Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PeerJ logoLink to PeerJ
. 2021 Apr 8;9:e11232. doi: 10.7717/peerj.11232

Bioinformatic prediction of immunodominant regions in spike protein for early diagnosis of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)

Siqi Zhuang 1, Lingli Tang 1, Yufeng Dai 1, Xiaojing Feng 1, Yiyuan Fang 1, Haoneng Tang 1, Ping Jiang 1, Xiang Wu 2, Hezhi Fang 3, Hongzhi Chen 4,✉
Editor: Elliot Lefkowitz
PMCID: PMC8038641  PMID: 33889450

Abstract

Background

To contain the pandemics caused by SARS-CoV-2, early detection approaches with high accuracy and accessibility are critical. Generating an antigen-capture based detection system would be an ideal strategy complementing the current methods based on nucleic acids and antibody detection. The spike protein is found on the outside of virus particles and appropriate for antigen detection.

Methods

In this study, we utilized bioinformatics approaches to explore the immunodominant fragments on spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.

Results

The S1 subunit of spike protein was identified with higher sequence specificity. Three immunodominant fragments, Spike56-94, Spike199-264, and Spike577-612, located at the S1 subunit were finally selected via bioinformatics analysis. The glycosylation sites and high-frequency mutation sites on spike protein were circumvented in the antigen design. All the identified fragments present qualified antigenicity, hydrophilicity, and surface accessibility. A recombinant antigen with a length of 194 amino acids (aa) consisting of the selected immunodominant fragments as well as a universal Th epitope was finally constructed.

Conclusion

The recombinant peptide encoded by the construct contains multiple immunodominant epitopes, which is expected to stimulate a strong immune response in mice and generate qualified antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, Spike protein, Antigen-capture, Immunodominant fragments, COVID-19

Introduction

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is highly contagious and has caused more than one hundred million infection cases and over 2.4 million deaths (https://www.who.int/, as of February 15, 2021), posing a huge economic and social burden internationally (Lan et al., 2020; Shang et al., 2020). The reports of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases suggest that stronger international efforts are required to prevent COVID-19 re-emergence in the future (Zhan, Deverman & Chan, 2020). Nevertheless, the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 becoming a seasonal epidemic cannot be excluded (Shaman & Galanti, 2020). Even worse, the large number of asymptomatic infections greatly increase the difficulties of epidemic control (Rothe et al., 2020). At present, no specific drugs have been developed for SARS-CoV-2, and the effectiveness of the vaccines on the market still needs time to be evaluated. Therefore, early detection and isolation of infected people are still indispensable means to control the spread of the epidemic, which requires accurate, early, economical, and easy-to-operate diagnostic methods (Yan, Chang & Wang, 2020).

The real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and antibody-capture serological tests are currently the main diagnostic methods for SARS-CoV-2 (Ishige et al., 2020). As the golden standard, RT-PCR is highly reliable (Bustin & Nolan, 2020; Padoan et al., 2020). However, the implementation costs and relatively cumbersome operation problems make it a big challenge for large population screening (Thabet et al., 2020). The antibody-capture serological test is convenient, but seroconversion generally occurs in the second or third week of illness. Therefore, it is not ideal for the early diagnosis of infection (Hachim et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2020). The antigen-capture test is an alternative diagnostic method that relies on the immunodetection of viral antigens in clinical samples. Accordingly, this method could be applied for the detection of early infection no matter if the patient was asymptomatic or not (Ohnishi, 2008). Compared with RT-PCR based detection method, it is relatively inexpensive and can be used at the point-of-care.

Rapid viral antigen detection has been successfully used for diagnosing respiratory viruses such as influenza and respiratory syncytial viruses (Cazares et al., 2020; Ji et al., 2011; Ohnishi et al., 2005, 2012; Qiu et al., 2005). The sensitivity and specificity of the antigen-capture detection system depend highly on the antigen employed to generate antibodies (Ohnishi et al., 2012). The spike protein is one of the structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2, with the majority located on the outside surface of the viral particles (Fehr & Perlman, 2015; Kumar et al., 2020; Woo et al., 2005). It has a 76.4% homology with the spike protein of SARS-CoV. Sunwoo et al. (2013) showed that the bi-specific spike protein derived monoclonal antibody system exhibited excellent sensitivity in SARS-CoV detection. The virus infection is initiated by the interaction of spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) on host cells. It is widely accepted that the spike protein is one of the earliest antigenic proteins recognized by the host immune system (Callebaut, Enjuanes & Pensaert, 1996; Chen et al., 2020c; Gomez et al., 1998; Lu et al., 2004; Sanchez et al., 1999). Nevertheless, the difficulties of using spike protein as an antigen are also obvious. Firstly, it is not easy to express and purify the full-length spike protein (Tan et al., 2004). Besides, the spike protein is highly glycosylated (Kumar et al., 2020) and prone to mutation (Wang et al., 2020a), which may counteract the sensitivity of antigen-capture based detection method. Hence, it is critical to truncating the glycosylation and mutation sites on spike protein as much as possible in antigen design (Meyer, Drosten & Muller, 2014; Tan et al., 2004). A study using the truncated spike protein to detect SARS-CoV achieved a diagnostic sensitivity of >99% and a specificity of 100% (Mu et al., 2008), which suggests that the truncated spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 could also be an appropriate candidate for the early diagnostic testing and screening of SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we analyzed the spike protein via bioinformatics tools to obtain immunodominant fragments. The predicted sequences were joined together as a novel antigen for the immunization of mice and antibody production. Epitopes information presented by this work may aid in developing a promising antigen-capture based detection system in pandemic surveillance and containment.

Method

Data retrieval and sequence alignment

Multiple bioinformatics analysis tools were used in this study, and the flowchart is depicted in Fig. 1. Coronaviruses had four genera composed of alpha-, beta-, gamma- and delta-coronaviruses. Among them, alpha- and beta- genera could infect humans. Seven beta-coronaviruses are known to infect humans (HCoV-229E, HCoV-OC43, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-HKU1, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2) (Kin et al., 2015; Su et al., 2016). We utilized the NCBI database to obtain the sequences of these human-related coronaviruses spike proteins, of which accession numbers were presented in Fig. 2A. The Clustal Omega Server-Multiple Sequence Alignment was used to analyze the sequence similarity. The analysis of the phylogenetic tree was calculated by the same server. In this study, we set parameters of Clustal Omega as default (Sievers et al., 2011). Additionally, we conducted the EMBOSS Needle Server-Pairwise Sequence Alignment (Needleman & Wunsch, 1970) to compare the whole sequence and several major domains between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV to find out the specific genomic regions on SARS-CoV-2.

Figure 1. Work flow chart.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Figure 2. Sequence alignment results of spike protein.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

(A) Accession IDs and sequence identities of selected coronavirus spike protein. (B) Phylogenetic tree of spike proteins among selected coronavirus. (C) Sequence identity of major domains in spike protein between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV. (D) Sequence identity of domains in SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV reflected by colors. From red to green, the color changing represents the sequence identity from high to low.

Linear B-cell epitope prediction

Linear B-cell epitopes of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were calculated by ABCpred and Bepipred v2.0 servers. For ABCpred, we set a threshold of 0.8 to achieve a specificity of 95.50% and an accuracy of 65.37% for prediction. The window length was set to 16 (the default window length) in this study (Saha & Raghava, 2006). The BepiPred v2.0 combines a hidden Markov model and a propensity scale method. The score threshold for the BepiPred v2.0 was set to 0.5 (the default value) to obtain a specificity of 57.16% and a sensitivity of 58.56% (Jespersen et al., 2017). The residues with scores above 0.5 were predicted to be part of an epitope.

T-cell epitope prediction

The free online service TepiTool server, integrated into the Immune Epitope Database (IEDB), was used to forecast epitopes binding to mice MHC molecules (Paul et al., 2016). Alleles including H-2-Db, H-2-Dd, H-2-Kb, H-2-Kd, H-2-Kk, and H-2-Ld were selected for MHC-I binding epitopes analysis. We checked the “IEDB recommended” option during computation and retained sequences with predicted consensus percentile rank ≤1 as predicted epitope (Trolle et al., 2015). For MHC-II binding epitopes, alleles including H2-IAb, H2-IAd, and H2-IEd were selected for analysis. As the same as MHC-I binding computation, we chose the “IEDB recommended” option, and peptides with predicted consensus percentile rank ≤10 were identified as potential epitopes (Wang et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2012).

