Viruses 2012, 4, 363-382; doi:10.3390/v4030363
The Coronavirus E Protein: Assembly and Beyond
Travis R. Ruch and Carolyn E. Machamer *
Department of Cell Biology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 725 N. Wolfe St.,
Baltimore, MD 21205, USA; E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: email@example.com;
Tel.: +1-410-955-1809; Fax: +1-410-955-4129.
Received: 24 December 2011; in revised form: 18 February 2012 / Accepted: 27 February 2012 /
Published: 8 March 2012
Abstract: The coronavirus E protein is a small membrane protein that has an important
role in the assembly of virions. Recent studies have indicated that the E protein has
functions during infection beyond assembly, including in virus egress and in the host stress
response. Additionally, the E protein has ion channel activity, interacts with host proteins,
and may have multiple membrane topologies. The goal of this review is to highlight the
properties and functions of the E protein, and speculate on how they may be related.
Keywords: envelope protein; coronavirus assembly; ion channel; Golgi complex;
membrane protein topology
Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped viruses with large positive-sense single-stranded RNA
genomes. CoVs infect a variety of mammalian and avian species, and can cause serious disease in
humans, as exemplified during the 2002–2003 outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome
The CoV E protein has a well-established role in the assembly of virions where it may induce
membrane curvature or aid in membrane scission. Recent studies have expanded the role of CoV E
beyond assembly. CoV E has ion channel activity in vitro. CoV E also is critical for the efficient
trafficking of virions through the secretory pathway, a function that may be related to its ion channel
activity. The CoV E protein has recently been shown to inhibit the host cell stress response,
implicating it in pathogenesis. New interacting partners for E have been identified that expand the role
Viruses 2012, 4
of the protein during infection. How all of these potential properties of CoV E fit together to impact its
function(s) is the focus of this review.
The E protein, along with N, S, and M, are the major coronavirus structural proteins (Figure 1A,B).
The N protein is a soluble protein and packages the RNA genome to form the nucleocapsid. The S
protein has a single transmembrane domain, is found in the virion envelope, and serves as the
attachment and fusion protein. The M protein has three transmembrane domains, is the most abundant
protein in the virion envelope, and directs the assembly process through interactions with the other
structural proteins (reviewed in [1,2]). CoV E is a small (76–109 amino acids) integral membrane
protein, and has a single predicted hydrophobic domain (HD). It is usually encoded as the second or
third message in a bi- or tri-cistronic mRNA [3,4]. The E protein is targeted to the Golgi region in
infected cells and also when expressed from cDNA [5–9]. The membrane topology of CoV E
is of considerable debate, having been reported as transmembrane or a membrane hairpin (see
below) [5,10–12]. There are conserved membrane proximal cysteine residues that are targets for
palmitoylation [7,13–15]. There are also conserved proline residues in the C-terminal tail
(Figure 1C,D). Other than these similarities there is large variation in the primary sequence of the E
proteins, which differ in size and sequence among virus groups often having <30% identity
(Figure 1C). How or if these differences affect protein function is not known.
Figure 1. Primary structure of the Coronavirus (CoV) E protein. (A) A cartoon depicting a
CoV virion. The structural proteins are labeled. (B) The three major CoV structural
proteins in the virion envelope. Oligosaccharides are shown on S and M. A single topology
is shown for E, see below for discussion on E protein topology. (C) A multiple sequence
alignment of several different CoV E proteins. The hydrophobic domain (HD) is bracketed.
The CoV genera (alpha, beta, and gamma) are denoted on the left of the multiple sequence
alignment. Positively charged residues are shown in blue, negatively charged residues are
shown in red, and polar uncharged residues are shown in yellow. The conserved Cys and
Pro residues are labeled with a bracket or an asterisk, respectively. The multiple sequence
alignment of CoV E proteins was carried out with ClusalW2 at the European
Bioinformatics Institutes server, and Jalview software version 2 was used to generate the
figure [16,17]. (D) Cartoon depiction of the E protein with the hydrophobic domain shown
as a cylinder and the conserved Cys and Pro residues labeled.
