» Articles » PMID: 34683381

Coinfection and Interference Phenomena Are the Results of Multiple Thermodynamic Competitive Interactions

Overview
Journal Microorganisms
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2021 Oct 23
PMID 34683381
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Biological, physical and chemical interaction between one (or more) microorganisms and a host organism, causing host cell damage, represents an infection. Infection of a plant, animal or microorganism with a virus can prevent infection with another virus. This phenomenon is known as viral interference. Viral interference is shown to result from two types of interactions, one taking place at the cell surface and the other intracellularly. Various viruses use different receptors to enter the same host cell, but various strains of one virus use the same receptor. The rate of virus-receptor binding can vary between different viruses attacking the same host, allowing interference or coinfection. The outcome of the virus-virus-host competition is determined by the Gibbs energies of binding and growth of the competing viruses and host. The virus with a more negative Gibbs energy of binding to the host cell receptor will enter the host first, while the virus characterized by a more negative Gibbs energy of growth will overtake the host metabolic machine and dominate. Once in the host cell, the multiplication machinery is shared by the competing viruses. Their potential to utilize it depends on the Gibbs energy of growth. Thus, the virus with a more negative Gibbs energy of growth will dominate. Therefore, the outcome can be interference or coinfection, depending on both the attachment kinetics (susceptibility) and the intracellular multiplication machinery (permittivity). The ratios of the Gibbs energies of binding and growth of the competing viruses determine the outcome of the competition. Based on this, a predictive model of virus-virus competition is proposed.

Citing Articles

Ghosts of the past: Elemental composition, biosynthesis reactions and thermodynamic properties of Zeta P.2, Eta B.1.525, Theta P.3, Kappa B.1.617.1, Iota B.1.526, Lambda C.37 and Mu B.1.621 variants of SARS-CoV-2.

Popovic M, Pantovic Pavlovic M, Pavlovic M Microb Risk Anal. 2023; 24:100263.

PMID: 37234934 PMC: 10199755. DOI: 10.1016/j.mran.2023.100263.


SARS-CoV-2 strain wars continues: Chemical and thermodynamic characterization of live matter and biosynthesis of Omicron BN.1, CH.1.1 and XBC variants.

Popovic M Microb Risk Anal. 2023; 24:100260.

PMID: 36974134 PMC: 10032061. DOI: 10.1016/j.mran.2023.100260.


XBB.1.5 Kraken cracked: Gibbs energies of binding and biosynthesis of the XBB.1.5 variant of SARS-CoV-2.

Popovic M Microbiol Res. 2023; 270:127337.

PMID: 36804126 PMC: 9928726. DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2023.127337.


The SARS-CoV-2 Hydra, a tiny monster from the 21st century: Thermodynamics of the BA.5.2 and BF.7 variants.

Popovic M Microb Risk Anal. 2023; 23:100249.

PMID: 36777924 PMC: 9898946. DOI: 10.1016/j.mran.2023.100249.


Never ending story? Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 monitored through Gibbs energies of biosynthesis and antigen-receptor binding of Omicron BQ.1, BQ.1.1, XBB and XBB.1 variants.

Popovic M Microb Risk Anal. 2023; 23:100250.

PMID: 36777740 PMC: 9896887. DOI: 10.1016/j.mran.2023.100250.


References
1.
Gale P . Towards a thermodynamic mechanistic model for the effect of temperature on arthropod vector competence for transmission of arboviruses. Microb Risk Anal. 2020; 12:27-43. PMC: 7104215. DOI: 10.1016/j.mran.2019.03.001. View

2.
Tappert M, Porterfield J, Mehta-Dsouza P, Gulati S, Air G . Quantitative comparison of human parainfluenza virus hemagglutinin-neuraminidase receptor binding and receptor cleavage. J Virol. 2013; 87(16):8962-70. PMC: 3754076. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00739-13. View

3.
Zou J, Yin J, Fang L, Yang M, Wang T, Wu W . Computational Prediction of Mutational Effects on SARS-CoV-2 Binding by Relative Free Energy Calculations. J Chem Inf Model. 2020; 60(12):5794-5802. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00679. View

4.
Lortat-Jacob H, Chouin E, Cusack S, van Raaij M . Kinetic analysis of adenovirus fiber binding to its receptor reveals an avidity mechanism for trimeric receptor-ligand interactions. J Biol Chem. 2001; 276(12):9009-15. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M009304200. View

5.
Shang J, Ye G, Shi K, Wan Y, Luo C, Aihara H . Structural basis of receptor recognition by SARS-CoV-2. Nature. 2020; 581(7807):221-224. PMC: 7328981. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2179-y. View