Profiling and evaluation of selected fragments

The secondary structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (PDB ID: 6VSB chain B) was calculated by the PyMOL molecular graphics system using the SSP algorithm. PyMOL (http://www.pymol.org) is a python-based tool, which is widely used for visualization of macromolecules, such as SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in the current study (Yuan et al., 2016). Vaxijen2.0 server was utilized to analyze the antigenicity of epitopes and selected fragments. A default threshold of 0.4 was set and the prediction accuracy is between 70% and 89% (Doytchinova & Flower, 2007). The hydrophilicity of the selected fragment was analyzed by the online server ProtScale (Wilkins et al., 1999). Surface accessibility of predicted fragments was evaluated by NetsurfP, an online server calculating the surface accessibility and secondary structure of amino acid sequence (Petersen et al., 2009). Critical features such as allergenicity and toxicity were evaluated by online server AllerTOP v2.0 (Dimitrov et al., 2014) and ToxinPred (Gupta et al., 2013). In addition, we utilized IEDB (www.iedb.org) to search the selected fragments and epitopes to clarify whether these peptides have been experimentally verified (Vita et al., 2019). Protein sequence BLAST was performed to evaluate the possibility of cross-reactivity with other mouse protein sequences (Altschul et al., 1997).

Results

Sequence alignment of spike protein in different coronaviruses

We performed sequence alignment to determine the evolutionary relationships between SARS-CoV-2 and other beta-coronaviruses that could infect humans. According to the results of sequence alignment (Figs. 2A and 2B), SARS-CoV is the closest virus to SARS-CoV-2 among the seven HCoVs, exhibiting a 77.46% sequence identity. To better understand the divergence of spike protein sequences between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, we further analyzed the sequences of main domains. Results showed that the S2 subunit was the most conserved domain with a 90.0% identity. RBM and NTD domains, which were located in the S1 subunit, exhibited 49.3% and 50.0% identity respectively (Figs. 2C and 2D). Hence, we chose the S1 subunit (amino acid 1-685) for the subsequent bioinformatics analysis given their high specificity.

Linear B-cell epitope prediction of S1 subunit in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

The B-cell epitope is a surface accessible cluster of amino acids, which could be recognized by secreted antibodies or B-cell receptors and elicit humoral immune response (Getzoff et al., 1988). The immunodominant fragments should contain high-quality linear B-cell epitopes to stimulate antibody production effectively. The sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit was evaluated via ABCpred and BepiPred v2.0. A total of 31 peptides were identified by the ABCpred algorithm (Table S1). For the Bepipred v2.0 server, 14 epitopes were forecasted (Table S2). After antigenicity evaluation, 19 and 9 potential linear B-cell epitopes predicted by the ABCpred server and BepiPred v2.0 server were obtained respectively (Table 1). The peptides predicted by both bioinformatics programs are more likely to be an epitope recognized in vivo. After mapping the positions of peptides identified by these servers, 3 regions containing predicted epitopes were obtained. These regions could be preliminarily considered as candidates for immunodominant fragments (Fig. 3; Table 2).

Table 1. Linear B-cell epitopes predicted by ABCpred and BepiPred v2.0 with antigenicity score exceed the threshold value.

Tools Position Sequence Length Antigenicity
(cut off ≥ 0.4)
ABCpred 583-598 EILDITPCSFGGVSVI 16 1.3971
406-421 EVRQIAPGQTGKIADY 16 1.3837
415-430 TGKIADYNYKLPDDFT 16 0.9642
648-663 GCLIGAEHVNNSYECD 16 0.848
288-303 AVDCALDPLSETKCTL 16 0.7905
604-619 TSNQVAVLYQDVNCTE 16 0.7593
307-322 TVEKGIYQTSNFRVQP 16 0.6733
200-215 YFKIYSKHTPINLVRD 16 0.657
257-272 GWTAGAAAYYVGYLQP 16 0.621
329-344 FPNITNLCPFGEVFNA 16 0.6058
245-260 HRSYLTPGDSSSGWTA 16 0.6017
280-295 NENGTITDAVDCALDP 16 0.5804
49-64 HSTQDLFLPFFSNVTW 16 0.5305
492-507 LQSYGFQPTNGVGYQP 16 0.5258
70-85 VSGTNGTKRFDNPVLP 16 0.5162
236-251 TRFQTLLALHRSYLTP 16 0.5115
266-281 YVGYLQPRTFLLKYNE 16 0.5108
594-609 GVSVITPGTNTSNQVA 16 0.4651
320-335 VQPTESIVRFPNITNL 16 0.4454
Bepipred v2.0 179-190 LEGKQGNFKNLR 12 1.1188
404-426 GDEVRQIAPGQTGKIADYNYKLP 23 1.1017
14-34 QCVNLTTRTQLPPAYTNSFTR 21 0.7594
56-81 LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDN 26 0.6041
208-222 TPINLVRDLPQGFSA 15 0.5531
141-160 LGVYYHKNNKSWMESEFRVY 20 0.5308
249-261 LTPGDSSSGWTAG 13 0.495
306-321 FTVEKGIYQTSNFRVQ 16 0.4361
615-644 VNCTEVPVAIHADQLTPTWRVYSTGSNVFQ 30 0.4259
Open in a new tab

Figure 3. Preliminary immunodominant fragments based on B-cell epitope prediction results.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

The black squares represent epitopes predicted by ABCpred server, the black frames represent epitopes predicted by Bepipred v2.0 server, and the black lines with numbers on both ends represent the preliminary candidate immunodominant fragments.

Table 2. Details of epitopes in the preliminary immunodominant fragments selected according to linear B-cell epitope prediction results.

Regions Epitope predicted by ABCpred Epitope predicted by Bepipred v2.0
Position Sequence Antigenicity Position Sequence Antigenicity
49-85 49-64 HSTQDLFLPFFSNVTW 0.5305 56-81 LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDN 0.6041
70-85 VSGTNGTKRFDNPVLP 0.5162
200-344 200-215 YFKIYSKHTPINLVRD 0.6570 208-222 TPINLVRDLPQGFSA 0.5531
236-251 TRFQTLLALHRSYLTP 0.5115 249-261 LTPGDSSSGWTAG 0.4950
245-260 HRSYLTPGDSSSGWTA 0.6017
257-272 GWTAGAAAYYVGYLQP 0.6210
266-281 YVGYLQPRTFLLKYNE 0.5108
280-295 NENGTITDAVDCALDP 0.5804
288-303 AVDCALDPLSETKCTL 0.7905 306-321 FTVEKGIYQTSNFRVQ 0.4361
307-322 TVEKGIYQTSNFRVQP 0.6733
320-335 VQPTESIVRFPNITNL 0.4454
329-344 FPNITNLCPFGEVFNA 0.6058
415-430 TGKIADYNYKLPDDFT 0.9642
583-663 583-598 EILDITPCSFGGVSVI 1.3971 615-644 VNCTEVPVAIHADQLTPTWRVYSTGSNVFQ 0.4259
594-609 GVSVITPGTNTSNQVA 0.4651
604-619 TSNQVAVLYQDVNCTE 0.7593
648-663 GCLIGAEHVNNSYECD 0.8480
Open in a new tab

Murine T-cell epitope prediction of S1 subunit in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

Though B cells are responsible for producing antibodies, humoral immunity is heavily dependent on the activation of T cells (Cho et al., 2019a). Helper T cells (Th) recognize antigen peptides presented by MHC-II molecules and facilitate the humoral immune response (Cho et al., 2019b; Mahon et al., 1995). During humoral immune responses, antigen-activated T cells could provide help in many aspects including directing antibody class switching and guiding the differentiation of antibody-secreting plasma cells as well as the properties of the B-cell antigen receptor (Cho et al., 2019a; Paus et al., 2006; Shulman et al., 2014). Therefore, the immunodominant fragments containing T-cell epitopes could offer essential help to powerful antibody production. The S1 subunit was selected for the prediction of T-cell epitopes. We utilized the TepiTool server to forecast MHC-I and MHC-II binding epitopes. A total of 35 MHC-I binding epitopes was predicted (Table S3), and 27 peptides were identified as MHC-II binding epitopes (Table S4). The antigenicity of these peptides was calculated via Vaxijen 2.0 server (Table 3). Combined with the MHC-II epitopes prediction results, the candidate immunodominant fragments were adjusted (Fig. 4). Compared with the preliminary candidate immunodominant fragments screened according to the linear B-cell epitope prediction, we added the Spike14-34 fragment into consideration because it contains a linear B epitope and an MHC-II binding epitope, both of which had high antigenicity scores (Table 4).

