Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Some studies in the literature show that viruses can affect bacteria directly or indirectly, and viruses use their own specific ways to do these interactions. Furthermore, it is said that bacteria are prone to attachment mammalian cells during a viral illness using their surface proteins that bind to host extracellular matrix proteins such as fibronectin, fibrinogen, vitronectin, and elastin. A recent study identified the cooperation between bacteria and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in silico, in vitro, and in vivo. Like this study, we hypothesized that more bacteria protein might help SARS-CoV-2 transport and attach to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). The bacteria’s outer membrane proteins (OMPs) we chose were not random; they had to be on the outer surface of the bacteria because these proteins on the outer surface should have a high probability of interacting with both the spike protein and ACE2. We obtained by using bioinformatics tools that there may be binding between both ACE2 and spike protein of these bacteria’s OMPs. Protein-protein interaction results also supported our hypothesis. Therefore, based on our predicted results, these bacteria OMPs may help SARS-CoV-2 move in our body, and both find and attach to ACE2. It is expected that these inferences obtained from the bioinformatics results may play a role in the SARS-CoV-2 virus reaching host cells. Thus, it may bring a different perspective to studies on how the virus can infect host cells.

Keywords

Spike-ACE2 interaction virus-bacteria interaction COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 bioinformatic

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the new human pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been highly transmissible between people.¹ It has spread fast worldwide and is announced as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO).^2,3 Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has structure proteins which are spike (S), envelope (E), membrane (M), and nucleocapsid (N).⁴ Spike protein plays a role diversity of SARS-CoV-2, while the other 4 structural proteins share almost 90% amino acid identity with SARS-CoV.^1,5 The spike protein has 2 functional subunits (S1 and S2). The S1 subunit (mutations were found) plays a vital role in binding to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on the host cell, crucial for the virus entry into epithelial cells. On the contrary, the S2 subunit is a vital fusion protein.^5-8 Bacteria and viruses interact in 2 ways: (1) viral binding to a bacterial cell or (2) viral utilization of a bacterial product. The direct interactions contain a specific bacterium or bacterial product that aids viral infection⁹—the cooperation between bacteria and viruses is quite interesting. Sometimes, viruses help bacteria spread, and sometimes bacteria help the virus replicate or spread in host cells.⁹ There are some examples of direct interactions between bacteria and viruses. For example, the interaction between Human norovirus and Enterobacter cloacae. During this interaction, histo-blood group antigen (HBGA)-like moieties serve as co-factor during infection.^9-11 Also, Murine norovirus and E. cloacae have a direct interaction in which HBGA-like moieties act as co-factor during infection; evidence of the presence of intestinal microbiota aid establishment of persistent viral infection.^10,12 Another example of direct interaction between bacteria and viruses is a cooperation between Poliovirus and N-acetyl glucosamine–containing polysaccharides. This direct interaction enhanced cell association and viral replication; increased capsid stability and transmission.^13,14 Moreover, Enteric bacteria help Rotavirus by enhancing viral replication; enhancing virus binding/entry; and less-effective host antibody response.¹⁵ Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria help the Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) too. This bacteria increase HIV long terminal repeat-driven transcription and HIV production during this virus.¹⁶ Like direct interaction, there is some indirect interaction between bacteria and viruses. For instance, Streptococcus pneumoniae; Streptococcus aureus increases host cell adhesion molecules during the Rhinovirus effect.¹⁷ Like S. pneumoniae and Rhinovirus interaction, S. pneumoniae helps Adenovirus by increasing host cell adhesion molecules.^9,18 Another example is between Influenza virus—S. pneumoniae; S. aureus; Haemophilus influenza respiratory commensals. The logic behind this interaction is that viral neuraminidase cleaves epithelial cell sialic acid exposing bacterial receptors; damaging epithelial cells.^9,19,20

