Key result
Structural analysis of sLb(pro) bound to E64-R-P-NH2 revealed its cleavage mechanism, and functional assays showed Lb(pro) and sLb(pro) have distinct substrate specificities.
Structural and biochemical differences between Lb(pro) and sLb(pro) suggest they may have distinct functional roles during foot-and-mouth disease virus infection.
Translation of foot-and-mouth disease virus RNA initiates at one of two start codons leading to the synthesis of two forms of leader proteinase L(pro) (Lab(pro) and Lb(pro)). These forms free themselves from the viral polyprotein by intra- and intermolecular self-processing and subsequently cleave the cellular eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 4 G. During infection, Lb(pro) removes six residues from its own C-terminus, generating sLb(pro). We present the structure of sLb(pro) bound to the inhibitor E64-R-P-NH2, illustrating how sLb(pro) can cleave between Lys/Gly and Gly/Arg pairs. In intermolecular cleavage on polyprotein substrates, Lb(pro) was unaffected by P1 or P1' substitutions and processed a substrate containing nine eIF4GI cleavage site residues whereas sLb(pro) failed to cleave the eIF4GI containing substrate and cleaved appreciably more slowly on mutated substrates. Introduction of 70 eIF4GI residues bearing the Lb(pro) binding site restored cleavage. These data imply that Lb(pro) and sLb(pro) may have different functions in infected cells.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steinberger et al. (2014) studied Foot-and-mouth disease virus. Foot-and-mouth disease virus leader proteinase (Lb(pro) and sLb(pro)) was evaluated on Intermolecular cleavage mechanism and substrate specificity. Structural analysis of sLb(pro) bound to E64-R-P-NH2 revealed its cleavage mechanism, and functional assays showed Lb(pro) and sLb(pro) have distinct substrate specificities.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: