Lineage-Specific Differences between the gp120 Inner Domain Layer 3 of Human Immunodeficiency Virus and That of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Binding of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) gp120 exterior envelope glycoprotein to CD4 triggers conformational changes in gp120 that promote its interaction with one of the chemokine receptors, usually CCR5, ultimately leading to gp41-mediated virus-cell membrane fusion and entry. We previously described that topological layers (layer 1, layer 2, and layer 3) in the gp120 inner domain contribute to gp120-trimer association in the unliganded state but also help secure CD4 binding. Relative to layer 1 of HIV-1 gp120, the SIVmac239 gp120 layer 1 plays a more prominent role in maintaining gp120-trimer association but is minimally involved in promoting CD4 binding, which could be explained by the existence of a well-conserved tryptophan at position 375 (Trp 375) in HIV-2/SIVsmm. In this study, we investigated the role of SIV layer 3 in viral entry, cell-to-cell fusion, and CD4 binding. We observed that a network of interactions involving some residues of the β8-α5 region in SIVmac239 layer 3 may contribute to CD4 binding by helping shape the nearby Phe 43 cavity, which directly contacts CD4. In summary, our results suggest that layer 3 in SIV has a greater impact on CD4 binding than in HIV-1. This work defines lineage-specific differences in layer 3 from HIV-1 and that from SIV. IMPORTANCE: CD4-induced conformational changes in the gp120 inner domain involve rearrangements between three topological layers. While the role of layers 1 to 3 for HIV-1 and layers 1 and 2 for SIV on gp120 transition to the CD4-bound conformation has been reported, the role of SIV layer 3 remains unknown. Here we report that SIV layer 3 has a greater impact on CD4 binding than does layer 3 in HIV-1 gp120. This work defines lineage-specific differences in layer 3 from HIV-1 and SIV.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".