Gastrointestinal (GI) habitats incorporate 200 species (within the oral cavity) to 1000 species at the distal intestine, where bacterial concentrations can get at almost 10¹⁴ cells/g.²¹ Bacteria cell has top layers in the envelope. They are the outer membrane (OM), a distinguishing feature of Gram-negative bacteria, the peptidoglycan cell wall, and the cytoplasmic or inner membrane (IM). The outer leaflet of the OM is made of glycolipids, mainly lipopolysaccharide.²² Outer membrane proteins (OMPs), such as the porins, OmpF, and OmpC, function to allow molecules such as mono disaccharides and amino acids across.²² A class of OMPs, which are larger transmembrane β strands, but are present at much lower levels, function as gated channels in the high-affinity transport of large ligands.²³ Bacteria have OMPs that may cooperate with the virus.^9-20 Bacteria are prone to infect mammalian cells during a viral illness using their surface proteins that bind to host extracellular matrix proteins.^9,24,25 Even there is no significant clue to our knowledge whether bacterial infections in COVID-19 are directly attributable to SARS-CoV-2; we know that ACE2 receptors are related. The SARS-CoV-2 are expressed in a place where many species of bacteria occupy such as small intestine, duodenum, etc, and it is known that this virus may binds to cells in these places.^5,6,21,26,27 One of the severe clinical manifestations of COVID-19 is pneumonia and progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), especially in the elderly. Most of those intubated due to SARS-CoV-2 include these age groups, and their lungs are affected by SARS-CoV-2. When inflammation occurs in the lung, it can impact the gut microbiota. So there is a possibility that novel SARS-CoV-2 might also impact the gut microbiota.^28-32 It has also been stated that dysbiosis in the elderly appears to be linked to the severity of COVID-19.³³ It is known that there are both, direct and indirect, interactions between bacteria that occupy an enormous number in our body and viruses.^9-20,^29-33 The purpose of this study is to pay attention to the possibility that proteins located outside the cell wall of bacteria which live with us and are located in our body may interact with the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2. These proteins may directly or indirectly affect the transmission and replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the body.

Method

Outer membrane proteins of bacteria which are PDB:1QU7(4 helical-bundle structure of the cytoplasmic domain of a serine chemotaxis receptor), PDB:2ZFG (Structure of OMPF porin), PDB:2XG6 (transport protein), and spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) structure (PDB:2GHV) were taken from Protein Data Bank (https://www.rcsb.org/)³⁴ to be used for examining the interaction between different SARS-CoV-2ʹ spike proteins. We used this OMP because we lived with bacteria with OMPs and located a massive number in our body.^21,22,^29-31 Both HDOCK SERVER and ClusPro 2.0 tools were used for protein-protein docking (between spike proteins-bacteria proteins and ACE2 [Accession number: NP_068576.1 and sequenced in January 2021] and bacteria protein).^35,36 Two different protein-protein docking tools were used to check the consistency of the prediction, and both tools are highly used as docking tools and ranked as the best methods of critical assessment of the projection of interactions.^37,38 Phyre2 tool was used to obtain the tertiary structure of ACE2,³⁹ and the tertiary structure of ACE2 was used for HDOCK SERVER and ClusPro 2.0 to predict the docking score. All the structures are visualized using Chimera 1.15.⁴⁰

Results and Discussion

Like interaction between Murine norovirus and E. Cloacae, Poliovirus and N-acetyl glucosamine–containing polysaccharides, Enteric bacteria and Rotavirus, S. pneumoniae and Adenovirus, Influenza virus and S. pneumoniae, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),^9-20 bacteria may play a role in the outbreak of coronavirus disease. Bacteria with OMPs live and locate a massive number in our body.⁴¹ These bacteria OMPs may help SARS-CoV-2 to move and find its receptor. Therefore, this study, using bioinformatics tools, tried to make preliminary predictions that OMPs could play a role in the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. For this purpose, some OMPs of bacteria (PDB:1QU7 [4 helical-bundle structure of the cytoplasmic domain of a serine chemotaxis receptor], PDB:2ZFG [Structure of OMPF porin], PDB:2XG6[transport protein]), were used. Moreover, spike RBD structure (PDB:2GHV) and ACE2 (Accession number: NP_068576.1) (The other 3 of them where there are no results are deleted) were exploited. All results are shown in Table 1 and Figures 1 to 3, respectively. Both HDOCK SERVER and ClusPro 2.0 tools were used for protein-protein docking (between spike protein and bacteria proteins and ACE2 [Accession number: NP_068576.1 and sequenced in January 2021] and bacteria protein)^35,36

Table 1.

