Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Mechanical strength of RNA knot in Zika virus protects against cellular defenses

Nature Chemical Biology volume 17, pages 975–981 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Unusual knot-like structures recently discovered in viral exoribonuclease-resistant RNAs (xrRNAs) prevent digestion by host RNases to create subgenomic RNAs enhancing infection and pathogenicity. xrRNAs are proposed to prevent digestion through mechanical resistance to unfolding. However, their unfolding force has not been measured, and the factors determining RNase resistance are unclear. Furthermore, how these knots fold remains unknown. Unfolding a Zika virus xrRNA with optical tweezers revealed that it was the most mechanically stable RNA yet observed. The knot formed by threading the 5′ end into a three-helix junction before pseudoknot interactions closed a ring around it. The pseudoknot and tertiary contacts stabilizing the threaded 5′ end were both required to generate extreme force resistance, whereas removing a 5′-end contact produced a low-force knot lacking RNase resistance. These results indicate mechanical resistance plays a central functional role, with the fraction of molecules forming extremely high-force knots determining the RNase resistance level.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Single-molecule force spectroscopy of Zika virus xrRNA.
Fig. 2: FECs in presence of antisense oligos.
Fig. 3: Unfolding and refolding pathways.
Fig. 4: Folding of mutants with low XR.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data supporting the findings of this work have been deposited in Figshare (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14544495). Source data are provided with this paper.

