Fluent Essays

BIOL 3410 Cell Biology Fall 2021 Section 3. Assignment 1 (57 points) This assignment is based on the paper published by Lan et al. (2020), which is available in the Assignment 1 folder on D2L. You will need to refer to that paper as you complete this assignment. Background Lan et al. (2020) set out to determine the crystal structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in complex with the ACE2 protein as a way to better understand the molecular interactions between these two structures, and to set the groundwork for developing neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Figure 1 of the paper shows a diagram of the viral spike protein. 1. Did the authors express the entire ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins in order to generate their crystal? (1 point) 2. The Authors used a 6-His tag to help purify the proteins of interest prior to crystallization. What is this and how does it work? (Yes, you’ll have to look this up). (2 points) 3. What do the acronyms ACE2, RBD, and RBM mean? (3 points) 4. Figures 1(b) and 1(c) show ribbon diagrams of the ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein structures in a binding complex with each other. What is the main secondary structural motif seen in the ACE2 protein? (2 points). 5. What types of secondary structure are seen in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD model? (2 points). 6. What is the arrangement (parallel or antiparallel) of the secondary structural element in the core of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein? (1 point). 7. The SARS-CoV-2 RBD protein is stabilized by four covalent interactions between amino acid side chains. What amino acid is involved in these interactions and what is this bond usually referred to as? (2 points) 8. How long is the beta3 strand of the SARS-Co-V2 RBD protein (region T…R)? (1 point) 9. How many of the beta3 strand amino acid side chains are theoretically capable of hydrogen bonding? (3 points) 10. If all hydrogen bonding amino acids in the beta3 region were replaced with alanine, would you expect the structure to be more or less stable? Explain your answer. (4 points). 11. Which end (N terminus or C terminus) of the ACE2 protein does the CARS-CoV-2 RBM interact with? (1 point). 12. Does the ACE2 structure feature any covalent bonds between amino acid side chains and if so, what is their likely purpose? (3 points). Figure 2 shows a detailed image and alignment of the interacting regions of SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2. 13. There is an interaction between Lys417 of SARS-CoV-2 and Asp30 of ACE2. Draw a diagram of how these two amino acid side chains might interact at physiological pH. What type of interaction is this? (4 points) 14. The paper compares the interaction of ACE2 with the RBDs of SARS-CoV-2 and the related corona virus SARS-CoV. Based on the data published, are these interactions identical and what does this mean when understanding the relatedness of these two corona viruses? (4 points). Table 1 summarizes the amino acid interactions between SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2. 15. Draw a diagram demonstrating how Gly502 of SARS-CoV-2 could hydrogen bond with Lys353 of ACE2. Is this an interaction between the two amino acid side chains, and if not, why not? (4 points). 16. During the original SARS outbreak in 2003, a series of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies were developed that could bind to the SARS-CoV spike protein and help fight viral infection. Unfortunately, these previously characterized antibodies do not bind to SARS-CoV-2. Why is this so, considering the striking similarity between the two viral strains? (3 points). 17. If you were in charge of a SARS-CoV-2 antibody development program at the CDC, how might you set about finding neutralizing antibodies that specifically bound to this current corona virus (note that there’s more than one way to do this - show me your creative thinking). (6 points). Go to the following website: https://www.rcsb.org/3d-view/6M0J. Play around with the image. It should look familiar. 18. What is the normal function of ACE2? (yes, you’ll have to look this up). (2 points). 19. What do you notice about the tertiary structure of ACE2? (2 points). 20. Insert a time-stamped screenshot of the ACE2 protein to illustrate your answer to question 20 (2 points) 21. Why do you think this particular protein shape might facilitate its normal function? (3 points). 22. What quaternary components are in the ACE2 protein that might help it to function? (2 points). Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 | 215 Article Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain bound to the ACE2 receptor Jun Lan1,4, Jiwan Ge1,4, Jinfang Yu1,4, Sisi Shan2,4, Huan Zhou3, Shilong Fan1, Qi Zhang2, Xuanling Shi2, Qisheng Wang3, Linqi Zhang2 ✉ & Xinquan Wang1 ✉ A new and highly pathogenic coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak in Wuhan city, Hubei province, China, starting from December 2019 that quickly spread nationwide and to other countries around the world1–3. Here, to better understand the initial step of infection at an atomic level, we determined the crystal structure of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 bound to the cell receptor ACE2. The overall ACE2-binding mode of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD is nearly identical to that of the SARS-CoV RBD, which also uses ACE2 as the cell receptor4. Structural analysis identified residues in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD that are essential for ACE2 binding, the majority of which either are highly conserved or share similar side chain properties with those in the SARS-CoV RBD. Such similarity in structure and sequence strongly indicate convergent evolution between the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs for improved binding to ACE2, although SARS-CoV-2 does not cluster within SARS and SARS-related coronaviruses1–3,5. The epitopes of two SARS-CoV antibodies that target the RBD are also analysed for binding to the SARS-CoV-2 RBD, providing insights into the future identification of cross-reactive antibodies. The emergence of the highly pathogenic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan and its rapid international spread has posed a serious global public-health emergency1–3. Similar to individuals who were infected by pathogenic SARS-CoV in 2003 and Middle East respira- tory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012, patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 showed a range of symptoms including dry cough, fever, headache, dyspnoea and pneumonia with an estimated mortal- ity rate ranging from 3 to 5%6–8. Since the initial outbreak in Decem- ber of 2019, SARS-CoV-2 has spread throughout China and to more than 80 other countries and areas worldwide. As of 5 March 2020, 80,565 cases in China have been confirmed with the infection and 3,015 infected patients have died (https://www.who.int/emergencies/ diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/). As a result, the epicentre Wuhan and the neighbouring cities have been under lockdown to minimize the continued spread and the WHO (World Health Organization) has announced a Public Health Emergency of International Concern owing to the rapid and global dissemination of SARS-CoV-2. Phylogenetic analyses of the coronavirus genomes have revealed that SARS-CoV-2 is a member of the Betacoronavirus genus, which includes SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, bat SARS-related coronaviruses (SARSr-CoV), as well as others identified in humans and diverse animal species1–3,5. Bat coronavirus RaTG13 appears to be the closest relative of the SARS-CoV-2, sharing more than 93.1% sequence iden- tity in the spike (S) gene. SARS-CoV and other SARSr-CoVs, however, are distinct from SARS-CoV-2 and share less than 80% sequence identity1. Coronaviruses use the homotrimeric spike glycoprotein (comprising a S1 subunit and S2 subunit in each spike monomer) on the envelope to bind to their cellular receptors. Such binding triggers a cascade of events that leads to the fusion between cell and viral membranes for cell entry. Previous cryo-electron microscopy studies of the SARS-CoV spike protein and its interaction with the cell receptor ACE2 have shown that receptor binding induces the dissociation of the S1 with ACE2, prompt- ing the S2 to transit from a metastable pre-fusion to a more-stable post-fusion state that is essential for membrane fusion9–12. Therefore, binding to the ACE2 receptor is a critical initial step for SARS-CoV to enter into target cells. Recent studies also highlighted the important role of ACE2 in mediating entry of SARS-CoV-21,13–15. HeLa cells express- ing ACE2 are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection whereas those without ACE2 are not1. In vitro binding measurements also showed that the SARS-CoV-2 RBD binds to ACE2 with an affinity in the low nanomolar range, indicating that the RBD is a key functional component within the S1 subunit that is responsible for binding of SARS-CoV-2 by ACE213,16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5 Received: 19 February 2020 Accepted: 19 March 2020 Published online: 30 March 2020 Check for updates 1The Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Protein Science, Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Structural Biology, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. 