Docking score of bacteria protein-ACE2 and bacteria protein-Spike RBD results predicted by HDOCK SERVER and ClusPro 2.0.

Bacteria proteins	Receptor
	HDOCK SERVER		ClusPro 2.0
	Spike RBD	ACE2	Spike RBD
PDB:1QU7	−287.79	−287.79	−1094,2
PDB:2ZFG	−285.78	−285.78	−1470
PDB:2XG6	−434.17	−305.41	−1763.2

Figure 1.

A screenshot for the interaction between bacteria protein PDB:1QU7 (both turquoise and navy blue) and SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (PDB:2GHV). The C-chain of spike receptor-binding domain interacts with bacteria protein. The places where possible interaction may occur are also indicated (in magenta color).

Figure 2.

A screenshot for the interaction between bacteria protein PDB:2ZFG (Navy blue) and SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (PDB:2GHV). Only E- (It is shown in green color) chain of spike receptor-binding domain interacts with bacteria protein. The places where possible interaction may occur are also indicated (in magenta color).

Figure 3.

A screenshot for the interaction between bacteria protein PDB:2XG6 and SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (PDB:2GHV). Only E- (in orange color) chain of spike receptor-binding domain interacts with bacteria protein. The places where possible interaction may occur are also indicated (in magenta color).

There is a massive amount of bacteria in the human body, and they play an essential role in maintaining host health by providing energy, nutrients, immunological protection, probiotic resistance, help virus interaction, and so on.^9-17,^21,22 Although the relationship of bacteria with SARS-CoV-2 is not precisely known,²⁷ several studies have already been carried out to predict that there may be an interaction between bacteria and viruses.^9-20 Since it is known that it is not a long time for human beings and the SARS-CoV-2 to live together, there are many things not to understand precisely what helps virus replicate and transmission in our body. In addition, it is thought-provoking that SARS-CoV-2 went and connected to ACE2 since they deficit the key characteristics, such as cell structure, brain, and organelles. So, we assume that it is unlikely that this virus will come randomly and find ACE2.^6,8,42-⁴⁴ This situation increases the likelihood that some partners, which bacteria may be one of these partners, as many studies support,^9,12,13,17 may occur when the SARS-CoV enters the human body. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus cannot reproduce in bacteria,⁴⁵ but this should not mean that SARS-CoV cannot bind to bacteria. There are very remarkable studies on the interaction between bacteria and viruses.¹⁰,^14-16,^18,19 Uchiyama et al¹⁵ found that Enteric bacteria help Rotavirus by enhancing both viral replication and virus binding/entry, and Pawlowski et al¹⁶ revealed that Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria help the HIV by increasing HIV long-terminal repeat-driven transcription and HIV production during this binding/entry. Like direct interaction between bacteria and viruses, there are some examples of indirect interactions between bacteria and viruses. For instance, S. pneumoniae and S. aureus increase host cell adhesion molecules during the Rhinovirus effect.¹⁷ During S. pneumoniae and Rhinovirus interaction, S. pneumoniae helps Adenovirus by increasing host cell adhesion molecules.^9,18 Petruk and her friends recently did a critical study and found that bacteria play a significant role in the COVID-19 outbreak. They found that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein bound to bacterial lipopolysaccharide and boosted proinflammatory activity.⁴⁶ The above interaction between bacteria protein and virus prompted us to investigate possible connections between the cytoplasmic domain of a serine chemotaxis receptor, OMPF porin, the teichoic wall acid, E. coli OmpF porin, Transport protein, Translocator EscV, and SARS-CoV-2 S protein from a structural perspective. Petruk and her friends found an interaction between bacteria lipopolysaccharide and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Our in silico results showed that more bacteria proteins might play a critical role in binding spike protein (Figures 1 -3, Table 1). Our predicted proteins did not choose randomly; most of them are Gram-positive bacteria such as Actinobacteria, Firmicutes. They are located in a human body with a remarkable number. It is very important that Gram-positive bacteria have the wall teichoic acid that chelating agents and in some types to promote adhesion⁴⁷ because our in silico results show that the wall teichoic acid may bind spike protein (Table 1). This situation can be said as follows: there is a temporary bacteria-virus in interaction with this spike. By the function of this protein, the bacteria can carry the virus to ACE2. An important study found that, not surprisingly, mammalian cells are prone to bacterial attachment during a viral illness. Bacteria do attach using their surface proteins that bind to host extracellular matrix proteins, such as fibronectin, fibrinogen, vitronectin, and elastin, which often play a vital role in the initial adherence of bacteria to solid surfaces within the host.^24,25,48 In this viral epidemic, if the probability of mammalian cells to bind to bacteria increases, the interaction of bacteria and spike protein may increase. Moreover, the orientation of bacteria to cells can also increase spike-ACE2 interaction. Besides, it might be said that our results support this situation (Table 1, Figures 1 –3). An example of bacterial attachment to mammalian cells is that S. aureus is especially significant for the plenty of microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules that it can produce, including clumping factors A and B (ClfA/B), fibronectin-binding factors A and B (FnBA/B), and a collagen-binding protein (Cna). Also, S. epidermidis produces at least 2 adhesins that bind to fibronectin and the fibrinogen-binding protein. Flagella are implicated in adherence to Vibrio cholerae, E. coli, P. aeruginosa, and Salmonella enterica.^48-50 Moreover, according to our results (Table 1, Figures 1 –3), we have found that both ACE2- and spike RBDs might bind to the bacterium proteins, such as serine chemotaxis receptor, OMPF porin, the wall teichoic acid polymerase TagF, OmpF porin in lipidic cubic phase, transport protein, and translocator protein. These may be thought of as when SARS-CoV-2 enters our body, bacteria may take a role in carrying this virus while heading toward cells by attaching microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 and spike RBD interaction docking score were predicted to be −267.98 by HDOCK SERVER. As expected, the docking result between bacterial proteins (given in method with PDB code) and SARS-CoV’s RBD was predicted better than ACE2 receptor-SARS-CoV-2’s RBD (Table 1, Figures 1 –3). That is, it is conceivable that the spike protein may direct and bind to ACE2 by binding to bacteria OMPs.

COVID-19 has come out as a multiorgan disease that causes damage to other organ systems, including the nervous and GI systems and respiratory disease.^51-53 Gastrointestinal system, which has a massive amount of bacteria with different species, is also important for the tendency and severity of COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 has been noted in the tissues of the entire GI tract. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, therefore, has a notable direct impact on the GI system, possibly as an important place for virus replication and activity.^54-56 It is not surprisingly known that ACE2 (the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 binds to) is abundantly expressed in GI systems (the ileum and colon). Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 can readily infect the enterocytes.^56-58 This information situation makes us think that the gut is also an important target organ of SARS-CoV-2. Even the mortality rate of the COVID-19 is still vague; it is clear that it is far more deadly for adults aged 65 years and older than for children or younger people.^59-61 Like mortality age changing, ACE2 gene expression may vary with age.^62,63 The number of bacteria in humans can change depending on age, and remarkable changes in the gut microbiota occur early in life and during infection.^64-68 Besides, during COVID-19, the number of bacteria in GI systems was changed.⁶⁸ We think that the reason for this change may be an interaction between bacteria OMPs and spike protein. We found some predicted interaction between OMPs of bacteria and spike protein (Table 1, Figures 1 –3). This interaction may damage bacteria’s OMPs protein, and these OMPs may lose the characteristics they normally do. The predicted interaction between ACE2 and OMPs should not be ignored (Table 1) because the rate of infection may also be affected by the rate of ACE2 presence. There is already a bacterial protein and spike interaction in the literature.⁴⁶ Like the logic in this study, the more OMPs we found can interact with the spike (Table 1, Figures 1 –3). If these interactions occur (Table 1, Figures 1 –3), the probability that bacteria effectively transmit the virus may increase even more. Furthermore, according to the preliminary data of bacterial interaction with ACE2 (Table 1), the excess ACE2 may affect the infected rate. Bacteria can be affected differently in interaction SARS-CoV-2 because virus-promoting direct interactions occur when the virus exploits a bacterial component to facilitate penetration into the host cell may support our hypothesis.⁵⁴ For example, it is mentioned that the number of Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, and Actinobacteria can change during COVID-19.⁶⁸ Like we said earlier, spike-bacteria interaction may damage bacteria OMPs protein, and OMPs may lose their characteristics what they normally do. As a result, other bacteria may replace the negatively affected bacteria. To give an example, although 9 species, including Bacteroides stercoris, Bacteroides vulgatus, Bacteroides massiliensis, Bifidobacterium longum, Streptococcus thermophilus, Lachnospiraceae bacterium 5163FAA, Prevotella bivia, Erysipelotrichaceae bacterium 6145, and Erysipelotrichaceae bacterium 2244. A were importantly enhanced, 6 species, namely, Clostridium nexile, Streptococcus salivarius, Coprococcus catus, Eubacterium hallii, Enterobacter aerogenes, and Adlercreutzia equolifaciens, were notably diminished in patients compared with those in the healthy controls.⁶⁸ In addition, bacteria are found in the mouth, skin, buccal mucosa, and nasal cavities outside the GI. Some of these bacteria are Mutans streptococci, lactobacilli, S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis.^69-72 It was stated that expression of SARS-CoV-2 is very abundant in the nose.^73,74 An interaction between spike protein and bacteria in the nose and mouth may also be considered. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 coming to body via the eyes, mouth, or nose may attach to the bacteria, and the bacteria can be affected by this situation and move toward the cells.^9,24,25 And again, as indicated in our results, it is possible that there is an interaction between the bacteria OMPs in the nose and mouth and ACE2, which is abundant in these 2 places⁷⁵ (Table 1, Figures 1 –3). In this case, bacteria may play a mediating role in taking the virus to the relevant receptor. We think it is important to conduct more studies on these interactions to elucidate the subject further. We think it is important to conduct more studies on these interactions to elucidate the subject further.

It is quite important to prove the results obtained using bioinformatics tools in the wet laboratory and proving results in the wet laboratory will increase the reliability of bioinformatics results. The role of bacteria in this epidemic has been studied broadly and significant results have been obtained in the literature. The thought that bacteria could act in partnership with the SARS-CoV-2 virus was also predicted as a result of these situations.⁷⁵,⁷⁶,^77-79 The thought that bacteria could act in partnership with the SARS-CoV-2 virus was also predicted as a result of these situations. Petruk and her friends found an interaction between bacteria lipopolysaccharide and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Our in silico results showed that more bacteria proteins might play a critical role in binding spike protein.⁴⁶ Therefore, it will be very important to prove the results found in this study in the laboratory environment, and thanks to these results, this will have a different perspective on this epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2. In addition, these wet laboratory results will not only determine the reliability of the results of our bioinformatics results but also the OMPs of some bacterial species will be viewed more skeptically in this outbreak. As a result, prejudices and disadvantages to the bioinformatics tools of our study will be eliminated.

Conclusion

We hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 might have a relationship with bacteria as a result of bioinformatics analysis. Using bioinformatics tools, we have obtained predicted results that the OMPs belonging to bacteria can interact with RBD of SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2. Therefore, the virus can use these bacteria as a carrier. The cooperation between these proteins and SARS-CoV-2 can help this virus transport or reproduce in our body. We think it is crucial to conduct more studies on these interactions to elucidate the subject further. Proving this relationship can provide a different perspective on how SARS-CoV-2 spreads in the host cell, and different paths can be followed in the diagnosis and treatment of the disease.