Table 3. MHC-II and MHC-I binding epitopes predicted by TepiTool server with antigenicity score exceed threshold value.

Type Position Sequence Length Allele Core
(smm-align)		 Core
(nn-align)		 Percentile Rank Antigenicity
(cut off ≥ 0.4
MHC-II binding 538-552 CVNFNFNGLTGTGVL 15 H2-IAb FNFNGLTGT FNFNGLTGT 8.55 1.3281
374-388 FSTFKCYGVSPTKLN 15 H2-IAb FKCYGVSPT YGVSPTKLN 6.45 1.0042
199-213 GYFKIYSKHTPINLV 15 H2-Iab KIYSKHTPI YSKHTPINL 6.9 0.9278
18-32 LTTRTQLPPAYTNSF 15 H2-IAb TRTQLPPAY TRTQLPPAY 9.9 0.79
60-74 SNVTWFHAIHVSGTN 15 H2-IAb VTWFHAIHV TWFHAIHVS 9.1 0.7044
263-277 AAYYVGYLQPRTFLL 15 H2-IAb VGYLQPRTF VGYLQPRTF 8.75 0.6073
592-606 FGGVSVITPGTNTSN 15 H2-IAb VITPGTNTS VSVITPGTN 6 0.5825
238-252 FQTLLALHRSYLTPG 15 H2-IEd TLLALHRSY TLLALHRSY 9.85 0.5789
345-359 TRFASVYAWNRKRIS 15 H2-IAb FASVYAWNR YAWNRKRIS 7.45 0.4963
215-229 DLPQGFSALEPLVDL 15 H2-IAb FSALEPLVD FSALEPLVD 6.05 0.4812
140-154 FLGVYYHKNNKSWME 15 H2-IEd GVYYHKNNK YYHKNNKSW 6.4 0.4793
512-526 VLSFELLHAPATVCG 15 H2-IAb FELLHAPAT FELLHAPAT 2.9 0.4784
87-101 NDGVYFASTEKSNII 15 H2-Iab YFASTEKSN VYFASTEKS 6.85 0.4277
52-66 QDLFLPFFSNVTWFH 15 H2-IAb FLPFFSNVT FLPFFSNVT 2.95 0.4159
233-247 INITRFQTLLALHRS 15 H2-IAd ITRFQTLLA ITRFQTLLA 1.9 0.4118
MHC-I binding 643-651 FQTRAGCLI 9 H-2-Kk 0.6 1.7332
612-620 YQDVNCTEV 9 H-2-Db 0.4 1.6172
539-547 VNFNFNGLT 9 H-2-Kb 0.47 1.5069
503-511 VGYQPYRVV 9 H-2-Kb 0.47 1.4383
379-387 CYGVSPTKL 9 H-2-Kd 0.3 1.4263
16-24 VNLTTRTQL 9 H-2-Kb 0.86 1.3468
510-518 VVVLSFELL 9 H-2-Kb 0.43 1.0909
202-210 KIYSKHTPI 9 H-2-Kb 0.27 0.7455
168-176 FEYVSQPFL 9 H-2-Kk 0.5 0.6324
268-276 GYLQPRTFL 9 H-2-Kd 0.2 0.6082
505-513 YQPYRVVVL 9 H-2-Dd 0.3 0.5964
488-496 CYFPLQSYG 9 H-2-Kd 0.64 0.578
215-223 DLPQGFSAL 9 H-2-Dd 0.69 0.5622
342-350 FNATRFASV 9 H-2-Kb 0.56 0.5609
84-92 LPFNDGVYF 9 H-2-Ld 0.21 0.5593
484-492 EGFNCYFPL 9 H-2-Kb 0.84 0.5453
62-70 VTWFHAIHV 9 H-2-Kb 0.61 0.5426
489-497 YFPLQSYGF 9 H-2-Dd 0.8 0.5107
350-358 VYAWNRKRI 9 H-2-Kd 0.7 0.5003
60-68 SNVTWFHAI 9 H-2-Kb 0.82 0.4892
262-270 AAAYYVGYL 9 H-2-Kb 0.98 0.4605
Open in a new tab

Figure 4. Adjusted candidate immunodominant fragments according to MHC-II T-cell epitope prediction results.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

The black squares represent epitopes predicted by ABCpred server, and the black frames represent epitopes predicted by Bepipred v2.0 server. The red frames denote MHC-II binding epitopes. The black lines with numbers on both ends represent the adjusted candidate fragments.

Table 4. Details of candidate immunodominant fragments adjusted according to the MHC-II binding T-cell epitopes prediction results.

Regions Linear B-cell epitopes MHC-II binding epitopes
Tools Position Sequence Antigenicity Position Sequence Antigenicity
14-34 Bepipred v2.0 14-34 QCVNLTTRTQLPPAYTNSFTR 0.7594 18-32 LTTRTQLPPAYTNSF 0.7900
49-101 Bepipred v2.0 56-81 LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDN 0.6041 52-66 QDLFLPFFSNVTWFH 0.4159
ABCpred 49-64 HSTQDLFLPFFSNVTW 0.5305 60-74 SNVTWFHAIHVSGTN 0.7044
ABCpred 70-85 VSGTNGTKRFDNPVLP 0.5162 87-101 NDGVYFASTEKSNII 0.4277
199-359 Bepipred v2.0 208-222 TPINLVRDLPQGFSA 0.5531 199-213 GYFKIYSKHTPINLV 0.9278
249-261 LTPGDSSSGWTAG 0.4950
306-321 FTVEKGIYQTSNFRVQ 0.4361
ABCpred 200-215 YFKIYSKHTPINLVRD 0.6570
236-251 TRFQTLLALHRSYLTP 0.5115 215-229 DLPQGFSALEPLVDL 0.4812
245-260 HRSYLTPGDSSSGWTA 0.6017
257-272 GWTAGAAAYYVGYLQP 0.6210 233-247 INITRFQTLLALHRS 0.4118
266-281 YVGYLQPRTFLLKYNE 0.5108
280-295 NENGTITDAVDCALDP 0.5804 238-252 FQTLLALHRSYLTPG 0.5789
288-303 AVDCALDPLSETKCTL 0.7905
307-322 TVEKGIYQTSNFRVQP 0.6733 263-277 AAYYVGYLQPRTFLL 0.6073
320-335 VQPTESIVRFPNITNL 0.4454
329-344 FPNITNLCPFGEVFNA 0.6058
345-359 TRFASVYAWNRKRIS 0.4963
583-620 ABCpred 583-598 EILDITPCSFGGVSVI 1.3971 592-606 FGGVSVITPGTNTSN 0.5825
594-609 GVSVITPGTNTSNQVA 0.4651
604-619 TSNQVAVLYQDVNCTE 0.7593
Open in a new tab

Immunodominant fragments refinement according to the glycosylation site distribution, mutation site distribution, and secondary structure

A profile of 24 glycosylation sites of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein has been reported (Shajahan et al., 2020). Since glycans could hinder the recognition of antigens by shielding the residues (Walls et al., 2019), protein glycosylation would affect the performance of antigen detection. Thus, glycosylation sites should be circumvented when selecting the immunodominant fragments. According to the study of Shajahan et al. (2020), 15 glycosylation sites were located in the S1 subunit of the spike protein. Hence, the fragments in this study were adjusted to Spike14-34, Spike49-101, Spike199-261, and Spike583-620. To retain antigenicity of the epitopes, the final identified fragments only contained 3 glycosylation sites which should have a minimum effect on antigen recognition.