2Center for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, Comprehensive AIDS Research Center, Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Structural Biology, School of Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. 3Shanghai Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Shanghai Advanced Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China. 4These authors contributed equally: Jun Lan, Jiwan Ge, Jinfang Yu, Sisi Shan. ✉e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] tsinghua.edu.cn https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/ https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5&domain=pdf mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] 216 | Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 Article The cryo-electron microscopy structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike trimer has recently been reported in two independent studies13,17. How- ever, inspection of one available spike structure revealed the incom- plete modelling of the RBD, particularly for the receptor-binding motif (RBM) that interacts directly with ACE217. Computer modelling of the interaction between the SARS-CoV-2 RBD and ACE2 has identified some residues that are potentially involved in the interaction; however, the actual residues that mediate the interaction remained unclear18. Fur- thermore, despite detectable cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing activity of serum or plasma from patients who recovered from SARS-CoV infections15, no isolated SARS-CoV monoclonal antibodies are able to neutralize SARS-CoV-216,17. These findings highlight some of the intrinsic sequence and structure differences between the SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 RBDs. To elucidate the interaction between the SARS-CoV-2 RBD and ACE2 at a higher resolution, we determined the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 complex using X-ray crystallography. This atomic-level structural information greatly improves our under- standing of the interaction between SARS-CoV-2 and susceptible cells, provides a precise target for neutralizing antibodies, and assists the structure-based vaccine design that is urgently needed in the ongoing fight against SARS-CoV-2. Specifically, we expressed the SARS-CoV-2 RBD (residues Arg319–Phe541) (Fig. 1a, b) and the N-terminal peptidase domain of ACE2 (residues Ser19–Asp615) in Hi5 insect cells and purified them by Ni-NTA affinity purification and gel filtration (Extended Data Fig. 1). The structure of the complex was determined by molecular replacement using the SARS-CoV RBD and ACE2 structures as search models4, and refined to a resolution of 2.45 Å with final Rwork and Rfree factors of 19.6% and 23.7%, respec- tively (Extended Data Fig. 2 and Extended Data Table 1). The final model contains residues Thr333–Gly526 of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD, residues Ser19–Asp615 of the ACE2 N-terminal peptidase domain, one zinc ion, four N-acetyl-β-glucosaminide (NAG) glycans linked to ACE2 Asn90, Asn322 and Asn546 and to RBD Asn343, as well as 80 water molecules. The SARS-CoV-2 RBD has a twisted five-stranded antiparallel β sheet (β1, β2, β3, β4 and β7) with short connecting helices and loops that form the core (Fig. 1b, c). Between the β4 and β7 strands in the core, there is an extended insertion containing the short β5 and β6 strands, α4 and α5 helices and loops (Fig. 1b, c). This extended inser- tion is the RBM, which contains most of the contacting residues of SARS-CoV-2 that bind to ACE2. A total of nine cysteine residues are found in the RBD, eight of which form four pairs of disulfide bonds that are resolved in the final model. Among these four pairs, three are in the core (Cys336–Cys361, Cys379–Cys432 and Cys391–Cys525), which help to stabilize the β sheet structure (Fig. 1c); the remaining pair (Cys480–Cys488) connects the loops in the distal end of the RBM (Fig. 1c). The N-terminal peptidase domain of ACE2 has two lobes, form- ing the peptide substrate binding site between them. The extended RBM in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD contacts the bottom side of the small lobe of ACE2, with a concave outer surface in the RBM that accommodates the N-terminal helix of the ACE2 (Fig. 1c). The overall structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD is similar to that of the SARS-CoV RBD (Extended Data Fig. 3a), with a root mean square deviation (r.m.s.d.) of 1.2 Å for 174 aligned Cα atoms. Even in the RBM, which has more sequence vari- ation, the overall structure is also highly similar (r.m.s.d. of 1.3 Å) to the SARS-CoV RBD, with only one obvious conformational change in the distal end (Extended Data Fig. 3a). The overall binding mode of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD to ACE2 is also nearly identical to that observed in the previously determined structure of the SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 complex4 (Extended Data Fig. 3b). The cradling of the N-terminal helix of ACE2 by the outer surface of the RBM results in a large buried surface of 1,687 Å2 (864 Å2 on the RBD and 823 Å2 on the ACE2) at the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 interface. A highly similar buried surface of 1,699 Å2 contributed by SARS-CoV RBD (869 Å2) and ACE2 (830 Å2) is also observed at the SARS-CoV RBD– ACE2 interface. With a distance cut-off of 4 Å, a total of 17 residues of the RBD are in contact with 20 residues of ACE2 (Fig. 2a and Extended Data Table 2). Analysis of the interface between the SARS-CoV RBD and ACE2 revealed a total of 16 residues of the SARS-CoV RBD in contact with 20 residues of ACE2 (Fig. 2a and Extended Data Table 2). Among the 20 ACE2 residues that interact with the two different RBDs, 17 resi- dues are shared between both interactions and most of the contact- ing residues are located at the N-terminal helix (Fig. 2a and Extended Data Table 2). To compare the ACE2-interacting residues on the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs, we used structure-guided sequence align- ment and mapped them to their respective sequences (Fig. 2b). Among 14  shared amino acid positions used by both RBMs for the interaction with ACE2, 8 have the identical residues between the two RBDs, including Tyr449/Tyr436, Tyr453/Tyr440, Asn487/ Asn473, Tyr489/Tyr475, Gly496/Gly482, Thr500/Thr486, Gly502/ Gly488 and Tyr505/Tyr491 of SARS-CoV-2/SARS-CoV, respectively (Fig. 2b). Five positions have residues that have similar biochemi- cal properties despite of having different side chains, including Leu455/Tyr442, Phe456/Leu443, Phe486/Leu472, Gln493/Asn479 and Asn501/Thr487 of SARS-CoV-2/SARS-CoV, respectively (Fig. 2b). ACE2 ACE2 Core Core RBM RBM N-terminal helix C379–C432 C336–C361 C480–C488 N* SARS-CoV-2 RBD β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 β6 β7 C391–C525 β5 α1 α2 α3 α5 β1 β3 β4 β6 β7 β2 α4 NH2 COOH RBM NTD RBD SD1 SD2 FP HR1 HR2 TM IC 333 527 438 506 S1 S2 SARS-CoV-2 RBD a b c 180° Fig. 1 | Overall structure of SARS-CoV-2 RBD bound to ACE2. a, Overall topology of the SARS-CoV-2 spike monomer. FP, fusion peptide; HR 1, heptad repeat 1; HR 2, heptad repeat 2; IC, intracellular domain; NTD, N-terminal domain; SD1, subdomain 1; SD2, subdomain 2; TM, transmembrane region. b, Sequence and secondary structures of SARS-CoV-2 RBD. The RBM sequence is shown in red. c, Overall structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD bound to ACE2 . ACE2 is shown in green. The SARS-CoV-2 RBD core is shown in cyan and RBM in red. Disulf ide bonds in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD are shown as sticks and indicated by arrows. The N-terminal helix of ACE2 responsible for binding is labelled. Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 | 217 The remaining position is at the Gln498/Tyr484 location (Fig. 2b), at which Gln498 of SARS-CoV-2 and Tyr484 of SARS-CoV both inter- act with Asp38, Tyr41, Gln42, Leu45 and Lys353 of ACE2. Among the six RBD positions with changed residues, SARS-CoV residues Tyr442, Leu472, Asn479 and Thr487 have previously been shown to be essential for binding ACE218. At the Leu455/Tyr442 position, Leu455 of SARS-CoV-2 and Tyr442 of SARS-CoV have similar interac- tions with Asp30, Lys31 and His34 of ACE2 (Fig. 3a). At the Phe486/ Leu472 position, Phe486 of SARS-CoV-2 interacts with Gln24, Leu79, Met82 and Tyr83 of ACE2, whereas Leu472 of SARS-CoV has less interactions with Leu79 and Met82 of ACE2 (Fig. 3a). At the Gln493/ Asn479 position, Gln493 of SARS-CoV-2 interacts with Lys31, His34 and Glu35 of ACE2 and forms a hydrogen bond with Glu35; Asn479 of SARS-CoV interacts with only His34 of ACE2 (Fig. 3a). At the Asn501/ Thr487 position, both residues have similar interactions with Tyr41, Lys353, Gly354 and Asp355 of ACE2 (Fig. 3a). Asn501 of SARS-CoV-2 and Thr487 of SARS-CoV both form a hydrogen bond with Tyr41 of ACE2 (Fig. 3a). Outside the RBM, there is a unique ACE2-interacting residue (Lys417) in SARS-CoV-2, which forms salt-bridge interactions with Asp30 of ACE2 (Fig. 3b). This position is replaced by a valine in the SARS-CoV RBD that fails to participate in ACE2 binding (Figs. 2b, 3b). Furthermore, a comparison of the surface electrostatic poten- tial also identified a positive charged patch on the SARS-CoV-2 RBD contributed by Lys417 that is absent on the SARS-CoV RBD (Fig. 3b). These subtly different ACE2 interactions may contribute to the difference in binding affinity of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV to the ACE2 receptor (4.7 nM compared with 31 nM, respectively) (Extended Data Fig. 4). One notable and common feature that was found for both RBD– ACE2 interfaces is the networks of hydrophilic interactions. There are 13 hydrogen bonds and 2 salt bridges at the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 interface, and 13 hydrogen bonds and 3 salt bridges at the SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interface (Table 1). The second shared feature is the involve- ment of multiple tyrosine residues that form hydrogen-bonding interactions with the polar hydroxyl group. These include Tyr449, Tyr489 and Tyr505 from the SARS-CoV-2 RBD and Tyr436, Tyr475 and Tyr491 from the SARS-CoV RBD (Table 1). The third shared feature may reside in the Asn90-linked glycans of the ACE2 that bind to dif- ferent RBDs. In the structure of the SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 complex, a chain of Asn90-linked NAG–NAG–β-d-mannose is in contact with Thr402 of the SARS-CoV RBD (Extended Data Fig. 5a), and this gly- can–RBD interaction has been proposed to have important roles in the binding of SARS-CoV RBD by ACE24,19. In the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 structure, the density enabled only the modelling of the first NAG linked to ACE2 Asn90, and no interactions between this NAG and the SARS-CoV-2 RBD were observed (Extended Data Fig. 5b). However, this does not exclude that glycans after the first NAG may interact with the SARS-CoV-2 RBD and may have important roles in the bind- ing of SARS-CoV-2 RBD by ACE2. Taken together, our results show that the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interfaces share substantial similarity in the buried surface area, the number of interacting residues and hydrophilic interaction networks, although a SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD Human ACE2 Human ACE2 b Q24 Q24 Q42 Q42 T27 T27 Q493 T500 N501 G502 G488 F456 K417 L455 Y489 Y453 G482 Y449 Q498 Y505 G446 G496 N487 N473 A475 F486 L472 L443 Y475 Y440 Y436 Y484 Y491 I489 R426 T486 T487 Y442 N479 D30N N E35 E37 E37 D38 D38 D355 D355 G354 G354 K353 K353 R393 K31 K31 H34 H34 F28 F28 L79 Y83 Y83 Y41 Y41 L45 N330 N330 E329 Q325 R357 R357 M82 M82 387 437 438 488 489 374 424 425 474 475 SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD 516 502 L79 Fig. 2 | The SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interfaces. a, Contacting residues are shown as sticks at the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interfaces. Positions in both RBDs that are involved in ACE2 binding are indicated by red labels. b, Sequence alignment of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs. Contacting residues in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD are indicated by black dots; contacting residues in the SARS-CoV RBD are indicated by red dots. 218 | Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 Article some of the ACE2 interactions observed both inside and outside the RBM were different (Fig. 3a, b). Such similarities argue strongly for the convergent evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBD struc- tures to improve binding affinity to the same ACE2 receptor, although SARS-CoV-2 does not cluster within SARS-CoV and SARSr-CoV in the Betacoronavirus genus. Consistent with the high structural similarity, we found that the binding affinities between ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs also fall into a similar range. Specifically, the equilibrium dissociation constant (KD) of ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 RBD is 4.7 nM, and of ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD is 31 nM (Extended Data Fig. 4). Similar results have also been reported by other groups13,16. However, this is slightly different from a recent report in which an approximately 20-fold increased bind- ing between ACE2 and the SARS-CoV-2 spike trimer was found (KD of 14.7 nM) compared with that between ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–SD1 (KD of 325 nM) 17. This is perhaps due to the different proteins used in the assay or because of other unknown reasons. Nevertheless, the bind- ing affinity alone is unlikely to explain the unusual transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2. Other factors such as the unique ‘RRAR’ furin cleavage site at the S1–S2 boundary of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may have more-important roles in facilitating the rapid human-to-human trans- mission of SARS-CoV-2. Neutralizing antibodies represent an important component of the immune system in the fight against viral infections. It has been reported that SARS-CoV-2 could be cross-neutralized by horse anti-SARS-CoV serum and convalescent serum from a patient with a SARS-CoV infection1,15, reinforcing the structural similarity between the RBDs of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV. Such similarity also increased the hope of the rapid application of previously character- ized SARS-CoV monoclonal antibodies in the clinical setting. However, no antibody that targeted SARS-CoV (m396, S230, 80R and CR3014) has so far demonstrated any notable cross-binding and neutraliza- tion activity against spike protein or RBD of SARS-CoV-216,17,20–23. One exception is SARS-CoV antibody CR3022 that binds to the SARS-CoV-2 RBD with a KD of 6.2 nM, although its neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 has not yet been reported16. Currently, we are uncertain where exactly the epitope of CR3022 on the RBDs of SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 is located. Among the three antibodies that are incapable a b SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD K417 ACE2 N-terminal helix ACE2 N-terminal helix L455 K417 L472Y442 Q493 N479 N501 T487 V404 F486 K31 H34 D30 M82 L79 Q24 K31 H34 D30 Y83 M82 L79 K31 H34 E35 H34 Y41 K353 D355 G354 Y41 K353 D355 G354 D30 SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV SARS-CoV SARS-CoV SARS-CoV SARS-CoVSARS-CoV-2 Fig. 3 | Comparisons of interactions at the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interfaces. a, Interactions around the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV positions in the RBM with changed residues. SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs are shown in cyan. ACE2 is shown in green. b, Interactions around the K417 and V404 positions of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs, respectively, that are outside the RBM and electrostatic potential maps of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs. The position of K417 in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD is indicated by a black arrow. The N-terminal helix of ACE2 is shown as a green ribbon. The Protein Data Bank (PDB) code for the SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 complex is 2AJF. https://www.rcsb.org/structure/2AJF Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 | 219 of binding to the SARS-CoV-2 RBD, two (m396 and 80R) have their epitopes resolved by the high-resolution crystal-structure deter- mination of SARS-CoV RBD–Fab complexes20,21. By mapping these epitope residues onto the sequence of SARS-CoV RBD aligned with the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 RBD (Fig. 4), we found that antibody m396 has 7 residue changes in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD among 21 epitope positions (Fig. 4). There are 16 residue changes in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD among 25 epitope positions of antibody 80R (Fig. 4). This may provide a structural basis for the lack of cross-reactivity of m396 and 80R with SARS-CoV-2. The cross-neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 by horse anti-SARS-CoV serum and serum or plasma from patients recovered from SARS-CoV infections reveals a great potential in identifying antibodies with cross-reactivity between these two cor- onaviruses1,15. The conserved non-RBD regions in the spike protein, such as the S2 subunit, are the potential targets for cross-reactive antibodies. Although the RBD is less conserved, identical residues between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBD exist, even in the more vari- able RBM (Fig. 4). Considering that the RBD is the important region for receptor binding, antibodies that target the conserved epitopes in the RBD will also present a great potential for developing highly potent cross-reactive therapeutic agents against diverse coronavirus species, including SARS-CoV-2. Online content Any methods, additional references, Nature Research reporting sum- maries, source data, extended data, supplementary information, acknowledgements, peer review information; details of author con- tributions and competing interests; and statements of data and code availability are available at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5. 1. Zhou, P. et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature 579, 270–273 (2020). 2. Wu, F. et al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature 579, 265–269 (2020). 3. Zhu, N. et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 727–733 (2020). 4. Li, F., Li, W., Farzan, M. & Harrison, S. C. Structure of SARS coronavirus spike receptor-binding domain complexed with receptor. Science 309, 1864–1868 (2005). 5. Lu, R. et al. Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet 395, 565–574 (2020). 6. Huang, C. et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 395, 497–506 (2020). 