: 655–659. pmid:17272724
  51. 51. Benton DJ, Nans A, Calder LJ, Turner J, Neu U, et al. (2018) Influenza hemagglutinin membrane anchor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 115: 10112–10117. pmid:30224494
  52. 52. Knossow M, Skehel JJ (2006) Variation and infectivity neutralization in influenza. Immunology 119: 1–7. pmid:16925526
  53. 53. Wagner R, Wolff T, Herwig A, Pleschka S, Klenk HD (2000) Interdependence of hemagglutinin glycosylation and neuraminidase as regulators of influenza virus growth: a study by reverse genetics. J Virol 74: 6316–6323. pmid:10864641
  54. 54. Matrosovich MN, Matrosovich TY, Gray T, Roberts NA, Klenk HD (2004) Neuraminidase is important for the initiation of influenza virus infection in human airway epithelium. J Virol 78: 12665–12667. pmid:15507653
  55. 55. Ohuchi M, Feldmann A, Ohuchi R, Klenk HD (1995) Neuraminidase is essential for fowl plague virus hemagglutinin to show hemagglutinating activity. Virology 212: 77–83. pmid:7676651
  56. 56. McKimm-Breschkin JL (2013) Influenza neuraminidase inhibitors: antiviral action and mechanisms of resistance. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 7 Suppl 1: 25–36. pmid:23279894
  57. 57. An J, Lim YS, Kim GA, Han SB, Jeong W, et al. (2017) Telbivudine versus entecavir in patients with undetectable hepatitis B virus DNA: a randomized trial. BMC Gastroenterol 17: 15. pmid:28103819
  58. 58. Choi J, Han S, Kim N, Lim YS (2017) Increasing burden of liver cancer despite extensive use of antiviral agents in a hepatitis B virus-endemic population. Hepatology 66: 1454–1463. pmid:28628942
  59. 59. Yim HJ, Kim IH, Suh SJ, Jung YK, Kim JH, et al. (2018) Switching to tenofovir vs continuing entecavir for hepatitis B virus with partial virologic response to entecavir: a randomized controlled trial. J Viral Hepat 25: 1321–1330. pmid:29772084
  60. 60. Op De Beeck A, Dubuisson J (2003) Topology of hepatitis C virus envelope glycoproteins. Rev Med Virol 13: 233–241. pmid:12820185
  61. 61. Vieyres G, Dubuisson J, Pietschmann T (2014) Incorporation of hepatitis C virus E1 and E2 glycoproteins: the keystones on a peculiar virion. Viruses 6: 1149–1187. pmid:24618856
  62. 62. Voisset C, Dubuisson J (2004) Functional hepatitis C virus envelope glycoproteins. Biol Cell 96: 413–420. pmid:15325070
  63. 63. Dubuisson J, Cosset FL (2014) Virology and cell biology of the hepatitis C virus life cycle: an update. J Hepatol 61: S3–S13. pmid:25443344
  64. 64. Dubuisson J (2007) Hepatitis C virus proteins. World J Gastroenterol 13: 2406–2415. pmid:17552023
  65. 65. Cromlish JA (1996) Hepatitis B virus-induced hepatocellular carcinoma: possible roles for HBx. Trends Microbiol 4: 270–274. pmid:8829335
  66. 66. Su Q, Schroder CH, Hofmann WJ, Otto G, Pichlmayr R, et al. (1998) Expression of hepatitis B virus X protein in HBV-infected human livers and hepatocellular carcinomas. Hepatology 27: 1109–1120. pmid:9537452
  67. 67. Wang XW, Forrester K, Yeh H, Feitelson MA, Gu JR, et al. (1994) Hepatitis B virus X protein inhibits p53 sequence-specific DNA binding, transcriptional activity, and association with transcription factor ERCC3. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91: 2230–2234. pmid:8134379
  68. 68. Forgues M, Difilippantonio MJ, Linke SP, Ried T, Nagashima K, et al. (2003) Involvement of Crm1 in hepatitis B virus X protein-induced aberrant centriole replication and abnormal mitotic spindles. Mol Cell Biol 23: 5282–5292. pmid:12861014
  69. 69. Kuo TC, Chao CC (2010) Hepatitis B virus X protein prevents apoptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma cells by upregulating SATB1 and HURP expression. Biochem Pharmacol 80: 1093–1102. pmid:20541537
  70. 70. Qadri I, Fatima K, Abde LHH (2011) Hepatitis B virus X protein impedes the DNA repair via its association with transcription factor, TFIIH. BMC Microbiol 11: 48. pmid:21375739