Rapid transmission of COVID-19 provides the SARS-CoV-2 with substantial opportunities for natural selection and mutations. To ensure the stability of the detection method, the immunodominant fragments were modified to avoid high-frequency mutation sites (Wang et al., 2020b). Spike14-34 were excluded for containing four high-frequency mutation sites. Fragment Spike49-101 was adjusted to Spike56-92, and fragment Spike583-620 was adjusted to Spike583-609. By adjusting the fragments, we avoided in a total of 8 high-frequency mutation sites (L5F, L18F, T29I, R21K/T, H49Y, L54F, S98F, D614G). The mainly mutant sites on the recent emergent highly infectious variants (including B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1), such as N501Y, D614G, E484K, Y144del, K417N, and A570D were also not included in our fragments. The adjusted fragments contain none of the above high-frequency mutation sites, which might avoid the impact of mutations on detection performance and improve the detection efficiency in the future (Li et al., 2020; Tegally et al., 2020).

The PyMOL was used to present the secondary structure of the spike protein (PDB ID: 6VSB) (Fig. S1). To keep the integrity of the secondary structure of the selected fragments, we extended the N- and C-ends with 2~5 residues, and the immunodominant fragments were finally adjusted to Spike56-94, Spike199-264, and Spike577-612. The epitopes and potential glycosylation sites contained in the selected immunodominant fragments were displayed in Fig. 5.

Figure 5. The epitopes and glycosylation sites on the selected immunodominant fragments.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

(A–C) Present the predicted epitopes and glycosylation sites on fragment Spike56-94, Spike199-264 and Spike577-612 respectively. The black squares represent epitopes predicted by ABCpred server, and the black frames represent epitopes predicted by Bepipred v2.0 server. The red squares represent MHC-I binding epitopes, and the red frames represent MHC-II binding epitopes. The gray squares mean occupied glycosylation sites contained in the selected fragments.

Profiling, evaluation, and visualization of selected immunodominant fragments

To further evaluate the antibody binding potentiality of these antigenic regions, the key features of the selected fragments such as antigenicity, hydrophilicity, surface accessibility, toxicity, and allergenicity were analyzed and presented (Table 5). The hydrophilicity and surface accessibility of the spike protein subunit 1 were calculated. The selected fragments of interest were submitted for computation of antigenicity, toxicity, and allergenicity. Three fragments presented relatively moderate hydrophilicity and surface accessibility. The proportion of hydrophilic amino acids in the selected fragments Spike56-94, Spike199-264, Spike577-612 are 48.72%, 45.45%, 33.33% respectively. The surface accessibility of these fragments calculated by the online server was shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Significant features of the selected immunodominant fragments.

The sequences marked as bold and italic in the table represent amino acids with hydrophilicity and surface accessibility respectively.

Fragments Spike56-94 Spike199-264 Spike577-612
Length(aa) 39 66 36
Sequence LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDNPVLPFNDGVYFAS GYFKIYSKHTPINLVRDLPQGFSALEPLVDLPIGINITRFQTLLALHRSYLTPGDSSSGWTAGAAA RDPQTLEILDITPCSFGGVSVITPGTNTSNQVAVLY
Antigenicity 0.4590 0.5774 0.9127
Domain S1(NTD) S1(NTD) S1
Hydrophilicity fragments LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDNPVLPFNDGVYFAS GYFKIYSKHTPINLVRDLPQGFSALEPLVDLPIGINITRFQTLLALHRSYLTPGDSSSGWTAGAAA RDPQTLEILDITPCSFGGVSVITPGTNTSNQVAVLY
Surface Accessibility fragments LPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDNPVLPFNDGVYFAS GYFKIYSK HTPINLVRDLPQGFSALEPLVDLPIGINITRFQTLLALHRSYLTPGDSSSGWTAGAAA RDPQTLEILDITPCSFGGVSVITPGTNTSNQVAVLY
Toxicity Non-toxin Non-toxin Non-toxin
Allergenicity non-allergen non-allergen probable allergen
Open in a new tab

The toxicity of the selected fragments was examined and no fragment was predicted to be toxic. The allergenicity was assessed and only fragment Spike577-612 was predicted to be a probable allergen. Attention should be paid to monitor potential allergic reactions when injecting the recombinant protein into mice. And the selected fragments were presented as the sphere in the trimer structure (Fig. 6). Next, we scanned the selected fragments utilizing the IEDB database to determine whether they were experimentally tested. The results showed that Spike200-215(IEDB ID: 1330367) and Spike238-252 (IEDB ID: 1329417) were identified experimentally as HLA class II epitope in SARS-CoV-2. Spike84-92 (IEDB ID: 1321049) and Spike202-210 (IEDB ID: 1319559) have been experimentally proved as HLA-B epitopes (Table S5). These findings enhanced the credibility of the current in silico analysis. The fragments identified would have a strong capacity in stimulating powerful antibody production.

Figure 6. Selected immunodominant fragments presented as spheres in the trimer structure of spike protein viewed by PyMOL.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Selected fragments were presented as red spheres, green cartoons denote unselected sections. (A, B, and C) denote fragments Spike56-94, Spike199-264, and Spike577-612 respectively.

Immunodominant fragments based recombinant antigen design

Three immunodominant fragments embody several linear B-cell epitopes, MHC-I binding, and MHC-II binding T-cell epitopes were selected. As a universal Th epitope, the PAN DR epitope [PADRE(AKFVAAWTLKAAA)] was added into the construction aiming to boost helper T cell activity (Alexander et al., 2000; Ghaffari-Nazari et al., 2015). (GGGGS)n is a wildly used flexible linker with the function of segmenting protein fragments, maintaining protein conformation, preserving biological activity, and promoting protein expression (Chen, Zaro & Shen, 2013). Finally, we combined the fragments and a PADRE epitope by linker peptide (GGGGS)2 and (GGGGS)3 (Chen, Zaro & Shen, 2013) (Fig. 7). The predicted antigenicity of the final construct (194 aa) was 0.5690 (Table 6). A protein BLAST for the final construct was conducted to evaluate the possibility of cross-reactivity. The BLAST result suggested that, except for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, no protein would cross-react with the construct (Raw data in the Supplemental Files), which indicated that our fragments possess good specificity.

Figure 7. A schematic diagram of recombinant peptide composed of selected fragments and a PADRE epitope.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

Table 6. The structure and antigenicity of final recombinant peptides.

Final construct PAN DR + (GGGGS)2 + Spike56-94 +(GGGGS)3 + Spike199-264 +(GGGGS)3 + Spike577-612
Sequence AKFVAAWTLKAAAGGGGSGGGGSLPFFSNVTWFHAIHVSGTNGTKRFDNPVLPFNDGVYFASGGGGSGGGGSGGGGSGYFKIYSKHTPINLVRDLPQGFSALEPLVDLPIGINITRFQTLLALHRSYLTPGDSSSGWTAGAAAGGGGSGGGGSGGGGSRDPQTLEILDITPCSFGGVSVITPGTNTSNQVAVLY
Antigenicity 0.5690
Open in a new tab

Discussion

In this study, the immunodominant fragments within the S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were explored. The final construct consists of three immunodominant fragments Spike56-94, Spike199-264, Spike577-612, and a PADRE epitope. The recombinant antigen will be used to immunize mice to generate qualified antibody which could be applied for developing an antigen-capture based detection system.

The antibody-based antigen capturing method is user-friendly, time-saving, and economical. Thus, it is an ideal complementary detection strategy especially for early diagnosis and large population screening. The monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV have been successfully applied in the immunological antigen-detection of SARS-CoV (Ohnishi, 2008). Accordingly, we explored the immunodominant fragments on the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which would provide aid in developing an accurate and fast antigen-capture based early detection system for SARS-CoV-2.