Footnotes

Funding:

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests:

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Contributions

Both authors reviewed the analysis and contributed to the preparation of the manuscript.

References

Guo

Zhou

, et al. Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2021;19:141-154.

World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Situation report – 51, 2020, www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation

Hui

Azhar

Madani

, et al. The continuing 2019—nCoV epidemic threat of novel coronaviruses to global health—the latest 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China. Intl J Infect Dis. 2020;91:264-266.

Chan

Kok

Zhu

, et al. Genomic characterization of the 2019 novel human-pathogenic coronavirus isolated from a patient with atypical pneumonia after visiting Wuhan. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020;9:221-236.

Zhou

Yang

Wang

, et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature. 2020;579:270-273.

Korcan

Ozgenturk

Erismis

. Bioinformatic analysis reveals that some bacteria may aid SARS–COV-2 spread and entry into host cells. Sigma J Eng Nat Sci. 2021;39:248-259.

Racaniello

. One hundred years of poliovirus pathogenesis. Virology. 2006;344:9-16.

Belouzard

Chu

Whittaker

. Activation of the SARS coronavirus spike protein via sequential proteolytic cleavage at two distinct sites. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106:5871-5876.

Almand

Moore

Jaykus

. Virus-bacteria interactions: an emerging topic in human infection. Viruses. 2017;9:58.

10.

Jones

Watanabe

Zhu

, et al. Enteric bacteria promote human and mouse norovirus infection of B cells. Science. 2014;346:755-759.

11.

Miura

Sano

Suenaga

, et al. Histo-blood group antigen-like substances of human enteric bacteria as specific adsorbents for human noroviruses. J Virol. 2013;87:9441-9451.

12.

Baldridge

Nice

McCune

, et al. Commensal microbes and interferon-λ determine persistence of enteric murine norovirus infection. Science. 2015;347:266-269.

13.

Kuss

Best

Etheredge

, et al. Intestinal microbiota promote enteric virus replication and systemic pathogenesis. Science. 2011;334:249-252.

14.

Robinson

Jesudhasan

Pfeiffer

. Bacterial lipopolysaccharide binding enhances virion stability and promotes environmental fitness of an enteric virus. Cell Host Microbe. 2014;15:36-46.

15.

Uchiyama

Chassaing

Zhang

Gewirtz

. Antibiotic treatment suppresses rotavirus infection and enhances specific humoral immunity. J. Infect. Dis. 2014;210:171-182.

16.

Pawlowski

Jansson

Sköld

Rottenberg

Källenius

. Tuberculosis and HIV Co-infection. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:e1002464.

17.

Wang

Kwon

Jang

. Rhinovirus enhances various bacterial adhesions to nasal epithelial cells simultaneously. Laryngoscope. 2009;119:1406-1411.

18.

Murrah

Turner

Pang

, et al. Replication of type 5 adenovirus promotes middle ear infection by Streptococcus pneumoniae in the chinchilla model of otitis media. Pathog Dis. 2015;73:1-8.

19.

McCullers

. Insights into the interaction between influenza virus and pneumococcus. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2006;19:571-582.

20.

Bosch

Biesbroek

Trzcinski

Sanders

Bogaert

. Viral and bacterial interactions in the upper respiratory tract. PLoS Pathog. 2013;9:e1003057.

21.

Xiao

Tang

Zheng

Liu

Shan

. Evidence for gastrointestinal infection of SARS-CoV-2. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:1831.e3-1833.e3.

22.

Silhavy

Kahne

Walker

. The bacterial cell envelope. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2010;2:a000414.

23.

Nikaido

. Molecular basis of bacterial outer membrane permeability revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003;67:593-656.

24.

Vareille

Kieninger

Edwards

Regamey

. The airway epithelium: soldier in the fight against respiratory viruses. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2011;24:210-229.

25.

Pittet

Hall-Stoodley

Rutkowski

Harmsen

. Influenza virus infection decrease stracheal mucociliary velocity and clearance of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2010;42:450-460.

26.

Leung

Chan

, et al. Enteric involvement of severe acute respiratory syndrome—Associated coronavirusinfection. Gastroenterology. 2003;125:1011-1017.

