Back

Applying distinct CDMS strategies to observe non-classical virus capsid assembly

Thiede, L.; Haris, A.; Damjanovic, T.; Kung, J. C. K.; Mueller-Guhl, J.; Pogan, R.; Rothe, J.; Schultze, W.; Ugelstad, S. S. A.; Eatough, D.; Giles, K.; Preece, S.; Richardson, K.; Ujma, J.; Uetrecht, C.

2026-05-01 biochemistry
10.64898/2026.04.29.721378 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In conventional native mass spectrometry (MS), one faces severe limitations when challenged with heterogenous, high mass samples, commonly failing to resolve clear peak distributions and thus mass determination. Charge detection MS (CDMS) has emerged as a premier method to analyze these samples by determining mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) and charge (z) simultaneously. Here, the two currently available commercialized CDMS systems, the Orbitrap-based Direct Mass Technology (DMT) and the electrostatic linear ion trap (ELIT)-based Xevo CDMS are applied to human norovirus capsids from two different strains, GI.1 Norwalk and GII.17 Kawasaki. The norovirus capsid is highly heterogenous due to N-terminal processing on the repeating subunits that it is built from and commonly forms T = 3 and sometimes T = 4 particles. Both CDMS approaches were able to determine similar masses in both strains. GII.17 Kawasaki exhibits both T = 3 and T = 4 particles, though the Xevo CDMS measurements were closer to the theoretical mass than the DMT instrument. Interestingly, GII.17 Kawasaki also displayed non-classical mass distributions with high abundance in-between T = 3 and T = 4 which was then confirmed by cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM), demonstrating an oval capsid shape. GI.1 Norwalk displays a wide mass distribution in both instruments that exceeds the theoretical T = 3 mass by 8-10 %. Proteomics and native MS experiments suggest possible interactions with a protein from the expression system. This study demonstrates the capabilities of two distinct CDMS methodologies on two viral capsids and presents the first non-classical capsid assembly in a GII.17 noroviral capsid.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.1%
2
Journal of Proteome Research
215 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.2%
3
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
4
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
158 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Analytica Chimica Acta
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.6%
7
The Analyst
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
9
PROTEOMICS
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
10
Journal of Proteomics
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.7%
12
JACS Au
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
13
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.0%
14
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
15
Talanta
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
16
Clinical Proteomics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
17
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
100 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 74%
0.8%
19
Chemical Communications
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Water Research
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.7%
22
Angewandte Chemie International Edition
81 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
26
ACS Central Science
66 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
27
ACS Nano
99 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
28
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%