References

  1. Steckelberg, A.-L. et al. A folded viral noncoding RNA blocks host cell exoribonucleases through a conformationally dynamic RNA structure. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 6404–6409 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Chapman, E. G. et al. The structural basis of pathogenic subgenomic flavivirus RNA (sfRNA) production. Science 344, 307–310 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Akiyama, B. M. et al. Zika virus produces noncoding RNAs using a multi-pseudoknot structure that confounds a cellular exonuclease. Science 354, 1148–1152 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Steckelberg, A.-L., Vicens, Q., Costantino, D. A., Nix, J. C. & Kieft, J. S. The crystal structure of a Polerovirus exoribonuclease-resistant RNA shows how diverse sequences are integrated into a conserved fold. RNA 26, 1767–1776 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Pijlman, G. P. et al. A highly structured, nuclease-resistant, noncoding RNA produced by flaviviruses is required for pathogenicity. Cell Host Microbe 4, 579–591 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Funk, A. et al. RNA structures required for production of subgenomic flavivirus RNA. J. Virol. 84, 11407–11417 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Dilweg, I. W., Gultyaev, A. P. & Olsthoorn, R. C. Structural features of an Xrn1-resistant plant virus RNA. RNA Biol. 16, 838–845 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gunawardene, C. D., Newburn, L. R. & White, K. A. A 212-nt long RNA structure in the tobacco necrosis virus-D RNA genome is resistant to Xrn degradation. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, 9329–9342 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Steckelberg, A.-L., Vicens, Q. & Kieft, J. S. Exoribonuclease-resistant RNAs exist within both coding and noncoding subgenomic RNAs. mBio 9, e02461 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Jinek, M., Coyle, S. M. & Doudna, J. A. Coupled 5′ nucleotide recognition and processivity in Xrn1-mediated mRNA decay. Mol. Cell 41, 600–608 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Nagarajan, V. K., Jones, C. I., Newbury, S. F. & Green, P. J. XRN 5′→3′ exoribonucleases: structure, mechanisms and functions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1829, 590–603 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Bavia, L., Mosimann, A. L. P., Aoki, M. N. & Duarte dos Santos, C. N. A glance at subgenomic flavivirus RNAs and microRNAs in flavivirus infections. Virol. J. 13, 84 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Moon, S. L. et al. A noncoding RNA produced by arthropod-borne flaviviruses inhibits the cellular exoribonuclease XRN1 and alters host mRNA stability. RNA 18, 2029–2040 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Schnettler, E. et al. Noncoding flavivirus RNA displays RNA interference suppressor activity in insect and mammalian cells. J. Virol. 86, 13486–13500 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Manokaran, G. et al. Dengue subgenomic RNA binds TRIM25 to inhibit interferon expression for epidemiological fitness. Science 350, 217–221 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Pompon, J. et al. Dengue subgenomic flaviviral RNA disrupts immunity in mosquito salivary glands to increase virus transmission. PLoS Path. 13, e1006535 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Göertz, G. P. et al. Subgenomic flavivirus RNA binds the mosquito DEAD/H-box helicase ME31B and determines Zika virus transmission by Aedes aegypti. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 19136–19144 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gould, E. A. & Solomon, T. Pathogenic flaviviruses. Lancet 371, 500–509 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. MacFadden, A. et al. Mechanism and structural diversity of exoribonuclease-resistant RNA structures in flaviviral RNAs. Nat. Commun. 9, 119 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Niu, X. et al. Molecular mechanisms underlying the extreme mechanical anisotropy of the flaviviral exoribonuclease-resistant RNAs (xrRNAs). Nat. Commun. 11, 5496 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Ritchie, D. B. & Woodside, M. T. Probing the structural dynamics of proteins and nucleic acids with optical tweezers. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 34, 43–51 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang, M. D., Yin, H., Landick, R., Gelles, J. & Block, S. M. Stretching DNA with optical tweezers. Biophys. J. 72, 1335–1346 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Onoa, B. et al. Identifying kinetic barriers to mechanical unfolding of the T. thermophila ribozyme. Science 299, 1892–1895 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Li, P. T. X., Bustamante, C. & Tinoco, I. Real-time control of the energy landscape by force directs the folding of RNA molecules. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 7039–7044 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Greenleaf, W. J., Frieda, K. L., Foster, D. A. N., Woodside, M. T. & Block, S. M. Direct observation of hierarchical folding in single riboswitch aptamers. Science 319, 630–633 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ritchie, D. B., Foster, D. A. N. & Woodside, M. T. Programmed −1 frameshifting efficiency correlates with RNA pseudoknot conformational plasticity, not resistance to mechanical unfolding. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 16167–16172 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Halma, M. T. J., Ritchie, D. B., Cappellano, T. R., Neupane, K. & Woodside, M. T. Complex dynamics under tension in a high-efficiency frameshift stimulatory structure. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 19500–19505 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Anthony, P. C., Perez, C. F., García-García, C. & Block, S. M. Folding energy landscape of the thiamine pyrophosphate riboswitch aptamer. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 1485–1489 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Chen, G., Chang, K.-Y., Chou, M.-Y., Bustamante, C. & Tinoco, I. Triplex structures in an RNA pseudoknot enhance mechanical stability and increase efficiency of –1 ribosomal frameshifting. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 12706–12711 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Smith, S. B., Cui, Y. & Bustamante, C. Overstretching B-DNA: the elastic response of individual double-stranded and single-stranded DNA molecules. Science 271, 795–799 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Woodside, M. T. et al. Nanomechanical measurements of the sequence-dependent folding landscapes of single nucleic acid hairpins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 6190–6195 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Thirumalai, D., Lee, N., Woodson, S. A. & Klimov, D. Early events in RNA folding. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 52, 751–762 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Suma, A., Coronel, L., Bussi, G. & Micheletti, C. Directional translocation resistance of Zika xrRNA. Nat. Commun. 11, 3749 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kieft, J. S., Rabe, J. L. & Chapman, E. G. New hypotheses derived from the structure of a flaviviral Xrn1-resistant RNA: Conservation, folding, and host adaptation. RNA Biol. 12, 1169–1177 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Villordo, S. M., Filomatori, C. V., Sánchez-Vargas, I., Blair, C. D. & Gamarnik, A. V. Dengue virus RNA structure specialization facilitates host adaptation. PLoS Path. 11, e1004604 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Chapman, E. G., Moon, S. L., Wilusz, J. & Kieft, J. S. RNA structures that resist degradation by Xrn1 produce a pathogenic Dengue virus RNA. eLife 3, e01892 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Yin, H. et al. Transcription against an applied force. Science 270, 1653–1657 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Liu, T. et al. Direct measurement of the mechanical work during translocation by the ribosome. eLife 3, e03406 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Ziegler, F. et al. Knotting and unknotting of a protein in single molecule experiments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 7533–7538 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Bustamante, A. et al. The energy cost of polypeptide knot formation and its folding consequences. Nat. Commun. 8, 1581 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. San Martín, Á. et al. Knots can impair protein degradation by ATP-dependent proteases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 9864–9869 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Romani, A. M. Magnesium homeostasis in mammalian cells. Front Biosci. 12, 308–331 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Neupane, K., Yu, H., Foster, D. A. N., Wang, F. & Woodside, M. T. Single-molecule force spectroscopy of the add adenine riboswitch relates folding to regulatory mechanism. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, 7677–7687 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Neuman, K. C. & Block, S. M. Optical trapping. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 2787–2809 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Seol, Y., Skinner, G. M. & Visscher, K. Elastic properties of a single-stranded charged homopolymeric ribonucleotide. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 118102 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Saenger, W. Principles of Nucleic Acid Structure (Springer, 1984).