We selected the S1 subunit for immunodominant fragments screening after divergence analysis. It had been reported that an S1 antigen-based assay of SARS-CoV could capture the virus as soon as the infection occurs (Sunwoo et al., 2013). Jong-Hwan Lee et al. designed a method that could seize and detect spike protein S1 subunit of SARS-CoV-2 using ACE2 receptor and S1-mAb (Lee et al., 2021). This finding suggests that it is appropriate to use the S1 subunit for specific and early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. Three immunodominant fragments (Spike56-94, Spike199-264, and Spike577-612) were identified in the present study. These sequences will be joined to construct recombinant peptides in the next step. Instead of using inactivated full-length spike protein, we designed a novel recombinant protein construct that increased sequence specificity as well as circumvented mutation sites and glycosylation sites. As the antigen design is based on bioinformatics study, the exact ability of the selected fragments to produce qualified antibodies for virus detection has yet to be determined by experiments.

Noticeably, the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is heavily glycosylated. Glycans could shield epitopes during antibody recognition, which may interfere with the detection of viral proteins (Shajahan et al., 2020). About 17 N-glycosylation sites along with two O-glycosylation sites were found occupied in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 (Shajahan et al., 2020). We circumnavigated most glycosylation sites when selecting immunodominant fragments. The three selected fragments in this study only contain 3 glycosylation sites. In case these glycosylation sites impede the diagnostic performance, an additional deglycosylation step with N-glycanase should be applied for the test specimens (Dermani et al., 2019), which is a simple and efficient method for deglycosylation (Hirani, Bernasconi & Rasmussen, 1987; Huang et al., 2015; Lattová et al., 2016; Zheng, Bantog & Bayer, 2011). Alternatively, an eukaryotic expressing system could be employed to mimic the antigen presented in human cells.

Though coronaviruses can find and repair errors during the replication process (Wang et al., 2020b), the SARS-CoV-2 genome still presents a large number of mutations. Mutations could not only help virus slip past our immune defense, but also spoil the efficiency of diagnostic tests (Chen et al., 2020b). In this study, we circumvented high-frequency mutation sites when selecting antigen fragments. In addition, our fragments also avoided RBD regions which are prone to mutation (Chen et al., 2020b). The construct finally built contained no high-frequency mutation.

To date, several studies using predictive algorithms to analyze SARS-CoV-2 have been reported (Alam et al., 2020; Behmard et al., 2020; Can et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020a; Dong et al., 2020; Poran et al., 2020; Saha, Ghosh & Burra, 2021; Sohail et al., 2021). However, most of these bioinformatics analyses against SARS-CoV-2 intended to develop effective vaccines to prevent infection and the identified sequences possess high homology with other viruses, especially SARS-CoV (Bhattacharya et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020a; Robson, 2020). On the contrary, the fragments suitable for diagnosis should be unique when compared with other species to ensure the specificity of detection. Therefore, the results obtained from vaccine studies are not ideal for virus detection. In this study, attention was paid to the sequences with high variability, hence the immunodominant fragments identified are more specific. Distinct from vaccine studies, murine MHC alleles were selected in epitopes prediction in this study, so that the designed antigen could trigger a strong humoral immune response in mice. Furthermore, glycosylated sites and recently identified high-frequency mutation sites were deliberately avoided during the screening process to eliminate their potential adverse impact.

In silico analysis has been widely used to mine and identify various pathogens as well as epitopes prediction (Kiyotani et al., 2020; Liò & Goldman, 2004; Qin et al., 2003; Robson, 2020; Shen et al., 2003). In this study, identified fragments were further scanned in the IEDB database, and found four peptides contained in the sequences were experimentally validated epitopes (Table S5), which reinforced the conclusion of the present study. In the following studies, we will immunize Balb/c mice with the designed antigen to generate mAbs which could be utilized for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis after evaluating their sensitivity, specificity, and other related properties.

Conclusion

Through bioinformatics analysis, three immunodominant fragments were identified in the present study. After connected by flexible linkers, we acquired a final recombinant peptide with 194 residues. It was predicted to possess high antigenicity and specificity for SARS-CoV-2. Our next move is to express and purify the recombinant protein in a suitable expression system, followed by immunizing the mice with purified immunogen to obtain specific antibodies. The present study would provide aid in developing an antigen-capture based detection system.

Supplemental Information

Supplemental Information 1. The secondary structure presentation of SARS-CoV2 spike using PyMOL server.

The letter L with green shades represents the loop structure, the letter S with yellow shades denotes the sheet structure and the letter H with gray shades indicates the helix structure. The lines “-” represent gaps in the sequence when we use PyMOL to visually present it.

Click here for additional data file. (35.2KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-1
Supplemental Information 2. Linear B-cell epitopes predicted by the ABCpred server along with their position, sequence, ABCpred prediction score and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.8KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-2
Supplemental Information 3. Linear B-cell epitopes predicted by the Bepipred v2.0 server along with their position, sequence and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (13.4KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-3
Supplemental Information 4. MHC-I binding epitopes predicted by TepiTool along with their position, sequence, allele and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.9KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-4
Supplemental Information 5. MHC-II binding epitopes predicted by TepiTool along with their position, sequence, allele and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.5KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-5
Supplemental Information 6. Experimentally verified epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 contained in the immunodominant fragments.
Click here for additional data file. (13.3KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-6
Supplemental Information 7. Raw data.

All prediction results including linear B-cell epitope, T-cell epitope, hydrophilicity and surface accessibility of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit.

Click here for additional data file. (236.4KB, zip)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-7

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the emergency and special scientific program of COVID-19 epidemic of Changsha, China (grant number: kq2001038) and the National Science Foundation of China (grant number: 81970746). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Siqi Zhuang conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Lingli Tang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Yufeng Dai performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Xiaojing Feng performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Yiyuan Fang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Haoneng Tang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Ping Jiang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Xiang Wu performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Hezhi Fang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Hongzhi Chen conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental File.

