PMC:7048180 / 4876-5942 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T18","span":{"begin":45,"end":57},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T19","span":{"begin":67,"end":74},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T20","span":{"begin":354,"end":361},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A18","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T18","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma62925"},{"id":"A19","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T19","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma67257"},{"id":"A20","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T20","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma67257"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-MONDO","denotations":[{"id":"T31","span":{"begin":292,"end":300},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T32","span":{"begin":398,"end":406},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T33","span":{"begin":490,"end":498},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T34","span":{"begin":568,"end":576},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T35","span":{"begin":585,"end":593},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T36","span":{"begin":675,"end":683},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A31","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T31","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A32","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T32","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A33","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T33","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A34","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T34","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A35","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T35","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A36","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T36","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T33","span":{"begin":1,"end":2},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T34","span":{"begin":149,"end":155},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000473"},{"id":"T35","span":{"begin":241,"end":242},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001021"},{"id":"T36","span":{"begin":998,"end":999},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T37","span":{"begin":1000,"end":1003},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0053733"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CHEBI","denotations":[{"id":"T25","span":{"begin":45,"end":57},"obj":"Chemical"},{"id":"T26","span":{"begin":67,"end":74},"obj":"Chemical"},{"id":"T27","span":{"begin":141,"end":145},"obj":"Chemical"},{"id":"T28","span":{"begin":354,"end":361},"obj":"Chemical"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A25","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T25","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_17089"},{"id":"A26","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T26","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_36080"},{"id":"A27","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T27","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_6617"},{"id":"A28","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T28","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_16541"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T33","span":{"begin":92,"end":960},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T34","span":{"begin":961,"end":1066},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"97","span":{"begin":482,"end":486},"obj":"Gene"},{"id":"98","span":{"begin":851,"end":855},"obj":"Gene"},{"id":"99","span":{"begin":906,"end":910},"obj":"Gene"},{"id":"100","span":{"begin":29,"end":38},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"101","span":{"begin":267,"end":276},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"102","span":{"begin":292,"end":300},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"103","span":{"begin":384,"end":393},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"104","span":{"begin":398,"end":406},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"105","span":{"begin":568,"end":576},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"106","span":{"begin":585,"end":593},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"107","span":{"begin":657,"end":666},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"108","span":{"begin":675,"end":683},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"109","span":{"begin":775,"end":784},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"110","span":{"begin":834,"end":843},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"111","span":{"begin":916,"end":925},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"112","span":{"begin":490,"end":498},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"113","span":{"begin":895,"end":901},"obj":"Chemical"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A97","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"97","obj":"Gene:59272"},{"id":"A98","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"98","obj":"Gene:59272"},{"id":"A99","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"99","obj":"Gene:59272"},{"id":"A100","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"100","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A101","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"101","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A102","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"102","obj":"Tax:694009"},{"id":"A103","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"103","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A104","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"104","obj":"Tax:694009"},{"id":"A105","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"105","obj":"Tax:694009"},{"id":"A106","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"106","obj":"Tax:694009"},{"id":"A107","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"107","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A108","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"108","obj":"Tax:694009"},{"id":"A109","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"109","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A110","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"110","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A111","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"111","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A112","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"112","obj":"Tax:694009"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"(a) Phylogenetic analysis of 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein from its protein BLAST sequences. The neighbour-joining tree was constructed using MEGA X, tested by bootstrap method of 2000 replicates, and edited by the online tool of iTOL (v5). (b) The simulated model of 2019-nCoV RBD binding to SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (m396, 80R, and F26G19). (c) Protein sequence alignment of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV RBD, showing the predominant residues that contribute to interactions with ACE2 or SARS-CoV-specific antibodies. (d) The comparison of the complex structures of SARS-CoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the first row) and models of 2019-nCoV-RBD and SARS-CoV-RBD-specific antibodies (shown in the second row). (e) Binding of monoclonal antibodies to 2019-nCoV RBD determined by ELISA. (f) Binding profiles of 2019-nCoV RBD to ACE2 and antibodies, and (g) competition of CR3022 and ACE2 with 2019-nCoV RBD measured by BLI in OctetRED96. Binding kinetics was evaluated using a 1:1 Langmuir binding model by ForteBio Data Analysis 7.0 software."}