  47. Halma, M. T. J., Ritchie, D. B. & Woodside, M. T. Conformational Shannon entropy of mRNA structures from force spectroscopy measurements predicts the efficiency of -1 programmed ribosomal frameshift stimulation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 038102 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Abramoff, M. D., Magalhaes, P. J. & Ram, S. J. Image processing with ImageJ. Biophotonics Int. 11, 36–42 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Kieft for helpful discussions about xrRNAs and D. Ritchie for assistance in designing the optical tweezers assay. This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant reference number MOP–142449 (to M.T.W), Alberta Innovates iCORE Strategic Chair (to M.T.W.) and the National Research Council Canada (to M.T.W.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Meng Zhao & Michael T. Woodside

Authors
  1. Meng Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael T. Woodside
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.Z. and M.T.W. designed the research. M.Z. prepared samples and performed measurements. M.Z. and M.T.W. analyzed the data. M.Z. and M.T.W. wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael T. Woodside.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Chemical Biology thanks Pan T. X. Li and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Effects of anti-sense oligo 1 on SMFS of Zika virus xrRNA.

a, Most unfolding FECs (90 ± 2%) show the extreme mechanical stability of Ir but no preceding ~20-pN unfolding event, confirming that P4 unfolds prior to Ir. Dashed lines show WLC fits to each state, cyan boxes show overstretching region, inset shows cartoon of structure before unfolding. b, A very few FECs (~0.3%) show unfolding forces in the range ~25–50 pN indicative of tertiary structure, and ΔLc consistent with state I5b, where the 5′ end is threaded but the ring is not closed. c, Some FECs (10% ± 2%) show unfolding of secondary structure only, consistent with state I1b. d, Proposed structures of Ir, I5b and I1b with oligo 1 bound. Contour length changes expected from unfolding each structure are listed in Supplementary Table 3. e, Most refolding FECs show the formation of I1b; in some cases, transitions into Ir and/or I5b are seen directly (for example in Fig. 2b), in other cases, they occur at sufficiently low force to remain undetected. f, Unfolding (black) and refolding (red) pathways in the presence of oligo 1. Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities. For comparison, the states and transitions prevented by binding of oligo 1 are shown in grey.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Effects of anti-sense oligo 2 on SMFS of Zika virus xrRNA.

a, Under half of FECs (41 ± 5%) show unfolding from I5b, with the 5′ end threaded but PK prevented by oligo binding. Dashed lines show WLC fits to different states, inset and cartoon show structure before unfolding with oligo 2 bound. Contour length changes expected from unfolding each structure are listed in Supplementary Table 3. b, Over half of FECs (59 ± 5%) show unfolding from I1b. c, States I1b and I5b can be distinguished by both their lengths (Supplementary Table 3) and unfolding forces. d, Most refolding FECs show the formation of I1b; in some cases, transitions into I5b are seen directly (for example in Fig. 2b), in other cases, they occur at sufficiently low force to remain undetected. e, Unfolding (black) and refolding (red) pathways in the presence of oligo 2. Identification of I5b indirectly proves the existence of the putative intermediate I5 (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Fig. 2). Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities. For comparison, the states and transitions blocked by oligo 2 binding are shown in grey.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Effects of anti-sense oligo 3 on SMFS of Zika virus xrRNA.

a, b, All of the unfolding (black) and refolding (red) FECs show the low-force transitions characteristic of secondary structure only, with length changes indicative of state I3. Dashed lines show WLC fits to different states, inset shows structure before unfolding with oligo 3 bound. c, Unfolding (top panel) and refolding (bottom panel) force distributions show low hysteresis characteristic of helix unfolding/refolding. d, Unfolding (black) and refolding (red) pathways in the presence of oligo 3. Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities. For comparison, the states and transitions blocked by oligo 3 binding are shown in grey.

Extended Data Fig. 4 SMFS of Zika virus xrRNA in the absence of Mg2+.

a, Two-thirds of unfolding FECs (~67%) show low-force transitions consistent with the unfolding of I1 (Supplementary Fig. 2b). Dashed lines show WLC fits to each state, inset shows structure before unfolding. b, One-third of unfolding FECs (~33%) show high-force transitions consistent with state I0PK′ containing a non-native pseudoknot that inhibits the folding of P4. c, All refolding FECs show sequential formation of I4→I2→I1, indicating I1 is Mg2+-independent and suggesting I0PK′ is derived from I1. d, Cartoon of the I0PK′→I1PK′ transition. Expected contour length changes listed in Supplementary Table 3. e, Unfolding (Fu) and refolding (Fr) force distributions of the states seen in FECs. High unfolding forces for I1PK′ indicate the presence of tertiary interactions. f, Unfolding and refolding forces for I4, I2 and I1 show a small stabilization effect from Mg2+. Center line indicates median value, box edges indicate 25th and 75th percentiles, whiskers indicate 5th and 95th percentiles. N = 283, 287, and 285 respectively for unfolding I1, I2, and I4 without Mg2+; N = 339, 328, and 352 for unfolding with Mg2+; N = 386, 386, 369 for refolding without Mg2+; and N = 477, 475, and 476 for refolding with Mg2+. g, Unfolding (black) and refolding (red) pathways in the absence of Mg2+. Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities. For comparison, the states and transitions dependent on Mg2+ are shown in grey.

Extended Data Fig. 5 SMFS of the C22G mutant.

a, Roughly 15% of unfolding FECs (black) show low forces consistent with secondary structure only, in state I1′, which is akin to I1 (Supplementary Fig. 2b) but with shorter P2 and longer P3. Dashed lines show WLC fits to each state, inset shows structure before unfolding. b, Roughly 17% of unfolding FECs (black) show a moderately high-force state Im1 consistent with partial formation of 5′-TC and the non-native pseudoknot PK′ but without any 5′-end threading. Refolding FECs (red) show a pathway similar to I1 (Supplementary Fig. 3a), although with shorter P2 and longer P3, indicating Im1 derives from I1′. c, Roughly 15% of unfolding FECs (black) show the same extreme stability as for the wild-type ring-knot, indicating this mutant forms a ring-knot analogous to the wild-type knot, with full 5′-TC and extreme mechanical resistance. d, Roughly 53% of unfolding (black) and refolding FECs (red) show low forces consistent with state I1″ (inset), akin to I1, containing secondary structure only but with lengthened P2. e, Proposed structures of the states identified in (a-d). Base-pairing of G22 with C44 prevents native 5′-TC but allows I1′–I4′ and Im1 (with shorter P2 and longer P3) to form. Alternatively, base-pairing of G22 with C9 lengthens P2 but leaves C44 accessible for native 5′-TC formation, allowing formation of mutant states Nm1 and Irm1 containing a mechanically resistant ring-knot, in addition to intermediates I1″, I2″, and I4″. Contour length changes expected from unfolding each structure are listed in Supplementary Table 4.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Effects of anti-sense oligo 3 on C22G mutant and evidence for G22:C9 base-pairing.