  71. 71. Lee YH, Yun Y (1998) HBx protein of hepatitis B virus activates Jak1-STAT signaling. J Biol Chem 273: 25510–25515. pmid:9738022
  72. 72. Sohn S, Shi HJ, Wang SH, Lee SK, Park SY, et al. (2018) Mycobacterium avium Complex Infection-Related Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome Mimicking Lymphoma in an Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patient. Infect Chemother 50: 350–356. pmid:30600659
  73. 73. Moore JP (1997) Coreceptors—Implications for HIV Pathogenesis and Therapy. Science 276: 51–52. pmid:9122710
  74. 74. Chan DC, Kim PS (1998) HIV entry and its inhibition. Cell 93: 681–684. pmid:9630213
  75. 75. Wilen CB, Tilton JC, Doms RW (2012) HIV: cell binding and entry. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2. pmid:22908191
  76. 76. Arthos J, Cicala C, Martinelli E, Macleod K, Van Ryk D, et al. (2008) HIV-1 envelope protein binds to and signals through integrin alpha4beta7, the gut mucosal homing receptor for peripheral T cells. Nat Immunol 9: 301–309. pmid:18264102
  77. 77. Ugolini S, Mondor I, Sattentau QJ (1999) HIV-1 attachment: another look. Trends Microbiol 7: 144–149. pmid:10217828
  78. 78. Geijtenbeek TB, Kwon DS, Torensma R, van Vliet SJ, van Duijnhoven GC, et al. (2000) DC-SIGN, a dendritic cell-specific HIV-1-binding protein that enhances trans-infection of T cells. Cell 100: 587–597. pmid:10721995
  79. 79. Choi JS, Park S (2016) A study on the predictors of Korean male students’ intention to receive human papillomavirus vaccination. J Clin Nurs 25: 3354–3362. pmid:27378054
  80. 80. Kang M, Ha SY, Cho HY, Chung DH, Kim NR, et al. (2020) Comparison of papanicolaou smear and human papillomavirus (HPV) test as cervical screening tools: can we rely on HPV test alone as a screening method? An 11-year retrospective experience at a single institution. J Pathol Transl Med 54: 112–118. pmid:31964113
  81. 81. Kim KM, Choi JS (2017) Mothers’ intentions to vaccinate their teenaged children against human papillomavirus, as predicted by sex in South Korea: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Jpn J Nurs Sci 14: 288–296. pmid:28004510
  82. 82. Kim YT, Lee JM, Hur SY, Cho CH, Kim SC, et al. (2010) Clearance of human papillomavirus infection after successful conization in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int J Cancer 126: 1903–1909. pmid:19642095
  83. 83. Ku CH, Lee SH, Lee SP (2014) Effect of human papillomavirus genotype on severity and prognosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol Sci 57: 37–43. pmid:24596816
  84. 84. Yang SH, Kong SK, Lee SH, Lim SY, Park CY (2014) Human papillomavirus 18 as a poor prognostic factor in stage I-IIA cervical cancer following primary surgical treatment. Obstet Gynecol Sci 57: 492–500. pmid:25469338
  85. 85. Scheurer ME, Tortolero-Luna G, Adler-Storthz K (2005) Human papillomavirus infection: biology, epidemiology, and prevention. Int J Gynecol Cancer 15: 727–746. pmid:16174218
  86. 86. Yim EK, Park JS (2005) The role of HPV E6 and E7 oncoproteins in HPV-associated cervical carcinogenesis. Cancer Res Treat 37: 319–324. pmid:19956366
  87. 87. Ganguly N, Parihar SP (2009) Human papillomavirus E6 and E7 oncoproteins as risk factors for tumorigenesis. J Biosci 34: 113–123. pmid:19430123
  88. 88. Boulet G, Horvath C, Vanden Broeck D, Sahebali S, Bogers J (2007) Human papillomavirus: E6 and E7 oncogenes. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 39: 2006–2011. pmid:17768080
  89. 89. Rampias T, Boutati E, Pectasides E, Sasaki C, Kountourakis P, et al. (2010) Activation of Wnt signaling pathway by human papillomavirus E6 and E7 oncogenes in HPV16-positive oropharyngeal squamous carcinoma cells. Mol Cancer Res 8: 433–443. pmid:20215420
  90. 90. DeFilippis RA, Goodwin EC, Wu L, DiMaio D (2003) Endogenous human papillomavirus E6 and E7 proteins differentially regulate proliferation, senescence, and apoptosis in HeLa cervical carcinoma cells. J Virol 77: 1551–1563. pmid:12502868
