Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 53 references

Insights into the role of dynamical features in protein complex formation: the case of SARS-CoV-2 spike binding with ACE2

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Protein motion before binding predicts ACE2 affinity

desk verdict New apo/holo MD comparison across six SARS-CoV-2 variants finds a plausible link between unbound rigidity and binding affinity, but single trajectories and no error bars leave the central trend underdetermined. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.05549 v1 pith:PO7CGBHC submitted 2025-06-05 q-bio.BM physics.bio-phq-bio.QM

Greta Grassmann , Mattia Miotto , Francesca Alessandrini , Leonardo Bo' , Giancarlo Ruocco , Edoardo Milanetti , Andrea Giansanti This is my paper
classification q-bio.BMphysics.bio-phq-bio.QM
keywords bindingaffinitymoleculardynamicsSARS-CoV-2spikeACE2conformationallock-and-keyinducedfitproteinflexibility
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks whether a protein's motion before it binds, not just the structure of the final complex, determines how strongly it binds a partner. Using molecular dynamics simulations of five SARS-CoV-2 spike variants and the wild type, both in isolation and bound to ACE2, it argues that variants with higher binding affinity are more rigid in their unbound state and show dynamics closer to their bound-state dynamics, a lock-and-key style of binding. Weaker-binding variants instead undergo larger rearrangements upon binding, consistent with induced fit. If correct, this would mean that the free conformational ensemble of a protein carries part of the explanation for binding affinity, and that the evolutionary optimization of viral entry can trade off against flexibility that helps immune escape.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by side-by-side 500 ns molecular dynamics trajectories of each spike receptor-binding domain in apo (unbound) and holo (ACE2-bound) form, compared through a set of dynamical descriptors: radius of gyration, RMSD and RMSF, residue covariance matrices with Frobenius distances between apo and holo states, principal component analysis of the essential space, and the degree of coordinated rotation between the two chains. The load-bearing comparison is the apo-versus-holo difference in each descriptor, ranked against the experimentally measured $K_d$ of each variant, with the wild type as the reference.

What would settle it

A direct check would be to run multi-replica, microsecond-scale simulations of the full spike trimer, or to measure the apo dynamics experimentally by NMR relaxation or hydrogen-deuterium exchange for the same panel of variants; if the ordering of apo rigidity across variants, especially the delta anomaly, does not survive, the claimed link between unbound dynamics and binding affinity would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the difference between a protein's unbound and bound dynamics is a predictor of binding stability: the smaller the dynamical gap between the apo and holo states, the lower the dissociation constant $K_d$. Higher-affinity variants (alpha, gamma) have more rigid apo conformations, lower holo-versus-apo RMSD ratios, and apo/holo projections that overlap in essential space, while lower-affinity variants (delta, omicron) show larger apo-holo separation, stronger covariance in the free state, and more pronounced conformational change upon binding. The paper also observes that the delta variant is anomalous: its interface rotations are far less coordinated with ACE2 than in other variants, which suggests that the lock-and-key versus induced-fit axis is not the only dynamical feature relevant to binding.

Load-bearing premise

The results rest on the assumption that a single 500 ns molecular dynamics run on the isolated receptor-binding domain, rather than the full spike trimer, captures the biologically relevant conformational ensemble of each variant, so the observed apo-holo differences reflect variant biology and not the truncated construct or insufficient sampling.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the apo-holo dynamical gap is a genuine determinant of affinity, then predicting binding strength for new variants should include simulations or measurements of the unbound partner, not only the bound complex.
  • The lock-and-key versus induced-fit classification offers a mechanistic explanation for why some variants, notably omicron, accept an affinity cost: flexibility at the binding site may be selected for antibody escape rather than for maximal receptor binding.
  • The delta variant's anomalous dynamics show that inferring binding mechanism from affinity alone is unsafe; each variant may follow a different kinetic path even when the final interface is similar.
  • The correlation of apo dynamics with $K_d$ across an evolutionary series implies that conformational entropy of the free protein contributes measurably to the free energy of binding, extending earlier NMR-based evidence to a fast-evolving viral system.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If this pattern generalizes, screening candidate mutations for binding affinity could be done by simulating only the free protein's dynamics, which would be substantially cheaper than simulating every complex.
  • The single lock-and-key versus induced-fit axis may be too coarse: delta's unique rotational dynamics hints that multiple distinct binding mechanisms can land on the same interface, so a low-dimensional dynamical descriptor would miss part of the story.
  • A natural test is to compute the same apo-holo dynamical gap for other viral-receptor pairs, such as influenza hemagglutinin with sialic acid, and check whether lower-affinity variants consistently show larger dynamical gaps.
  • The paper's logic implies that antibody escape and receptor affinity are coupled to the same dynamical degrees of freedom; if so, viral mutational trajectories may be constrained to move along a rigidity-versus-flexibility trade-off.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses molecular dynamics simulations to compare the dynamical behavior of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) in its unbound (apo) and ACE2-bound (holo) forms for the wild type and five variants (alpha, beta, gamma, delta, omicron). From single 500 ns trajectories per state, it computes radius of gyration, RMSD, RMSF, covariance matrices, PCA projections, inter-chain rotations, and centroid-distance fluctuations, and relates these descriptors to experimentally measured dissociation constants reported by Han et al. The central claim is that higher binding affinity is associated with greater rigidity of the unbound protein and with apo dynamics that resemble the bound state, suggesting a lock-and-key binding mechanism for high-affinity variants rather than induced fit or conformational selection. The paper also discusses SARS-CoV-2 evolution as a trade-off between entry efficiency and other fitness traits such as antibody escape.

Significance. If the central correlation were robust, the paper would provide a notable conceptual contribution: dynamical features of the isolated binding partner, not just the bound complex, could help explain and predict binding affinity, with implications for entropy-based affinity prediction and for interpreting viral evolution. The study is commendable for using external experimental Kd values as a benchmark and for not fitting any parameters to those values, so the reported correlations are not forced by construction. However, the significance is currently limited by the small number of systems (six), the use of a single trajectory per state, and the absence of uncertainty quantification, all of which bear directly on the ranking that motivates the lock-and-key conclusion. The paper is better viewed as a suggestive case study than as a definitive test of the proposed mechanism.