a, b, All (a) unfolding and (b) refolding FECs measured in the presence of oligo 3 show secondary structure only. c, Without oligo 3 (red), two sub-populations are seen, with different average contour length changes (top) and unfolding forces (bottom). High-force transitions have lengths inconsistent with expectations for G22:C44 pairing (blue, left) but consistent with expectations for G22:C9 pairing (blue, right). As expected, ΔLc for unfolding P1 + P3 without oligo 3 (Supplementary Table 4) is anti-correlated with the change in ΔLc for P2 between the two sub-populations, being longer for G22:C44 pairing. With oligo 3 present (black), only one population is seen, matching the results for G22:C9 pairing. Fu is expected to be higher for P2 with G22:C9 pairing because two extra base-pairs are predicted by mfold to make P2 ~5.7 kcal/mol more stable. Note that these bar graphs restate results presented in Fig. 4c and Supplementary Table 4; error bars represent standard error on the mean. d, Proposed structures for intermediate states with oligo 3 present. Contour length changes expected from unfolding each structure are listed in Supplementary Table 4.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Unfolding and refolding pathways for C22G mutant.

The two possible base-pairings for the mutated base (G22), with either C9 or C44, lead to heterogeneous pathways. Superscripts ‘e’ and ‘s’ denote respectively elongated and shortened versions of a helix relative to the native ones. Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities.

Extended Data Fig. 8 XR activity and SMFS of U4C mutant.

a, Measurements of XR activity show U4C mutant has no resistance to digestion by Xrn1 (to within 2% detection limit), in contrast to strong resistance of WT xrRNA (~80%). Note that some of the input RNA remains undigested because of incomplete loading of Xrn1. Two replicates are shown out of 3 independent measurements yielding the same result of ~0% resistance for U4C. b, Just over half (52%) of FECs show folding (red) into and unfolding (black) out of a native-like ring-knot. c, Most of the remaining FECs (44%) show folding (red) into and unfolding (black) out of intermediate I1. d, A very few FECs (1%) show folding (red) into and unfolding (black) out of an intermediate with the 5′ end natively threaded but the ring still open. e, A very few FECs (~3%) for U4C show folding (red) into and unfolding (black) out of a non-native state (I6). A speculative model of I6 involving non-native 5′-TC is illustrated (inset, dashed black line: G3:C22), but further study is needed. f, With oligo 2 blocking PK, most FECs (73 ± 7%) unfolded from the threaded intermediate I5bm2, whose unfolding force was lower than for the analogous state in the WT xrRNA (Supplementary Fig. 6a) because of disrupted 5′-TC. g, A minority of FECs (27 ± 7%) with oligo 2 unfolded from I1. h, Proposed structures of states identified in (b–g). Contour length changes expected from unfolding each structure are listed in Supplementary Table 5. i, Pathways for unfolding (black) and refolding (red). Arrow thicknesses indicate pathway probabilities.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–4 and Tables 1–5.

Reporting Summary

Source data

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 8

Unprocessed gel images.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, M., Woodside, M.T. Mechanical strength of RNA knot in Zika virus protects against cellular defenses. Nat Chem Biol 17, 975–981 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-021-00829-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-021-00829-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing