This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smith, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Perry, K. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smith, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Perry, K. L.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Virology, August 2000, p. 7578-7586, Vol. 74, No. 16
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

The Structure of Cucumber Mosaic Virus and Comparison to Cowpea Chlorotic Mottle Virus

Thomas J. Smith,1,* Elaine Chase,1 Timothy Schmidt,1 and Keith L. Perry2

Department of Biological Sciences1 and Department of Botany and Plant Pathology,2 Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907

Received 10 March 2000/Accepted 26 May 2000

The structure of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV; strain Fny) has been determined to a 3.2-Å resolution using X-ray crystallography. Despite the fact that CMV has only 19% capsid protein sequence identity (34% similarity) to cowpea chlorotic mottle virus (CCMV), the core structures of these two members of the Bromoviridae family are highly homologous. As suggested by a previous low-resolution structural study, the 305-Å diameter (maximum) of CMV is ~12 Å larger than that of CCMV. In CCMV, the structures of the A, B, and C subunits are nearly identical except in their N termini. In contrast, the structures of two loops in subunit A of CMV differ from those in B and C. These loops are 6 and 7 residues longer than the analogous regions in CCMV. Unlike that of CCMV, the capsid of CMV does not undergo swelling at pH 7.0 and is stable at pH 9.0. This may be partly due to the fact that the N termini of the B and C subunits form a unique bundle of six amphipathic helices oriented down into the virion core at the threefold axes. In addition, while CCMV has a cluster of aspartic acid residues at the quasi-threefold axis that are proposed to bind metal in a pH-dependent manner, this cluster is replaced by complementing acids and bases in CMV. Finally, this structure clearly demonstrates that the residues important for aphid transmission lie at the outermost portion of the beta H-beta I loop and yields details of the portions of the virus that are hypothesized to mediate binding to aphid mouthparts.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. Phone: (765) 494-8038. Fax: (765) 496-1189. E-mail: tom{at}bragg.bio.purdue.edu.

Journal of Virology, August 2000, p. 7578-7586, Vol. 74, No. 16
0022-538X/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Belyi, V. A., Muthukumar, M. (2006). Electrostatic origin of the genome packing in viruses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103: 17174-17178 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Thompson, J. R., Doun, S., Perry, K. L. (2006). Compensatory Capsid Protein Mutations in Cucumber Mosaic Virus Confer Systemic Infectivity in Squash (Cucurbita pepo).. J. Virol. 80: 7740-7743 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Pacios, L. F., Garcia-Arenal, F. (2006). Comparison of properties of particles of Cucumber mosaic virus and Tomato aspermy virus based on the analysis of molecular surfaces of capsids. J. Gen. Virol. 87: 2073-2083 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Llamas, S., Moreno, I. M., Garcia-Arenal, F. (2006). Analysis of the viability of coat-protein hybrids between Cucumber mosaic virus and Tomato aspermy virus. J. Gen. Virol. 87: 2085-2088 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Moury, B. (2004). Differential Selection of Genes of Cucumber Mosaic Virus Subgroups. Mol Biol Evol 21: 1602-1611 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Salanki, K., Gellert, A., Huppert, E., Naray-Szabo, G., Balazs, E. (2004). Compatibility of the movement protein and the coat protein of cucumoviruses is required for cell-to-cell movement. J. Gen. Virol. 85: 1039-1048 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bowman, V. D., Chase, E. S., Franz, A. W. E., Chipman, P. R., Zhang, X., Perry, K. L., Baker, T. S., Smith, T. J. (2002). An Antibody to the Putative Aphid Recognition Site on Cucumber Mosaic Virus Recognizes Pentons but Not Hexons. J. Virol. 76: 12250-12258 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Liu, S., He, X., Park, G., Josefsson, C., Perry, K. L. (2002). A Conserved Capsid Protein Surface Domain of Cucumber Mosaic Virus Is Essential for Efficient Aphid Vector Transmission. J. Virol. 76: 9756-9762 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kakani, K., Sgro, J.-Y., Rochon, D'A. (2001). Identification of Specific Cucumber Necrosis Virus Coat Protein Amino Acids Affecting Fungus Transmission and Zoospore Attachment. J. Virol. 75: 5576-5583 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»