27.

Rawson

Wilson

Holmes

. Understanding the role of bacterial and fungal infection in COVID-19. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27:9-11.

28.

Zhang

Wang

Tan

Zhang

Feng

. The cross-talk between gut microbiota and lungs in common lung diseases. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:301-314.

29.

Dumas

. The role of the lung microbiota and the gut–lung axis in respiratory infectious diseases. Cell Microbiol. 2018;20:e12966.

30.

Groves

. Respiratory viral infection alters the gut microbiota by inducing inappetence. Mbio. 2020;11:1-17.

31.

Lake

. What we know so far: COVID-19 current clinical knowledge and research. Clin Med Lond (Lond). 2020;20:124-127.

32.

Dickson

Arbor

. The microbiome and critical illness. Lancet Respir Med. 2017;4:59-72.

33.

Yeoh

Zuo

Lui

, et al. Gut microbiota composition reflects disease severity and dysfunctional immune responses in patients with COVID-19. Gut. 2021;70:698-706.

34.

https://wwwrcsborg/

35.

Yan

Zhang

Zhou

Huang

S-Y

. HDOCK: a web server for protein-protein and protein-DNA/RNA docking based on a hybrid strategy. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:W365-W373.

36.

Kozakov

. The ClusPro web server for protein-protein docking. Nat Protoc. 2017;12:255-278.

37.

Van Zundert

Rodrigues

JPGLM

Trellet

, et al. The HADDOCK2.2 Web server: user-friendly integrative modeling of biomolecular complexes. J Mol Biol. 2016;428:720-725.

38.

Janin

Henrick

Moult

, et al. CAPRI: a critical assessment of predicted interactions. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2003;52:2-9.

39.

Kelley

Mezulis

Yates

Wass

Sternberg

MJE

. The Phyre2 web portal for protein modeling, prediction and analysis Nat Protoc. 2015;10:845-858.

40.

Pettersen

Goddard

Huang

, et al. UCSF Chimera—a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem. 2004;25:1605-1612.

41.

Gut bacteria and human body: a mini review. GSC Adv Res Rev. 2019;1:31-35.

42.

Farnsworth

. An organisational systems-biology view of viruses explains why they are not alive. Biosystems. 2021;200:104324.

43.

van der Hoek

Pyrc

Jebbink

, et al. Identification of a new human coronavirus. Nat Med. 2004;10:368-373.

44.

Koonin

Starokadomskyy

. Are viruses alive. The replicator paradigm sheds decisive light on an old but misguided question. Stud History Philos Sci Part C. 2016;59:125-134.

45.

de Wilde

Snijder

Kikkert

van Hemert

. Host factors in coronavirus replication. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2018;419:1-42. doi: 10.1007/82_2017_25

46.

Petruk

Puthia

Petrlova

, et al. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to bacterial lipopolysaccharide and boosts proinflammatory activity. J Molec Cell Biol. 2020;12:916-932.

47.

Minh-Thu

Miki

Silke

Mathias

Friedric

. Lipoproteins in gram-positive bacteria: abundance, function, fitness. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:2312.

48.

Patti

Allen

McGavin

Hook

. MSCRAMM-mediated adherence of microorganisms to host tissues. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1994;48:585-617.

49.

Heilmann

. Molecular basis of biofilm formation by Staphylococcus epidermidis. Med Implic Biofilms. 2003;1:110-135.

50.

Lejeune

. Contamination of abiotic surfaces: what a colonizing bacterium sees and how to blur it. Trends Microbiol. 2003;11:179-184.

51.

Mao

Qiu

, et al. Manifestations and prognosis of gastrointestinal and liver involvement in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;5:667-678.

52.

Wong

MCS

Huang

Lai

Chan

FKL

Chan

PKS

. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in fecal specimens of patients with confirmed COVID-19: a meta-analysis. J Infect. 2020;81:e31-e38.

53.

Tian

Yuan

Xiao

, et al. Clinical characteristics and risk factors associated with COVID-19 disease severity in patients with cancer in Wuhan, China: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:893-903.