major comments (4)
  1. [Statistics and Reproducibility] The central ranking claim rests on a single 500 ns trajectory per state with the first 50 ns discarded and no replicas, block error bars, or convergence diagnostics. The protocol also uses only 0.1 ns of NVT/NPT equilibration before production, so discarding 50 ns is not itself evidence that the starting basin has been forgotten. In Fig. 1b1 the between-variant mean RMSD differences are of the same order as the within-trajectory standard deviations (e.g., alpha 0.20 ± 0.03 nm vs. delta 0.18 ± 0.03 nm), and Fig. 2 (bottom-right) and Fig. 3c report point estimates without uncertainty. With six variants and only alpha as a high-affinity point, the monotonic trend that drives the lock-and-key interpretation could be inverted if one trajectory sampled a different local basin. The sampling uncertainty therefore directly affects the central conclusion and should be quantified, for example with replicated trajectories, block bootstrap, or convergence tests.
  2. [Materials and Methods - Structural data] The simulations are performed on the isolated RBD of the spike and the extracellular domain of ACE2, with apo and holo starting structures taken from different PDB entries, but the manuscript never tests whether the dynamics of the isolated RBD reproduce the dynamics of the RBD within the full trimeric spike. Since the central claim is about the unbound dynamical ensemble of the spike protein, this construct assumption is load-bearing and should be justified or examined, e.g., by comparing with full-spike simulations or by showing that the missing trimerization domains do not affect the relevant interface dynamics.
  3. [Introduction and Table II] The dissociation constant reported for delta differs between the Introduction (26.07 nM) and Table II (25.07 nM). Delta is an outlier in several analyses (e.g., Fig. 4b), and the correlations in Fig. 3c and Fig. 4f depend on the exact Kd ordering. The manuscript should state which value was used in the analysis and reconcile the discrepancy, since an error in this value could shift the perceived trend.
  4. [Results - Principal component analysis] The claim that variants with higher Kd show 'significantly greater' centroid distances between apo and holo projections (Fig. 3a2) is not supported by any statistical test or uncertainty estimate. The same applies to the Frobenius-distance comparisons in Fig. 2 and to the rotation-coordination analysis in Fig. 4e. The authors should provide confidence intervals, permutation tests, or bootstrap estimates to distinguish genuine variant differences from sampling noise before drawing mechanistic conclusions.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 1] The y-axis quantities in Fig. 1b2 and 1b3 are not explicitly defined; please add axis titles that clarify that the WT mean RMSD difference has been subtracted.
  2. [Introduction] The text states that alpha has 'one of the lowest Kd values', but Table II shows it has the lowest Kd among the six systems; please correct the wording.
  3. [References] References [30] and [33] appear to refer to the same paper; please consolidate to avoid duplicate citations.
  4. [Data Availability] The Data Availability statement says data are available 'upon request' but provides no repository; depositing trajectories and analysis scripts would substantially improve reproducibility.
  5. [Methods - Rotation analysis] The description of the rotation-coordination analysis refers to gmx rotmat but does not explain how the output vectors A-F are constructed from the rotation matrices; please add the necessary computational details.
  6. [General notation] The symbol Ba is introduced in the Introduction but used only sporadically; please define it once and use it consistently, or replace it with the dissociation constant Kd throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dynamical descriptors are computed from MD trajectories and compared against an external experimental Kd benchmark, with no parameter fitted to the target.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that higher binding affinity correlates with higher apo-state rigidity and greater apo/holo dynamical similarity. These dynamical quantities (RMSD, RMSF, covariance matrices, PCA projections, Frobenius distances, and rotation coordination) are computed from 500 ns MD trajectories of each construct, independently of the dissociation constants. The Kd values cited from Han et al. are used only as an external benchmark against which the dynamics-derived quantities are plotted; no parameter of the dynamical analysis is fit to Kd, and no equation defines the dynamical descriptors in terms of affinity. The lock-and-key interpretation is a post-hoc reading of the observed correlations, not a quantity derived from the definitions of the descriptors. Self-citations (e.g., refs. 30, 32, 45) are contextual and do not carry the argument; the only load-bearing external input is the experimental Kd. The main caveat is statistical rather than circular: with one 500 ns trajectory per state and no replicas, the reported point estimates may not be distinguishable from sampling noise, as indicated in the Statistics and Reproducibility section ('All molecular dynamics simulations were run for 500 ns... All subsequent analyses were performed by removing the first 50 ns'), but sampling limitations are not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles or forces. Its claims rest on standard MD and analysis choices plus the external Kd data. The main ad hoc assumption is the truncation to the RBD, plus several hand-set thresholds. No parameter is fitted to binding affinity; all dynamical descriptors are computed independently of Kd.

free parameters (4)
  • Interface residue cutoff = 8 Å
    Hand-chosen centroid-distance threshold defining interacting residues; it determines the 23-residue and 13/11-residue sets used in every covariance and PCA comparison.
  • Equilibration discard time = 50 ns
    First 50 ns of each 500 ns trajectory are removed before analysis; all reported averages and covariances depend on this choice.
  • Non-bonded cutoff = 12 Å
    Hand-set cutoff for short-range non-bonded interactions in the CHARMM36 simulations; standard but arbitrary.
  • Delta Kd account = 25.07 nM (Table II) vs 26.07 nM (Introduction)
    The manuscript gives two values for the delta variant's dissociation constant, which affects its position in Kd-ordered comparisons.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption MD with CHARMM36 and TIP3P water models the dynamics of the RBD and ACE2 adequately for this comparison.
    All conclusions depend on the force field and water model yielding realistic ensembles; no validation against experimental dynamics is provided.
  • domain assumption A single 500 ns trajectory per system is sufficient to sample the equilibrium ensemble.
    No replica runs or convergence checks are reported, so slow motions may be undersampled.
  • domain assumption Experimental Kd values from Han et al. are accurate and directly comparable across variants.
    These external values anchor all affinity correlations; any measurement bias shifts the trends.
  • ad hoc to paper The isolated RBD represents the behavior of the RBD in the full trimeric spike.
    The study simulates only the RBD, but the RBD in the intact spike experiences different allosteric and steric constraints; this could bias both apo and holo dynamics.
  • standard math PCA and covariance of atomic positions capture functionally relevant collective motions.
    Standard dimensionality-reduction tools are applied; their biological relevance is assumed rather than tested.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Insights into the role of dynamical features in protein complex formation: the case of SARS-CoV-2 spike binding with ACE2." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PO7CGBHC

