TABLE 3.
Comparison of PCV2 Rep and BPV E1 architecturea
| Overlayb | Rotationc (º) |
Translationd (Å) |
Offsete (º) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCV2 | BPV | PCV2 | BVP | PCV2 | BPV | |
| A → B | 58.5 | 53.1 | 2.5 | 2.2 | 7.7 | 7.5 |
| B → C | 59.2 | 57.9 | 2.7 | −1.5 | 8.9 | 5.8 |
| C → D | 58.6 | 57.0 | 3.1 | −1.8 | 11.1 | 7.1 |
| D → E | 59.7 | 63.4 | 3.1 | −3.3 | 11.9 | 8.6 |
| E → F | 60.0 | 63.7 | 3.2 | −2.6 | 10.5 | 5.5 |
| F → A | 64.1 | 65.6 | −14.7 | 7.5 | 16.2 | 11.3 |
a
Parameters for overlaying an AD subunit onto the AD of a neighboring subunit. Values are shown for the PCV2 Rep and BPV E1 (PDB entry 2GXA). The large difference in the direction of translation between Rep and E1 is indicative of a potential difference in DNA translocation mechanism. Note that the Rep AD continues to move away from the OD, whereas the E1 AD oscillates from the OD.
b
Alignment of AD from one subunit to the neighboring subunit.
c
Relative rotation needed to align the AD.
d
Relative translation (shift) along the axis shown in Fig. 2. Positive values indicate movement away from the OD.
e
The offset degree from the OD C6 axis of rotation. The direction of offset is shown in Fig. 2.