References

  • Alam et al. (2020).Alam A, Khan A, Imam N, Siddiqui M, Waseem M, Malik M, Ishrat R. Design of an epitope-based peptide vaccine against the SARS-CoV-2: a vaccine-informatics approach. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2020;22(2):1309–1323. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbaa340. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Alexander et al. (2000).Alexander J, Del Guercio MF, Maewal A, Qiao L, Fikes J, Chesnut RW, Paulson J, Bundle DR, DeFrees S, Sette A. Linear PADRE T helper epitope and carbohydrate B cell epitope conjugates induce specific high titer IgG antibody responses. Journal of Immunology. 2000;164(3):1625–1633. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.164.3.1625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Altschul et al. (1997).Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Research. 1997;25(17):3389–3402. doi: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Behmard et al. (2020).Behmard E, Soleymani B, Najafi A, Barzegari E. Immunoinformatic design of a COVID-19 subunit vaccine using entire structural immunogenic epitopes of SARS-CoV-2. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):20864. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-77547-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bhattacharya et al. (2020).Bhattacharya M, Sharma AR, Patra P, Ghosh P, Sharma G, Patra BC, Lee SS, Chakraborty C. Development of epitope-based peptide vaccine against novel coronavirus 2019 (SARS-COV-2): immunoinformatics approach. Journal of Medical Virology. 2020;92(6):618–631. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25736. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bustin & Nolan (2020).Bustin SA, Nolan T. RT-qPCR testing of SARS-CoV-2: a primer. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21(8):3004. doi: 10.3390/ijms21083004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Callebaut, Enjuanes & Pensaert (1996).Callebaut P, Enjuanes L, Pensaert M. An adenovirus recombinant expressing the spike glycoprotein of porcine respiratory coronavirus is immunogenic in swine. Journal of General Virology. 1996;7(Pt 2):309–313. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-77-2-309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Can et al. (2020).Can H, Köseoğlu AE, Erkunt Alak S, Güvendi M, Döşkaya M, Karakavuk M, Gürüz AY, Ün C. In silico discovery of antigenic proteins and epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 for the development of a vaccine or a diagnostic approach for COVID-19. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):22387. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-79645-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cazares et al. (2020).Cazares LH, Chaerkady R, Samuel Weng SH, Boo CC, Cimbro R, Hsu HE, Rajan S, Dall’Acqua W, Clarke L, Ren K, McTamney P, Kallewaard-LeLay N, Ghaedi M, Ikeda Y, Hess S. Development of a parallel reaction monitoring mass spectrometry assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and nucleoprotein. Analytical Chemistry. 2020;92(20):13813–13821. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c02288. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen et al. (2020a).Chen HZ, Tang LL, Yu XL, Zhou J, Chang YF, Wu X. Bioinformatics analysis of epitope-based vaccine design against the novel SARS-CoV-2. Infectious Diseases of Poverty. 2020a;9(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s40249-020-00713-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen et al. (2020b).Chen J, Wang R, Wang M, Wei GW. Mutations strengthened SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. Journal of Molecular Biology. 2020b;432(19):5212–5226. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2020.07.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen et al. (2020c).Chen J, Zhu H, Horby PW, Wang Q, Zhou J, Jiang H, Liu L, Zhang T, Zhang Y, Chen X, Deng X, Nikolay B, Wang W, Cauchemez S, Guan Y, Uyeki TM, Yu H. Specificity, kinetics and longevity of antibody responses to avian influenza A(H7N9) virus infection in humans. Journal of Infection. 2020c;80(3):310–319. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2019.11.024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen, Zaro & Shen (2013).Chen X, Zaro JL, Shen WC. Fusion protein linkers: property, design and functionality. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2013;65(10):1357–1369. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cho et al. (2019a).Cho S, Raybuck A, Blagih J, Kemboi E, Haase V, Jones R, Boothby M. Hypoxia-inducible factors in CD4 T cells promote metabolism, switch cytokine secretion, and T cell help in humoral immunity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019a;116(18):8975–8984. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1811702116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cho et al. (2019b).Cho SH, Raybuck AL, Blagih J, Kemboi E, Haase VH, Jones RG, Boothby MR. Hypoxia-inducible factors in CD4(+) T cells promote metabolism, switch cytokine secretion, and T cell help in humoral immunity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019b;116(18):8975–8984. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1811702116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dermani et al. (2019).Dermani FK, Samadi P, Rahmani G, Kohlan AK, Najafi R. PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint: Potential target for cancer therapy. Journal of Cellular Physiology. 2019;234(2):1313–1325. doi: 10.1002/jcp.27172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dimitrov et al. (2014).Dimitrov I, Bangov I, Flower DR, Doytchinova I. AllerTOP v.2—a server for in silico prediction of allergens. Journal of Molecular Modeling. 2014;20(6):2278. doi: 10.1007/s00894-014-2278-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dong et al. (2020).Dong R, Chu Z, Yu F, Zha Y. Contriving multi-epitope subunit of vaccine for COVID-19: immunoinformatics approaches. Frontiers in immunology. 2020;11:1784. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01784. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Doytchinova & Flower (2007).Doytchinova IA, Flower DR. VaxiJen: a server for prediction of protective antigens, tumour antigens and subunit vaccines. BMC Bioinformatics. 2007;8(1):4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-8-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Fehr & Perlman (2015).Fehr AR, Perlman S. Coronaviruses: an overview of their replication and pathogenesis. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2015;1282(Pt 4):1–23. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2438-7_1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Getzoff et al. (1988).Getzoff ED, Tainer JA, Lerner RA, Geysen HM. The chemistry and mechanism of antibody binding to protein antigens. Tumor Immunology. 1988;43(9):1–98. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2776(08)60363-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ghaffari-Nazari et al. (2015).Ghaffari-Nazari H, Tavakkol-Afshari J, Jaafari MR, Tahaghoghi-Hajghorbani S, Masoumi E, Jalali SA. Improving multi-epitope long peptide vaccine potency by using a strategy that enhances CD4+ T help in BALB/c Mice. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(11):e0142563. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142563. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gomez et al. (1998).Gomez N, Carrillo C, Salinas J, Parra F, Borca MV, Escribano JM. Expression of immunogenic glycoprotein S polypeptides from transmissible gastroenteritis coronavirus in transgenic plants. Virology. 1998;249(2):352–358. doi: 10.1006/viro.1998.9315. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gupta et al. (2013).Gupta S, Kapoor P, Chaudhary K, Gautam A, Kumar R, Open Source Drug Discovery C, Raghava GP. In silico approach for predicting toxicity of peptides and proteins. PLOS ONE. 2013;8(9):e73957. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073957. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hachim et al. (2020).Hachim A, Kavian N, Cohen CA, Chin AWH, Chu DKW, Mok CKP, Tsang OTY, Yeung YC, Perera R, Poon LLM, Peiris JSM, Valkenburg SA. ORF8 and ORF3b antibodies are accurate serological markers of early and late SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nature Immunology. 2020;21(10):1293–1301. doi: 10.1038/s41590-020-0773-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hirani, Bernasconi & Rasmussen (1987).Hirani S, Bernasconi RJ, Rasmussen JR. Use of N-glycanase to release asparagine-linked oligosaccharides for structural analysis. Analytical Biochemistry. 1987;162(2):485–492. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(87)90424-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Huang et al. (2015).Huang J, Wan H, Yao Y, Li J, Cheng K, Mao J, Chen J, Wang Y, Qin H, Zhang W, Ye M, Zou H. Highly efficient release of glycopeptides from hydrazide beads by hydroxylamine assisted PNGase F deglycosylation for N-Glycoproteome analysis. Analytical Chemistry. 2015;87(20):10199–10204. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b02669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ishige et al. (2020).Ishige T, Murata S, Taniguchi T, Miyabe A, Kitamura K, Kawasaki K, Nishimura M, Igari H, Matsushita K. Highly sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by multiplex rRT-PCR for molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 by clinical laboratories. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2020;507:139–142. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2020.04.023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jespersen et al. (2017).Jespersen MC, Peters B, Nielsen M, Marcatili P. BepiPred-2.0: improving sequence-based B-cell epitope prediction using conformational epitopes. Nucleic Acids Research. 2017;45(W1):W24–W29. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ji et al. (2011).Ji Y, Guo W, Zhao L, Li H, Lu G, Wang Z, Wang G, Liu C, Xiang W. Development of an antigen-capture ELISA for the detection of equine influenza virus nucleoprotein. Journal of Virological Methods. 2011;175(1):120–124. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2011.04.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kin et al. (2015).Kin N, Miszczak F, Gouilh MA, Vabret A, Consortium E Genomic analysis of 15 human coronaviruses OC43 (HCoV-OC43s) circulating in France from 2001 to 2013 reveals a high intra-specific diversity with new recombinant genotypes. Viruses. 2015;7(5):2358–2377. doi: 10.3390/v7052358. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kiyotani et al. (2020).Kiyotani K, Toyoshima Y, Nemoto K, Nakamura Y. Bioinformatic prediction of potential T cell epitopes for SARS-Cov-2. Journal of Human Genetics. 2020;65(7):569–575. doi: 10.1038/s10038-020-0771-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kumar et al. (2020).Kumar S, Maurya VK, Prasad AK, Bhatt MLB, Saxena SK. Structural, glycosylation and antigenic variation between 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) and SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV) Virusdisease. 2020;31(1):13–21. doi: 10.1007/s13337-020-00571-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lan et al. (2020).Lan J, Ge J, Yu J, Shan S, Zhou H, Fan S, Zhang Q, Shi X, Wang Q, Zhang L, Wang X. Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain bound to the ACE2 receptor. Nature. 2020;581(7807):215–220. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lattová et al. (2016).Lattová E, Bryant J, Skřičková J, Zdráhal Z, Popovič M. Efficient procedure for N-Glycan analyses and detection of Endo H-Like activity in human tumor specimens. Journal of Proteome Research. 2016;15(8):2777–2786. doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lee et al. (2021).Lee JH, Choi M, Jung Y, Lee SK, Lee CS, Kim J, Kim J, Kim NH, Kim BT, Kim HG. A novel rapid detection for SARS-CoV-2 spike 1 antigens using human angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) Biosensors & Bioelectronics. 2021;171(7477):112715. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Li et al. (2020).Li Q, Wu J, Nie J, Zhang L, Hao H, Liu S, Zhao C, Zhang Q, Liu H, Nie L, Qin H, Wang M, Lu Q, Li X, Sun Q, Liu J, Zhang L, Li X, Huang W, Wang Y. The impact of mutations in SARS-CoV-2 spike on viral infectivity and antigenicity. Cell. 2020;182(5):1284–1294.e1289. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.07.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Liò & Goldman (2004).Liò P, Goldman N. Phylogenomics and bioinformatics of SARS-CoV. Trends in Microbiology. 2004;12(3):106–111. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2004.01.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Liu et al. (2020).Liu W, Liu L, Kou G, Zheng Y, Ding Y, Ni W, Wang Q, Tan L, Wu W, Tang S, Xiong Z, Zheng S. Evaluation of Nucleocapsid and Spike Protein-based ELISAs for detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. 2020. J Clin Microbiol. doi 10.1128/JCM.00461-20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lu et al. (2004).Lu L, Manopo I, Leung BP, Chng HH, Ling AE, Chee LL, Ooi EE, Chan SW, Kwang J. Immunological characterization of the spike protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2004;42(4):1570–1576. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.4.1570-1576.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mahon et al. (1995).Mahon BP, Katrak K, Nomoto A, Macadam AJ, Minor PD, Mills KH. Poliovirus-specific CD4+ Th1 clones with both cytotoxic and helper activity mediate protective humoral immunity against a lethal poliovirus infection in transgenic mice expressing the human poliovirus receptor. Journal of Experimental Medicine. 1995;181(4):1285–1292. doi: 10.1084/jem.181.4.1285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Meyer, Drosten & Muller (2014).Meyer B, Drosten C, Muller MA. Serological assays for emerging coronaviruses: challenges and pitfalls. Virus Research. 2014;194(2):175–183. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2014.03.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mu et al. (2008).Mu F, Niu D, Mu J, He B, Han W, Fan B, Huang S, Qiu Y, You B, Chen W. The expression and antigenicity of a truncated spike-nucleocapsid fusion protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus. BMC Microbiology. 2008;8(1):207. doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-8-207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Needleman & Wunsch (1970).Needleman SB, Wunsch CD. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1970;48(3):443–453. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ohnishi (2008).Ohnishi K. Establishment and characterization of monoclonal antibodies against SARS coronavirus. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2008;454:191–203. doi: 10.1007/978-1-59745-181-9_15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ohnishi et al. (2005).Ohnishi K, Sakaguchi M, Kaji T, Akagawa K, Taniyama T, Kasai M, Tsunetsugu-Yokota Y, Oshima M, Yamamoto K, Takasuka N, Hashimoto S, Ato M, Fujii H, Takahashi Y, Morikawa S, Ishii K, Sata T, Takagi H, Itamura S, Odagiri T, Miyamura T, Kurane I, Tashiro M, Kurata T, Yoshikura H, Takemori T. Immunological detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus by monoclonal antibodies. Japanese Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2005;58:88–94. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ohnishi et al. (2012).Ohnishi K, Takahashi Y, Kono N, Nakajima N, Mizukoshi F, Misawa S, Yamamoto T, Mitsuki YY, Fu S, Hirayama N, Ohshima M, Ato M, Kageyama T, Odagiri T, Tashiro M, Kobayashi K, Itamura S, Tsunetsugu-Yokota Y. Newly established monoclonal antibodies for immunological detection of H5N1 influenza virus. Japanese Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2012;65(5):19–27. doi: 10.7883/yoken.65.442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Padoan et al. (2020).Padoan A, Cosma C, Sciacovelli L, Faggian D, Plebani M. Analytical performances of a chemiluminescence immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG and antibody kinetics. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. 2020;58(7):1081–1088. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2020-0443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Paul et al. (2016).Paul S, Sidney J, Sette A, Peters B. TepiTool: a pipeline for computational prediction of T cell epitope candidates. Current Protocols in Immunology. 2016;114(1):163. doi: 10.1002/cpim.12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Paus et al. (2006).Paus D, Phan T, Chan T, Gardam S, Basten A, Brink R. Antigen recognition strength regulates the choice between extrafollicular plasma cell and germinal center B cell differentiation. Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2006;203(4):1081–1091. doi: 10.1084/jem.20060087. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Petersen et al. (2009).Petersen B, Petersen TN, Andersen P, Nielsen M, Lundegaard C. A generic method for assignment of reliability scores applied to solvent accessibility predictions. BMC Structural Biology. 2009;9(1):51. doi: 10.1186/1472-6807-9-51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Poran et al. (2020).Poran A, Harjanto D, Malloy M, Arieta C, Rothenberg D, Lenkala D, Van Buuren M, Addona T, Rooney M, Srinivasan L, Gaynor R. Sequence-based prediction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine targets using a mass spectrometry-based bioinformatics predictor identifies immunogenic T cell epitopes. Genome Medicine. 2020;12(1):70. doi: 10.1186/s13073-020-00767-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Qin et al. (2003).Qin L, Xiong B, Luo C, Guo ZM, Hao P, Su J, Nan P, Feng Y, Shi YX, Yu XJ, Luo XM, Chen KX, Shen X, Shen JH, Zou JP, Zhao GP, Shi TL, He WZ, Zhong Y, Jiang HL, Li YX. Identification of probable genomic packaging signal sequence from SARS-CoV genome by bioinformatics analysis. Acta Pharmacologica Sinica. 2003;24:489–496. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Qiu et al. (2005).Qiu LW, Tang HW, Wang YD, Liao JE, Hao W, Wen K, He XM, Che XY. Development and application of triple antibodies-based sandwich ELISA for detecting nucleocapsid protein of SARS-associated coronavirus. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2005;26:277–281. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Robson (2020).Robson B. Computers and viral diseases. Preliminary bioinformatics studies on the design of a synthetic vaccine and a preventative peptidomimetic antagonist against the SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV, COVID-19) coronavirus. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 2020;119(1):103670. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.103670. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rothe et al. (2020).Rothe C, Schunk M, Sothmann P, Bretzel G, Froeschl G, Wallrauch C, Zimmer T, Thiel V, Janke C, Guggemos W, Seilmaier M, Drosten C, Vollmar P, Zwirglmaier K, Zange S, Wolfel R, Hoelscher M. Transmission of 2019-nCoV infection from an asymptomatic contact in Germany. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020;382(10):970–971. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Saha, Ghosh & Burra (2021).Saha R, Ghosh P, Burra V. Designing a next generation multi-epitope based peptide vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2 using computational approaches. 3 Biotech. 2021;11(2):47. doi: 10.1007/s13205-020-02574-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Saha & Raghava (2006).Saha S, Raghava GP. Prediction of continuous B-cell epitopes in an antigen using recurrent neural network. Proteins-Structure Function and Bioinformatics. 2006;65(1):40–48. doi: 10.1002/prot.21078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sanchez et al. (1999).Sanchez CM, Izeta A, Sanchez-Morgado JM, Alonso S, Sola I, Balasch M, Plana-Duran J, Enjuanes L. Targeted recombination demonstrates that the spike gene of transmissible gastroenteritis coronavirus is a determinant of its enteric tropism and virulence. Journal of Virology. 1999;73(9):7607–7618. doi: 10.1128/JVI.73.9.7607-7618.1999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shajahan et al. (2020).Shajahan A, Supekar NT, Gleinich AS, Azadi P. Deducing the N- and O- glycosylation profile of the spike protein of novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Glycobiology. 2020;30(12):981–988. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwaa042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shaman & Galanti (2020).Shaman J, Galanti M. Will SARS-CoV-2 become endemic? Science. 2020;370(6516):527–529. doi: 10.1126/science.abe5960. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shang et al. (2020).Shang J, Ye G, Shi K, Wan Y, Luo C, Aihara H, Geng Q, Auerbach A, Li F. Structural basis of receptor recognition by SARS-CoV-2. Nature. 2020;581(7807):221–224. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2179-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shen et al. (2003).Shen X, Xue JH, Yu CY, Luo HB, Qin L, Yu XJ, Chen J, Chen LL, Xiong B, Yue LD, Cai JH, Shen JH, Luo XM, Chen KX, Shi TL, Li YX, Hu GX, Jiang HL. Small envelope protein E of SARS: cloning, expression, purification, CD determination, and bioinformatics analysis. Acta Pharmacologica Sinica. 2003;24:505–511. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shulman et al. (2014).Shulman Z, Gitlin A, Weinstein J, Lainez B, Esplugues E, Flavell R, Craft J, Nussenzweig M. Dynamic signaling by T follicular helper cells during germinal center B cell selection. Science. 2014;345(6200):1058–1062. doi: 10.1126/science.1257861. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sievers et al. (2011).Sievers F, Wilm A, Dineen D, Gibson TJ, Karplus K, Li W, Lopez R, McWilliam H, Remmert M, Soding J, Thompson JD, Higgins DG. Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Molecular Systems Biology. 2011;7(1):539. doi: 10.1038/msb.2011.75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sohail et al. (2021).Sohail M, Ahmed S, Quadeer A, McKay M. In silico T cell epitope identification for SARS-CoV-2: progress and perspectives. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2021;171:29–47. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2021.01.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Su et al. (2016).Su S, Wong G, Shi W, Liu J, Lai ACK, Zhou J, Liu W, Bi Y, Gao GF. Epidemiology, genetic recombination, and pathogenesis of coronaviruses. Trends in Microbiology. 2016;24(6):490–502. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2016.03.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sunwoo et al. (2013).Sunwoo HH, Palaniyappan A, Ganguly A, Bhatnagar PK, Das D, El-Kadi AO, Suresh MR. Quantitative and sensitive detection of the SARS-CoV spike protein using bispecific monoclonal antibody-based enzyme-linked immunoassay. Journal of Virological Methods. 2013;187(1):72–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2012.09.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tan et al. (2004).Tan YJ, Goh PY, Fielding BC, Shen S, Chou CF, Fu JL, Leong HN, Leo YS, Ooi EE, Ling AE, Lim SG, Hong W. Profiles of antibody responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus recombinant proteins and their potential use as diagnostic markers. Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology. 2004;11(2):362–371. doi: 10.1128/CDLI.11.2.362-371.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tang et al. (2020).Tang MS, Hock KG, Logsdon NM, Hayes JE, Gronowski AM, Anderson NW, Farnsworth CW. Clinical performance of two SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays. Clinical Chemistry. 2020;66(8):1055–1062. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/hvaa120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tegally et al. (2020).Tegally H, Wilkinson E, Giovanetti M, Iranzadeh A, Fonseca V, Giandhari J, Doolabh D, Pillay S, San EJ, Msomi N, Mlisana K, von Gottberg A, Walaza S, Allam M, Ismail A, Mohale T, Glass AJ, Engelbrecht S, Van Zyl G, Preiser W, Petruccione F, Sigal A, Hardie D, Marais G, Hsiao M, Korsman S, Davies M-A, Tyers L, Mudau I, York D, Maslo C, Goedhals D, Abrahams S, Laguda-Akingba O, Alisoltani-Dehkordi A, Godzik A, Wibmer CK, Sewell BT, Lourenço J, Alcantara LCJ, Pond SLK, Weaver S, Martin D, Lessells RJ, Bhiman JN, Williamson C, De Oliveira T. Emergence and rapid spread of a new severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage with multiple spike mutations in South Africa. MedRxiv. 2020. [DOI]
  • Thabet et al. (2020).Thabet L, Mhalla S, Naija H, Jaoua MA, Hannachi N, Fki-Berrajah L, Toumi A, Karray-Hakim H. SARS-CoV-2 infection virological diagnosis. Tunis Med. 2020;98:304–308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Trolle et al. (2015).Trolle T, Metushi IG, Greenbaum JA, Kim Y, Sidney J, Lund O, Sette A, Peters B, Nielsen M. Automated benchmarking of peptide-MHC class I binding predictions. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(13):2174–2181. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Vita et al. (2019).Vita R, Mahajan S, Overton JA, Dhanda SK, Martini S, Cantrell JR, Wheeler DK, Sette A, Peters B. The immune epitope database (IEDB): 2018 update. Nucleic Acids Research. 2019;47(D1):D339–D343. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Walls et al. (2019).Walls AC, Xiong X, Park YJ, Tortorici MA, Snijder J, Quispe J, Cameroni E, Gopal R, Dai M, Lanzavecchia A, Zambon M, Rey FA, Corti D, Veesler D. Unexpected receptor functional mimicry elucidates activation of coronavirus fusion. Cell. 2019;176(5):1026–1039.e1015. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.12.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wang et al. (2010).Wang P, Sidney J, Kim Y, Sette A, Lund O, Nielsen M, Peters B. Peptide binding predictions for HLA DR, DP and DQ molecules. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11(1):568. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-568. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wang et al. (2020a).Wang R, Hozumi Y, Yin C, Wei G-W. Mutations on COVID-19 diagnostic targets. Genomics. 2020a;112(6):5204–5213. doi: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2020.09.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wang et al. (2020b).Wang R, Hozumi Y, Yin C, Wei GW. Decoding SARS-CoV-2 transmission and evolution and ramifications for COVID-19 diagnosis, vaccine, and medicine. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. 2020b;60(12):5853–5865. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wilkins et al. (1999).Wilkins MR, Gasteiger E, Bairoch A, Sanchez JC, Williams KL, Appel RD, Hochstrasser DF. Protein identification and analysis tools in the ExPASy server. Methods in Molecular Medicine. 1999;112:531–552. doi: 10.1385/1-59259-584-7:531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Woo et al. (2005).Woo PC, Lau SK, Wong BH, Tsoi HW, Fung AM, Kao RY, Chan KH, Peiris JS, Yuen KY. Differential sensitivities of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus spike polypeptide enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and SARS coronavirus nucleocapsid protein ELISA for serodiagnosis of SARS coronavirus pneumonia. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2005;43(7):3054–3058. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3054-3058.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yan, Chang & Wang (2020).Yan Y, Chang L, Wang L. Laboratory testing of SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV): current status, challenges, and countermeasures. Reviews in Medical Virology. 2020;30(3):e2106. doi: 10.1002/rmv.2106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yuan et al. (2016).Yuan S, Chan HCS, Filipek S, Vogel H. PyMOL and Inkscape bridge the data and the data visualization. Structure. 2016;24(12):2041–2042. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2016.11.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhan, Deverman & Chan (2020).Zhan SH, Deverman BE, Chan YA. SARS-CoV-2 is well adapted for humans. What does this mean for re-emergence? BioRxiv. 2020;30(4):343. doi: 10.1101/2020.05.01.073262. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang et al. (2012).Zhang L, Udaka K, Mamitsuka H, Zhu S. Toward more accurate pan-specific MHC-peptide binding prediction: a review of current methods and tools. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2012;13(3):350–364. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbr060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Zheng, Bantog & Bayer (2011).Zheng K, Bantog C, Bayer R. The impact of glycosylation on monoclonal antibody conformation and stability. MAbs. 2011;3(6):568–576. doi: 10.4161/mabs.3.6.17922. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Information 1. The secondary structure presentation of SARS-CoV2 spike using PyMOL server.

The letter L with green shades represents the loop structure, the letter S with yellow shades denotes the sheet structure and the letter H with gray shades indicates the helix structure. The lines “-” represent gaps in the sequence when we use PyMOL to visually present it.

Click here for additional data file. (35.2KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-1
Supplemental Information 2. Linear B-cell epitopes predicted by the ABCpred server along with their position, sequence, ABCpred prediction score and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.8KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-2
Supplemental Information 3. Linear B-cell epitopes predicted by the Bepipred v2.0 server along with their position, sequence and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (13.4KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-3
Supplemental Information 4. MHC-I binding epitopes predicted by TepiTool along with their position, sequence, allele and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.9KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-4
Supplemental Information 5. MHC-II binding epitopes predicted by TepiTool along with their position, sequence, allele and antigenicity score.
Click here for additional data file. (14.5KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-5
Supplemental Information 6. Experimentally verified epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 contained in the immunodominant fragments.
Click here for additional data file. (13.3KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-6
Supplemental Information 7. Raw data.

All prediction results including linear B-cell epitope, T-cell epitope, hydrophilicity and surface accessibility of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit.

Click here for additional data file. (236.4KB, zip)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11232/supp-7

Data Availability Statement

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental File.

Articles from PeerJ are provided here courtesy of PeerJ, Inc

RESOURCES