@misc{pith2026250605549,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Insights into the role of dynamical features in protein complex formation: the case of SARS-CoV-2 spike binding with ACE2},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PO7CGBHC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.05549}
}
read the original abstract

The functionality of protein-protein complexes is closely tied to the strength of their interactions, making the evaluation of binding affinity a central focus in structural biology. However, the molecular determinants underlying binding affinity are still not fully understood. In particular, the entropic contributions, especially those arising from conformational dynamics, remain poorly characterized. In this study, we explore the relationship between protein motion and binding stability and its role in protein function. To gain deeper insight into how protein complexes modulate their stability, we investigated a model system with a well-characterized and fast evolutionary history: a set of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants bound to the human ACE2 receptor, for which experimental binding affinity data are available. Through Molecular Dynamics simulations, we analyzed both structural and dynamical differences between the unbound (apo) and bound (holo) forms of the spike protein across several variants of concern. Our findings indicate that a more stable binding is associated with proteins that exhibit higher rigidity in their unbound state and display dynamical patterns similar to that observed after binding to ACE2. The increase of binding stability is not the sole driving force of SARS-CoV-2 evolution. More recent variants are characterized by a more dynamical behavior that determines a less efficient viral entry but could optimize other traits, such as antibody escape. These results suggest that to fully understand the strength of the binding between two proteins, the stability of the two isolated partners should be investigated.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.05549 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Computational approaches to predict protein–protein interactions in crowded cellular environments

    Greta Grassmann, Mattia Miotto, Fausta Desantis, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Gian Gaetano Tartaglia, Annalisa Pastore, Gian- carlo Ruocco, Michele Monti, and Edoardo Milanetti. Computational approaches to predict protein–protein interactions in crowded cellular environments. Chemical Reviews, 124(7):3932–3977, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Recent advances in the development of protein–protein interactions modulators: mechanisms and clinical trials

    Haiying Lu, Qiaodan Zhou, Jun He, Zhongliang Jiang, Cheng Peng, Rongsheng Tong, and Jianyou Shi. Recent advances in the development of protein–protein interactions modulators: mechanisms and clinical trials. Signal transduction and targeted therapy, 5(1):213, 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Electrostatic complementarity at the interface drives transient protein-protein interactions

    Greta Grassmann, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Giorgio Gosti, Marco Leonetti, Giancarlo Ruocco, Mattia Miotto, and Edoardo Milanetti. Electrostatic complementarity at the interface drives transient protein-protein interactions. Scientific Reports, 13(1):10207, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Compact assessment of molecular surface complementarities enhances neural network-aided prediction of key binding residues.Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 2025

    Greta Grassmann, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Giancarlo Ruocco, Mattia Miotto, and Edoardo Milanetti. Compact assessment of molecular surface complementarities enhances neural network-aided prediction of key binding residues.Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Exploring neural networks to uncover information-richer features for protein interaction prediction

    Greta Grassmann, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Giancarlo Ruocco, Edoardo Milanetti, and Mattia Miotto. Exploring neural networks to uncover information-richer features for protein interaction prediction. European Biophysics Journal, pages 1–12, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Prediction of protein-protein interaction strength using domain features with supervised regression