54.

Almand

Moore

Jaykus

L-A

. Virus-bacteria interactions: an emerging topic in human infection. Viruses. 2017;9:58.

55.

Zhu

, et al. Characteristics of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection and potential evidence for persistent fecal viral shedding. Nat Med. 2020;26:502-505.

56.

Zhang

Gong

Meng

, et al. Comparative study on virus shedding patterns in nasopharyngeal and fecal specimens of COVID-19 patients. Sci China Life Sci. 2020;64:486-488.

57.

Lamers

Beumer

Van Der Vaart

, et al. SARS-CoV-2 productively infects human gut enterocytes. Science. 2020;369:50-54.

58.

Aktas

. Bioinformatics analysis unveils certain mutations implicated in spike structure damage and ligand-binding site of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Bioinform Biol Insight. 2021;15:1-10.

59.

Gardner

States

Bagley

. The coronavirus and the risks to the elderly in long-term care. J Aging Social Policy. 2020;32:310-315.

60.

Daoust

J-F

. Elderly people and responses to COVID-19 in 27 countries. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0235590.

61.

Yatsunenko

Rey

Manary

, et al. Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature. 2012;486:222-227.

62.

Bunyavanich

Vicencio

. Nasal gene expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in children and adults. JAMA. 2020;323:2427-2429.

63.

Patel

Verma

. Nasal ACE2 levels and COVID-19 in children. JAMA. 2020;323:2386-2387.

64.

Koenig

, et al. Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:4578-4585.

65.

Palmer

Bik

DiGiulio

Relman

Brown

. Development of the human infant intestinal microbiota. PLoS Biol. 2007;5:e177.

66.

Karst

Wobus

. A working model of how noroviruses infect the intestine. PLoS Pathog. 2015;11:e1004626.

67.

Racaniello

. One hundred years of poliovirus pathogenesis. Virology. 2006;344:9-16.

68.

Zuo

Zhang

Lui

GCY

, et al. Alterations in gut microbiota of patients with covid-19 during time of hospitalization. Gastroenterology. 2020;159:944.e8-955.e8.

69.

Javed

Zakirulla

Baig

Asif

Meer

. Development of artificial neural network model for prediction of post-streptococcus mutans in dental caries. Comput Meth Prog Biomed. 2020;186:105198.

70.

Ribet

Cossart

. How bacterial pathogens colonize their hosts and invade deeper tissues. Microbes Infec. 2015;17;3.

71.

Schommer

Gallo

. Structure and function of the human skin microbiome. Trends Microbiol. 2013;21:660-668.

72.

Wade

. The oral microbiome in health and disease. Pharmacol Res. 2013;69:137-143.

73.

Zhu

Zhang

Wang

, et al. China Novel Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:727-733.

74.

Sungnak

Huang

Bécavin

, et al. SARS-CoV-2 entry factors are highly expressed in nasal epithelial cells together with innate immune genes. Nat Med. 2020;26:681-687.

75.

Zhong

Deng

, et al. High expression of ACE2 receptor of 2019-nCoV on the epithelial cells of oral mucosa. Int J Oral Sci. 24;12(1):8.

76.

Alhumaid

, et al. Coinfections with bacteria, fungi, and respiratory viruses in patients with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pathogens. 2021;10:809.

77.

Xiang

, et al. Potential implications of SARS-CoV-2 oral infection in the host microbiota. J Oral Microbiol. 2021;13:1853451.

78.

Yongjian

, et al. Altered oral and gut microbiota and its association with SARS-CoV-2 viral load in COVID-19 patients during hospitalization. Biofilms Microbiomes. 2021;7:1-9.

79.

Segala

Bavaro

Di Gennaro

, et al. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 epidemic on antimicrobial resistance: a literature review. Viruses. 2021;13:2110.

Revealing In Silico that Bacteria’s Outer Membrane Proteins may Help our Bodies Replicate and Carry Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Method

Results and Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Funding:

Declaration of Conflicting Interests:

Author Contributions

References