SYMMETRY AND MORPHOLOGY OF VIRUSES AS THE BASIS OF SPATIAL ORGANIZATION, EVOLUTION, PATHOGENICITY, AND MODERN BIOMEDICAL NANOTECHNOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

ABSTRACT

Symmetry and morphology of viruses are currently regarded as one of the key aspects of virology, since it is the spatial organization of the capsid and nucleocapsid that determines the stability of virions in the external environment, the efficiency of packaging and transmission of genetic material, and the characteristics of their interactions with the host cell and the immune system. At the same time, the existence of complex, pleomorphic, and giant viruses demonstrates the plasticity of these principles and their evolutionary modification depending on transmission routes and replication features. Understanding the fundamental role of symmetry in the organization of viral particles has not only theoretical significance but also direct practical implications

Keywords: Symmetry, morphology of viruses, capsid.

The morphology and symmetry of viruses reflect fundamental principles of their molecular organization and evolutionary adaptation. Virions, possessing extremely limited genetic material, are compelled to achieve maximal structural and functional “economy”: from a small number of proteins and a nucleic acid there is formed a stable yet dynamic complex capable of self-assembly, genome protection, and efficient transmission between cells and organisms [1, 4].

The classical symmetry types of viral capsids–icosahedral and helical–are not merely geometric descriptions; they represent universal architectural solutions that allow viruses to:

- minimize genome length through the repeated use of the same protein subunits;

- ensure high packing density of the nucleic acid;

- combine mechanical robustness of the capsid with the required mobility and the ability to undergo controlled disassembly in the host cell [5, 11].

The existence of complex, pleomorphic, and giant viruses complements this picture, demonstrating that symmetry principles may be modified and combined depending on genome size, transmission routes, target tissues, and specific features of the replication cycle [8, 14]. An understanding of viral morphology and symmetry has not only fundamental, but also substantial applied value­–for diagnostics, vaccine development, antiviral agents, and biotechnological applications.

1. Icosahedral Symmetry: Triangulation Number and Quasi-equivalence

Icosahedral symmetry is one of the most widespread organizational types of the capsid in viruses of animals, plants, and bacteria [5, 7]. A regular icosahedron has 20 identical triangular faces and 12 vertices with fivefold axes of symmetry. Such geometry provides an optimal ratio of volume to surface area, which is critically important for a compact and robust “container” for the viral genome.

The limited length of the viral genome dictates the need for multiple use of one or a few capsid proteins. To describe the architecture of an icosahedral capsid, the triangulation number (T) is used; it reflects into how many identical elementary triangles each face of the icosahedron is subdivided. In the simplest case, T = 1, and the capsid then contains 60 identical subunits (three subunits per face) occupying fully equivalent positions [6]. An example is provided by viruses of the family Parvoviridae (T = 1).

With increasing capsid size, the number of subunits grows, yet the virus generally cannot “afford” to encode many fundamentally different capsid proteins. It becomes necessary to use the same protein in slightly different structural environments­–in penta- and hexavalent positions. To explain this, the concept of quasi-equivalence was introduced: subunits of the same protein occupy several positions that are similar in energy and conformation, forming pentamers (around fivefold axes) and hexamers (around “sixfold” regions of symmetry) [6].

Thus, at T > 1 large and robust shells are formed without a substantial increase in the complexity of the protein composition.

Icosahedral organization of the capsid provides:

- high mechanical stability (important in the case of high internal pressure of packaged DNA in phages);

- the ability to self-assemble from many identical subunits;

- efficient use of limited genetic resources.

2. Helical (Filamentous) Symmetry

Helical (filamentous) symmetry is characteristic primarily of viruses in which capsid proteins are arranged in a regular helix around the nucleic acid strand. This organization is particularly typical of plant RNA viruses and of nucleocapsids in a number of vertebrate viruses [2, 3].

The principal parameters of a helical structure are:

- pitch of the helix–the distance along the axis corresponding to one complete turn;

- number of subunits per turn;

- radius of the helix (inner and outer);

- angle of rotation between neighboring subunits.

In the classical model of tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), the capsid protein forms a rigid rod-like nucleocapsid: about 16.3 subunits per turn, and the RNA passes through the central channel [10]. The length of the virion is thereby proportional to the genome length, while the diameter remains practically constant. This creates a “modular” packaging system: the addition of one turn corresponds to incorporation of a defined number of nucleotides.

Helical symmetry is realized:

- in “naked” capsids: many filamentous plant viruses (Potyviridae and others), filamentous bacteriophages; such particles are often rigid or semi-rigid, with a fixed diameter and variable length;

- in nucleocapsids with an envelope: paramyxoviruses (Paramyxoviridae), orthomyxoviruses (Orthomyxoviridae, including influenza virus), rhabdoviruses (Rhabdoviridae, rabies virus), and filoviruses (Filoviridae, Ebola and Marburg viruses) possess a flexible helical nucleocapsid enclosed in a lipoprotein envelope [15]. On the surface of the envelope are located glycoproteins (spikes) that determine interaction with the host cell and viral tropism.

Helical symmetry provides:

- high adaptability to genome length (particularly in the case of variable RNA length);

- relative flexibility of particles, which can facilitate passage through tissues and barriers;

- simplicity of nucleocapsid self-assembly due to repetitive protein–RNA and protein–protein interactions [11].

3. Complex, Pleomorphic, and Unusual Morphologies

In addition to classical icosahedral and helical structures, there exist viruses with complex and “atypical” morphology. These forms reflect increased complexity of the genome, replication cycle, and interactions with the host cell.

Poxviruses (Poxviridae), including variola virus and vaccinia virus, are large DNA viruses with brick-shaped or ellipsoidal virions (200-300 × 150-250 nm) [12]. Their features include:

- absence of simple regular icosahedral or helical symmetry at the level of the entire virion;

- presence of a complex multilayered structure: outer envelope, protein–lipid components, lateral “bodies,” and an internal ovoid core containing DNA;

- a large number of structural and enzymatic proteins that ensure an autonomous (cytoplasmic) replication cycle.

Many bacteriophages exhibit complex morphology: an icosahedral head containing DNA, a helical tail, a baseplate, and tail fibers, each part possessing its own symmetry (head–icosahedral, tail–cylindrical/helical, baseplate–often sixfold symmetry) [4].

Such modular organization reflects functional compartmentalization: genome storage, cell attachment, and nucleic acid injection.

Filamentous and pleomorphic viruses illustrate a high degree of shape plasticity:

- filoviruses (Filoviridae, Ebola and Marburg viruses) form long (up to 800–1400 nm) filamentous particles, including U- or 6-shaped forms, with a diameter of 80–100 nm [14];

- many influenza viruses (Orthomyxoviridae) are capable of forming spherical, filamentous, and irregular virions depending on the conditions of replication and budding [15];

- in a number of plant viruses (Potyviridae and others), virion length reaches hundreds of nanometers with a diameter of 10–20 nm.

Pleomorphism may result both from particular features of assembly and budding and from adaptation to various tissues and conditions within the host organism [4].

Thus, the study of viral symmetry and morphology has important practical significance for medicine, veterinary science, biotechnology, and biosafety assessment.

Knowledge of the spatial organization of capsids and nucleocapsids makes it possible to identify immunodominant epitopes on the surface of icosahedral and enveloped viruses [13]; to develop structure-based vaccines (virus-like particles, VLPs) that reproduce the symmetry and morphology of the native virion but lack infectivity.

Viral capsids and nucleocapsids, owing to their high degree of order and predictable symmetry, are used as nanoscale scaffolds for the construction of three-dimensional nanostructures and biomaterials [9] and as templates for organizing functional layers (catalysts, electrode materials, drug carriers) with precise control over the spatial arrangement of components [11].

The relationship between symmetry type, genome structure, and transmission routes of viruses is important for viral genome analysis and risk assessment of the emergence of new pathogens, including through the use of structural–functional criteria; for the development of control strategies for especially dangerous infections (poxviruses, filoviruses, giant viruses), where morphology and structure are closely related to virion stability in the external environment and to transmission characteristics.

Therefore, viral symmetry and morphology represent not only a convenient language for describing viral structure, but also a key to understanding the principles of organization of viral genomes and proteins, the mechanisms of self-assembly, and interactions with the host cell. This knowledge is directly translated into applied fields–from laboratory diagnostics to vaccine design and nanobiotechnology–making viral morphology and symmetry one of the central concepts of modern virology.

References:

1. Borisov L. B. Medical Microbiology, Virology, Immunology: Textbook. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2016. 792 p.
2. Viruses and Viral Infections of Humans and Animals: A Handbook of Virology / Ed. by D. K. Lvov. 3rd ed. Moscow: Medical Information Agency, 2013. 1200 p.
3. Medical Microbiology, Virology, and Immunology. Atlas-Guide / Ed. by A. S. Bykov, V. V. Zverev. Moscow: Medical Information Agency, 2018. 416 p.
4. Pinevich A. V., Sirotkin A. K. Virology: Textbook. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2020. 444 p.
5. Flint S. J., Enquist L. W., Racaniello V. R., Skalka A. M. Principles of Virology. 4th ed. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 2015. 1060 p.
6. Johnson J. E., Speir J. A. Quasi-equivalent viruses: a paradigm for protein assemblies // J. Mol. Biol. 2015. Vol. 427, No. 21. P. 3446–3465.
7. Knipe D. M., Howley P. M. (eds.). Fields Virology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2020. 2603 p.
8. Koonin E. V., Dolja V. V. A virocentric perspective on the evolution of life // Curr. Opin. Virol. 2013. Vol. 3, No. 5. P. 546–557.
9. Liu Y., Zhang W., Zhu Y., Wang C. Architecturing hierarchical function layers on self-assembled viral templates as 3D nano-array electrodes for integrated Li-ion microbatteries // Nano Lett. 2013. Vol. 13, No. 1. P. 293–300.
10. Maclachlan N. J., Dubovi E. J. (eds.). Fenner's Veterinary Virology. 5th ed. Amsterdam: Academic Press, 2017. 602 p.
11. Mateu M. G. Assembly, stability and dynamics of virus capsids // Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2013. Vol. 531, No. 1–2. P. 65–79.
12. Moss B. Poxviridae // Fields Virology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2021.
13. Murray P. R., Rosenthal K. S., Pfaller M. A. Medical Microbiology. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2020. 848 p.
14. Raoult D., Forterre P. Redefining viruses: lessons from Mimivirus // Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2008. Vol. 6, No. 4. P. 315–319.
15. Taubenberger J. K., Kash J. C. Influenza virus evolution, host adaptation, and pandemic formation // Cell Host Microbe. 2010. Vol. 7, No. 6. P. 440–451.