    Mayumi Kamada, Yusuke Sakuma, Morihiro Hayashida, and Tatsuya Akutsu. Prediction of protein-protein interaction strength using domain features with supervised regression. The Scientific World Journal , 2014(1):240673, 2014

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Computational optimization of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 for sars-cov-2 spike molecular recognition

    Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Michele Monti, Edoardo Milanetti, Mattia Miotto, Alberto Boffi, Gian Gaetano Tartaglia, and Gian- carlo Ruocco. Computational optimization of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 for sars-cov-2 spike molecular recognition. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal , 19:3006–3014, 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Shape complementarity optimization of antibody–antigen interfaces: The application to sars-cov-2 spike protein

    Alfredo De Lauro, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Mattia Miotto, Pier Paolo Olimpieri, Edoardo Milanetti, and Giancarlo Ruocco. Shape complementarity optimization of antibody–antigen interfaces: The application to sars-cov-2 spike protein. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences , 9, May 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Quantifying protein–protein interactions in molecular simulations

    Alfredo Jost Lopez, Patrick K Quoika, Max Linke, Gerhard Hummer, and Jurgen Kofinger. Quantifying protein–protein interactions in molecular simulations. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , 124(23):4673–4685, 2020

    2020

  2. [10]

    A highly accurate metadynamics-based dissociation free energy method to calculate protein–protein and protein–ligand binding potencies

    Jing Wang, Alexey Ishchenko, Wei Zhang, Asghar Razavi, and David Langley. A highly accurate metadynamics-based dissociation free energy method to calculate protein–protein and protein–ligand binding potencies. Scientific Reports , 12(1):2024, 2022

    2024

  3. [11]

    Computational prediction of protein–protein binding affinities

    Till Siebenmorgen and Martin Zacharias. Computational prediction of protein–protein binding affinities. Wiley Interdis- ciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , 10(3):e1448, 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    On the binding affinity of macromolecular interactions: daring to ask why proteins interact

    Panagiotis L Kastritis and Alexandre MJJ Bonvin. On the binding affinity of macromolecular interactions: daring to ask why proteins interact. Journal of The Royal Society Interface , 10(79):20120835, 2013

    2013

  5. [13]

    Spatial organization of hydrophobic and charged residues affects protein thermal stability and binding affinity

    Fausta Desantis, Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Edoardo Milanetti, and Giancarlo Ruocco. Spatial organization of hydrophobic and charged residues affects protein thermal stability and binding affinity. Scientific Reports, 12(1):12087, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Dominant forces in protein folding

    Ken A Dill. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry, 29(31):7133–7155, 1990

    1990

  7. [15]

    A statistical thermo- dynamic model of the protein ensemble

    Vincent J Hilser, Bertrand Garc ´ ıa-Moreno E, Terrence G Oas, Greg Kapp, and Steven T Whitten. A statistical thermo- dynamic model of the protein ensemble. Chemical reviews, 106(5):1545–1558, 2006

    2006

  8. [16]

    Model-free approach to the interpretation of nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in macromolecules

    Giovanni Lipari and Attila Szabo. Model-free approach to the interpretation of nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in macromolecules. 1. theory and range of validity. Journal of the American Chemical Society , 104(17):4546–4559, 1982

    1982

  9. [17]

    Entropy in molecular recognition by proteins

    Jos´ e A Caro, Kyle W Harpole, Vignesh Kasinath, Jackwee Lim, Jeffrey Granja, Kathleen G Valentine, Kim A Sharp, and A Joshua Wand. Entropy in molecular recognition by proteins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 114(25):6563–6568, 2017

    2017

  10. [18]

    Simu- lated epidemics in 3d protein structures to detect functional properties

    Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Pietro Corsi, Giancarlo Ruocco, Domenico Raimondo, and Edoardo Milanetti. Simu- lated epidemics in 3d protein structures to detect functional properties. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 60(3):1884–1891, February 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    gmxmmpbsa: a new tool to perform end-state free energy calculations with gromacs

    Mario S Vald´ es-Tresanco, Mario E Vald´ es-Tresanco, Pedro A Valiente, and Ernesto Moreno. gmxmmpbsa: a new tool to perform end-state free energy calculations with gromacs. Journal of chemical theory and computation , 17(10):6281–6291, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Evolution of alchemical free energy methods in drug discovery

    Lin Frank Song and Kenneth M Merz Jr. Evolution of alchemical free energy methods in drug discovery. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , 60(11):5308–5318, 2020

    2020

  13. [21]

    From static to dynamic structures: Improving binding affinity prediction with graph-based deep learning

    Yaosen Min, Ye Wei, Peizhuo Wang, Xiaoting Wang, Han Li, Nian Wu, Stefan Bauer, Shuxin Zheng, Yu Shi, Yingheng Wang, et al. From static to dynamic structures: Improving binding affinity prediction with graph-based deep learning. Advanced Science, 11(40):2405404, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Structural basis for the recognition of the sars-cov-2 by full-length human ace2

    Renhong Yan, Yuanyuan Zhang, Yaning Li, Lu Xia, Yingying Guo, and Qiang Zhou. Structural basis for the recognition of the sars-cov-2 by full-length human ace2. Science, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Potent sars-cov-2 neutralizing antibodies directed against spike n-terminal domain 13 target a single supersite

    Gabriele Cerutti, Yicheng Guo, Tongqing Zhou, Jason Gorman, Myungjin Lee, Micah Rapp, Eswar R Reddem, Jian Yu, Fabiana Bahna, Jude Bimela, et al. Potent sars-cov-2 neutralizing antibodies directed against spike n-terminal domain 13 target a single supersite. Cell host & microb...

    2021

  16. [24]

    A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin

    Peng Zhou, Xing-Lou Yang, Xian-Guang Wang, Ben Hu, Lei Zhang, Wei Zhang, Hao-Rui Si, Yan Zhu, Bei Li, Chao-Lin Huang, et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature, pages 1–4, 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    New sars-cov-2 variants—clinical, public health, and vaccine implications

    Salim S Abdool Karim and Tulio de Oliveira. New sars-cov-2 variants—clinical, public health, and vaccine implications. New England Journal of Medicine , 384(19):1866–1868, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Rna virus mutations and fitness for survival

    EJJH Domingo and JJ Holland. Rna virus mutations and fitness for survival. Annual review of microbiology, 51:151, 1997

    1997

  19. [27]

    Genome heterogeneity drives the evolution of species.Phys

    Mattia Miotto and Lorenzo Monacelli. Genome heterogeneity drives the evolution of species.Phys. Rev. Research, 2:043026, Oct 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Temporal signal and the phylodynamic threshold of sars-cov-2

    Sebastian Duchene, Leo Featherstone, Melina Haritopoulou-Sinanidou, Andrew Rambaut, Philippe Lemey, and Guy Baele. Temporal signal and the phylodynamic threshold of sars-cov-2. Virus evolution , 6(2):veaa061, 2020

    2020

  21. [29]

    Exploring the structural distribution of genetic variation in sars-cov-2 with the covid-3d online resource

    Stephanie Portelli, Moshe Olshansky, Carlos HM Rodrigues, Elston N D’Souza, Yoochan Myung, Michael Silk, Azadeh Alavi, Douglas EV Pires, and David B Ascher. Exploring the structural distribution of genetic variation in sars-cov-2 with the covid-3d online resource. Nature Genet...

    2020

  22. [30]

    Inferring the stabilization effects of SARS-CoV-2 variants on the binding with ACE2 receptor

    Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Giorgio Gosti, Leonardo Bo’, Giacomo Parisi, Roberta Piacentini, Alberto Boffi, Giancarlo Ruocco, and Edoardo Milanetti. Inferring the stabilization effects of SARS-CoV-2 variants on the binding with ACE2 receptor. Commun Biol , 5(1):20221, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Receptor binding and complex structures of human ace2 to spike rbd from omicron and delta sars-cov-2

    Pengcheng Han, Linjie Li, Sheng Liu, Qisheng Wang, Di Zhang, Zepeng Xu, Pu Han, Xiaomei Li, Qi Peng, Chao Su, et al. Receptor binding and complex structures of human ace2 to spike rbd from omicron and delta sars-cov-2. Cell, 185(4):630–640, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Differences in the organization of interface residues tunes the stability of the sars-cov-2 spike-ace2 complex

    Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Greta Grassmann, Fausta Desantis, Gianluca Cidonio, Giorgio Gosti, Marco Leonetti, Giancarlo Ruocco, and Edoardo Milanetti. Differences in the organization of interface residues tunes the stability of the sars-cov-2 spike-ace2 complex. Frontie...

    2023

  25. [33]

    Inferring the stabilization effects of sars-cov-2 variants on the binding with ace2 receptor

    Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Giorgio Gosti, Leonardo Bo’, Giacomo Parisi, Roberta Piacentini, Alberto Boffi, Giancarlo Ruocco, and Edoardo Milanetti. Inferring the stabilization effects of sars-cov-2 variants on the binding with ace2 receptor. Communications biology, 5(1)...

    2022

  26. [34]

    Covid-19 patient serum less potently inhibits ace2-rbd binding for various sars-cov-2 rbd mutants

    Daniel Junker, Alex Dulovic, Matthias Becker, Teresa R Wagner, Philipp D Kaiser, Bjoern Traenkle, Katharina Kienzle, Stefanie Bunk, Carlotta Struemper, Helene Haeberle, et al. Covid-19 patient serum less potently inhibits ace2-rbd binding for various sars-cov-2 rbd mutants. Sc...

    2022

  27. [35]

    Genomic characterisation of an emergent sars-cov-2 lineage in manaus: preliminary findings

    Nuno R Faria, Ingra Morales Claro, Darlan Candido, LA Moyses Franco, Pamela S Andrade, Thais M Coletti, Camila AM Silva, Flavia C Sales, Erika R Manuli, Renato S Aguiar, et al. Genomic characterisation of an emergent sars-cov-2 lineage in manaus: preliminary findings. Virologi...

    2021

  28. [36]

    Confirmed reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (sars-cov-2) variant voc-202012/01

    David Harrington, Beatrix Kele, Spiro Pereira, Xose Couto-Parada, Anna Riddell, Suzanne Forbes, Hamish Dobbie, and Teresa Cutino-Moguel. Confirmed reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (sars-cov-2) variant voc-202012/01. Clinical Infectious Diseases,...

    1946

  29. [37]

    The disease severity and clinical outcomes of the sars-cov-2 variants of concern

    Lixin Lin, Ying Liu, Xiujuan Tang, and Daihai He. The disease severity and clinical outcomes of the sars-cov-2 variants of concern. Frontiers in Public Health , 9:1929, 2021

    1929

  30. [38]

    Mortality risk in patients infected with sars-cov-2 of the lineage b

    Chia Siang Kow, Hamid A Merchant, and Syed Shahzad Hasan. Mortality risk in patients infected with sars-cov-2 of the lineage b. 1.1. 7 in the uk. Journal of Infection , 83(1):e14–e15, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Sars-cov-2 variant of concern 202012/01 has about twofold replicative advantage and acquires concerning mutations.Viruses, 13(3):392, 2021

    Frederic Grabowski, Grzegorz Preibisch, Stanis law Gizi´ nski, Marek Kocha´ nczyk, and Tomasz Lipniacki. Sars-cov-2 variant of concern 202012/01 has about twofold replicative advantage and acquires concerning mutations.Viruses, 13(3):392, 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    What scientists know about new, fast-spreading coronavirus variants

    David Adam et al. What scientists know about new, fast-spreading coronavirus variants. Nature, 594(7861):19–20, 2021

    2021

  33. [41]

    Increased transmissibility and global spread of sars-cov-2 variants of concern as at june 2021

    Finlay Campbell, Brett Archer, Henry Laurenson-Schafer, Yuka Jinnai, Franck Konings, Neale Batra, Boris Pavlin, Katelijn Vandemaele, Maria D Van Kerkhove, Thibaut Jombart, et al. Increased transmissibility and global spread of sars-cov-2 variants of concern as at june 2021. Eu...

    2021

  34. [42]

    Omicron: a mysterious variant of concern

    A Gowrisankar, TMC Priyanka, and Santo Banerjee. Omicron: a mysterious variant of concern. The European Physical Journal Plus , 137(1):1–8, 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Advances in the omicron variant development

    Antonio Vitiello, Francesco Ferrara, Amogh M Auti, Marina Di Domenico, and Mariarosaria Boccellino. Advances in the omicron variant development. Journal of Internal Medicine , 292(1):81–90, 2022

    2022

  36. [44]

    Induced fit, conformational selection and independent dynamic segments: an extended view of binding events

    Peter Csermely, Robin Palotai, and Ruth Nussinov. Induced fit, conformational selection and independent dynamic segments: an extended view of binding events. Trends in biochemical sciences, 35(10):539–546, 2010

    2010

  37. [45]

    Dynam- ical changes of sars-cov-2 spike variants in the highly immunogenic regions impact the viral antibodies escaping

    Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Mattia Miotto, Fausta Desantis, Greta Grassmann, Giancarlo Ruocco, and Edoardo Milanetti. Dynam- ical changes of sars-cov-2 spike variants in the highly immunogenic regions impact the viral antibodies escaping. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformati...

    2023

  38. [46]

    In-silico evidence for a two receptor based strategy of sars-cov-2

    Edoardo Milanetti, Mattia Miotto, Lorenzo Di Rienzo, Madhu Nagaraj, Michele Monti, Thaddeus W Golbek, Giorgio Gosti, Steven J Roeters, Tobias Weidner, Daniel E Otzen, et al. In-silico evidence for a two receptor based strategy of sars-cov-2. Frontiers in molecular biosciences,...

    2021

  39. [47]

    Van Der Spoel, E

    D. Van Der Spoel, E. Lindahl, B. Hess, G. Groenhof, A. E. Mark, and H. J. C. Berendsen. GROMACS: Fast, flexible, and free. Journal of Computational Chemistry , 26(16):1701–1718, 2005

    2005

  40. [48]

    B. R. Brooks, C. L. Brooks, A. D. Mackerell, L. Nilsson, R. J. Petrella, B. Roux, Y. Won, G. Archontis, C. Bartels, S. Boresch, A. Caflisch, L. Caves, Q. Cui, A. R. Dinner, M. Feig, S. Fischer, J. Gao, M. Hodoscek, W. Im, K. Kuczera, T. Lazaridis, J. Ma, V. Ovchinnikov, E. Pac...

    2009

  41. [49]

    Jorgensen, Jayaraman Chandrasekhar, Jeffry D

    William L. Jorgensen, Jayaraman Chandrasekhar, Jeffry D. Madura, Roger W. Impey, and Michael L. Klein. Comparison 14 of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. The Journal of Chemical Physics , 79(2):926–935, July 1983

    1983

  42. [50]

    Bussi, D

    G. Bussi, D. Donadio, and M. Parrinello. Canonical sampling through velocity rescaling. The Journal of Chemical Physics , 126(1):014101, January 2007

    2007

  43. [51]

    Parrinello and A

    M. Parrinello and A. Rahman. Crystal structure and pair potentials: A molecular-dynamics study. Physical Review Letters, 45(14):1196–1199, October 1980

    1980

  44. [52]

    B. Hess, H. Bekker, H. J. C. Berendsen, and J. G. E. M. Fraaije. LINCS: A linear constraint solver for molecular simulations. Journal of Computational Chemistry , 18(12):1463–1472, September 1997

    1997

  45. [53]

    T. E. III Cheatham, J. L. Miller, T. Fox, T. A. Darden, and P. A. Kollman. Molecular dynamics simulations on solvated biomolecular systems: The particle mesh ewald method leads to stable trajectories of DNA, RNA, and proteins. Journal of the American Chemical Society , 117(14)...

    1995

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.