  91. 91. Pal A, Kundu R (2019) Human Papillomavirus E6 and E7: The Cervical Cancer Hallmarks and Targets for Therapy. Front Microbiol 10: 3116. pmid:32038557
  92. 92. Asrani P, Eapen MS, Chia C, Haug G, Weber HC, et al. (2021) Diagnostic approaches in COVID-19: clinical updates. Expert Rev Respir Med 15: 197–212. pmid:32924671
  93. 93. Asrani P, Eapen MS, Hassan MI, Sohal SS (2021) Implications of the second wave of COVID-19 in India. Lancet Respir Med 9: e93–e94. pmid:34216547
  94. 94. Mohammad T, Choudhury A, Habib I, Asrani P, Mathur Y, et al. (2021) Genomic Variations in the Structural Proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and Their Deleterious Impact on Pathogenesis: A Comparative Genomics Approach. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 11: 765039. pmid:34722346
  95. 95. Feldmann H, Geisbert TW (2011) Ebola haemorrhagic fever. Lancet 377: 849–862. pmid:21084112
  96. 96. Kuhl A, Pohlmann S (2012) How Ebola virus counters the interferon system. Zoonoses Public Health 59 Suppl 2: 116–131. pmid:22958256
  97. 97. Kawaoka Y (2005) How Ebola virus infects cells. N Engl J Med 352: 2645–2646. pmid:15972874
  98. 98. Cox BD, Stanton RA, Schinazi RF (2015) Predicting Zika virus structural biology: Challenges and opportunities for intervention. Antivir Chem Chemother 24: 118–126. pmid:27296393
  99. 99. Dai L, Song J, Lu X, Deng YQ, Musyoki AM, et al. (2016) Structures of the Zika Virus Envelope Protein and Its Complex with a Flavivirus Broadly Protective Antibody. Cell Host Microbe 19: 696–704. pmid:27158114
  100. 100. Ternhag A, Penttinen P (2005) [Nipah virus—another product from the Asian “virus factory”]. Lakartidningen 102: 1046–1047. pmid:15892474
  101. 101. Lee B, Ataman ZA (2011) Modes of paramyxovirus fusion: a Henipavirus perspective. Trends Microbiol 19: 389–399. pmid:21511478
  102. 102. Ciancanelli MJ, Basler CF (2006) Mutation of YMYL in the Nipah virus matrix protein abrogates budding and alters subcellular localization. J Virol 80: 12070–12078. pmid:17005661
  103. 103. Holmes EC, Twiddy SS (2003) The origin, emergence and evolutionary genetics of dengue virus. Infect Genet Evol 3: 19–28. pmid:12797969
  104. 104. Dwivedi VD, Tripathi IP, Tripathi RC, Bharadwaj S, Mishra SK (2017) Genomics, proteomics and evolution of dengue virus. Brief Funct Genomics 16: 217–227. pmid:28073742
  105. 105. Chen Y, Maguire T, Hileman RE, Fromm JR, Esko JD, et al. (1997) Dengue virus infectivity depends on envelope protein binding to target cell heparan sulfate. Nat Med 3: 866–871. pmid:9256277
  106. 106. Liu J, Thorp SC (2002) Cell surface heparan sulfate and its roles in assisting viral infections. Med Res Rev 22: 1–25. pmid:11746174
  107. 107. Schuffenecker I, Iteman I, Michault A, Murri S, Frangeul L, et al. (2006) Genome microevolution of chikungunya viruses causing the Indian Ocean outbreak. PLoS Med 3: e263. pmid:16700631
  108. 108. Voss JE, Vaney MC, Duquerroy S, Vonrhein C, Girard-Blanc C, et al. (2010) Glycoprotein organization of Chikungunya virus particles revealed by X-ray crystallography. Nature 468: 709–712. pmid:21124458
  109. 109. Finke S, Conzelmann KK (2005) Replication strategies of rabies virus. Virus Res 111: 120–131. pmid:15885837
  110. 110. Conzelmann KK, Cox JH, Schneider LG, Thiel HJ (1990) Molecular cloning and complete nucleotide sequence of the attenuated rabies virus SAD B19. Virology 175: 485–499. pmid:2139267
  111. 111. Jackson AC, Rasalingam P, Weli SC (2006) Comparative pathogenesis of recombinant rabies vaccine strain SAD-L16 and SAD-D29 with replacement of Arg333 in the glycoprotein after peripheral inoculation of neonatal mice: less neurovirulent strain is a stronger inducer of neuronal apoptosis. Acta Neuropathol 111: 372–378. pmid:16453143