7. Liu, K. et al. Clinical characteristics of novel coronavirus cases in tertiary hospitals in Hubei Province. Chin. Med. J. (Engl.) https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000000744 (2020). Table 1 | The hydrogen bonds and salt bridges at the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2 and SARS-CoV RBD–ACE2 interfaces SARS-CoV-2 RBD Length (Å) ACE2 Length (Å) SARS-CoV RBD Hydrogen bonds N487(ND2) 2.6 Q24(OE1) 2.9 N473(ND2) K417(NZ) 3.0 D30(OD2) Q493(NE2) 2.8 E35(OE2) E37(OE1) 3.4 Y491(OH) Y505(OH) 3.2 E37(OE2) D38(OD1) 3.0 Y436(OH) Y449(OH) 2.7 D38(OD2) 3.0 Y436(OH) T500(OG1) 2.6 Y41(OH) 2.8 T486(OG1) N501(N) 3.7 Y41(OH) 3.3 T487(N) G446(O) 3.3 Q42(NE2) Y449(OH) 3.0 Q42(NE2) Q42(OE1) 2.7 Y436(OH) Y489(OH) 3.5 Y83(OH) 3.3 Y475(OH) N487(OD1) 2.7 Y83(OH) 2.8 N473(ND2) Q325(OE1) 3.8 R426(NH2) E329(OE2) 3.0 R426(NH2) N330(ND2) 2.8 T486(O) G502(N) 2.8 K353(O) 2.6 G488(N) Y505(OH) 3.7 R393(NH2) Salt bridges K417(NZ) 3.9 D30(OD1) K417(NZ) 3.0 D30(OD2) E329(OE2) 3.7 R426(NH1) E329(OE1) 3.9 R426(NH2) E329(OE2) 3.0 R426(NH2) ND2, nitrogen delta 2; NE2, nitrogen epsilon 2; NZ, nitrogen zeta; N, nitrogen; NH1, nitrogen eta 1: NH2, nitrogen eta 2; OH, oxygen eta; O, oxygen; OD1, oxygen delta 1; OD2, oxygen delta 2; OG1, oxygen gamma 1; OE1, oxygen epsilon 1; OE2, oxygen epsilon 2. 336 386 387 437 438 488 489 323 373 374 424 425 474 475 m396 80R 516 502 SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD SARS-CoV-2 RBD SARS-CoV RBD Fig. 4 | Mapping of SARS-CoV neutralizing antibody epitopes. The epitopes of SARS-CoV neutralizing antibodies m396 and 80R, which target the RBD, are labelled in the SARS-CoV sequence aligned with the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 RBD. Epitope residues of m396 are indicated by black dots; epitope residues of 80R are indicated by red dots. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5 https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000000744 220 | Nature | Vol 581 | 14 May 2020 Article 8. Wang, D. et al. Clinical characteristics of 138 hospitalized patients with 2019 novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia in Wuhan, China. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 323, 1061–1069 (2020). 9. Gui, M. et al. Cryo-electron microscopy structures of the SARS-CoV spike glycoprotein reveal a prerequisite conformational state for receptor binding. Cell Res. 27, 119–129 (2017). 10. Song, W., Gui, M., Wang, X. & Xiang, Y. Cryo-EM structure of the SARS coronavirus spike glycoprotein in complex with its host cell receptor ACE2. PLoS Pathog. 14, e1007236 (2018). 11. Kirchdoerfer, R. N. et al. Stabilized coronavirus spikes are resistant to conformational changes induced by receptor recognition or proteolysis. Sci. Rep. 8, 15701 (2018). 12. Yuan, Y. et al. Cryo-EM structures of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV spike glycoproteins reveal the dynamic receptor binding domains. Nat. Commun. 8, 15092 (2017). 13. Walls, A. C. et al. Structure, function, and antigenicity of the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. Cell https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.058 (2020). 14. Letko, M., Marzi, A. & Munster, V. Functional assessment of cell entry and receptor usage for SARS-CoV-2 and other lineage B betacoronaviruses. Nat. Microbiol. 5, 562–569 (2020). 15. Hoffmann, M. et al. SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 (2020). 16. Tian, X. et al. Potent binding of 2019 novel coronavirus spike protein by a SARS coronavirus-specific human monoclonal antibody. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 9, 382–385 (2020). 17. Wrapp, D. et al. Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation. Science 367, 1260–1263 (2020). 18. Wan, Y., Shang, J., Graham, R., Baric, R. S. & Li, F. Receptor recognition by novel coronavirus from Wuhan: an analysis based on decade-long structural studies of SARS. J. Virol. 94, e00127-20 (2020). 19. Li, W. et al. Receptor and viral determinants of SARS-coronavirus adaptation to human ACE2. EMBO J. 24, 1634–1643 (2005). 20. Prabakaran, P. et al. Structure of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus receptor-binding domain complexed with neutralizing antibody. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 15829–15836 (2006). 21. Hwang, W. C. et al. Structural basis of neutralization by a human anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome spike protein antibody, 80R. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 34610–34616 (2006). 22. Walls, A. C. et al. Unexpected receptor functional mimicry elucidates activation of coronavirus fusion. Cell 176, 1026–1039 (2019). 23. van den Brink, E. N. et al. Molecular and biological characterization of human monoclonal antibodies binding to the spike and nucleocapsid proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. J. Virol. 79, 1635–1644 (2005). Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.058 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 Methods Data reporting No statistical methods were used to predetermine sample size. The experiments were not randomized and the investigators were not blinded to allocation during …