Viruses 2012, 4
Figure 1. Cont.
3. CoV E and Virus Assembly
Unlike many other enveloped viruses, CoVs assemble and bud intracellularly at the ER-Golgi
intermediate compartment (ERGIC) (Figure 2A) [18,19]. One of the early discoveries in CoV
assembly was that formation of the virion envelope required only expression of M and E and not N.
Originally observed for mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) , this property has been observed for
infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) , transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) , and bovine
coronavirus (BCoV) . There has been considerable debate about the requirements for SARS-CoV
envelope formation, with reports that M and N , M and E , and even M alone  can drive
production of released vesicles. These results raise an interesting point about the efficacy of measuring
virus-like particle (VLP) production in different cell types and expression systems. It is important to
note that membrane proteins that form multimers can be secreted from cells in microvesicles .
Thus, overexpression of viral membrane proteins may lead to release in microvesicles, complicating
the interpretation of VLP experiments. Additionally, the original reports for MHV, IBV, TGEV, and
BCoV all used vaccinia-based expression systems. What has recently become apparent, at least for
MHV , SARS CoV , and IBV , is that when using transient transfection to express the
proteins from plasmids, the presence of N can greatly increase VLP yield. This result likely means that
while not necessarily required for envelope formation, N plays an important role in forming a complete
virion. This makes intuitive sense, and explains why empty virions are not readily purified from
infected cells. However, the fact that M and E are sufficient for envelope formation is important
information when considering the mechanism of assembly.
Viruses 2012, 4
Figure 2. CoVs assemble and bud intracellularly at the ERGIC. (A) Newly formed virions
bud into the lumen of the ERGIC and traverse the secretory pathway for egress.
(B) Potential roles for E in assembly. The E protein is shown in orange and the M protein is
shown in green. CoV E could help to bend membranes or play a role in membrane scission.
The ability of E and M to drive VLP formation clearly shows that E is important for assembly, but
the mechanism is not well understood. The IBV E and M proteins interact via their cytoplasmic
tails [28,29]. These interactions may be important for particle assembly . Additionally, mutations
introduced into the C-terminal tail of MHV E produced virions that were unstable, elongated, and may
have resulted from failed scission events . However, a version of IBV E with a heterologous HD
was able to drive VLP formation and produce infectious virus, suggesting that the sequence of the HD
was not important for assembly [29,31]. The E protein may also promote membrane rearrangements.
MHV E can drive the intracellular formation of electron dense membranes derived from the ERGIC
when expressed alone in BHK-21 cells . Additionally, the HD of SARS-CoV E can drive the
in vitro tubulation of dimyristoyl phosphatidylcholine (DMPC) membranes , although a version of
the HD that was flanked with lysine residues did not have the same effect . All of these
observations point to a pivotal role for E in assembly, possibly in the scission of particles at the
ERGIC, or in inducing membrane curvature (Figure 2B). Thus, it was surprising when versions of
MHV, SARS-CoV, and TGEV lacking the E gene were shown to assemble virions, albeit to a lower
degree than the corresponding wild-type viruses [34–36]. Furthermore, the E proteins from IBV,
SARS-CoV, and BCoV could functionally replace MHV E in the context of infection, and TGEV E,
which cannot substitute for MHV E, needed only a single amino acid change to complement
MHVΔE . This suggests that sequence specific protein-protein interactions between M and E are
not required for assembly. One final piece of information came from the study of MHVΔE.
Viruses 2012, 4
Characterization of this virus showed that the production of infectious particles was severely
compromised. However, after serial passage, revertants arose with a partial duplication of the M gene
consisting of the N-terminus and all three transmembrane domains, but lacking most of the C-terminal
cytoplasmic tail . How a truncated version of M can functionally replace E is unknown, but it
could allow for spacing between M proteins and disrupt lateral interactions with the M tails. Thus, the
exact role of the E protein in assembly is not clear. It may be important for membrane curvature and/or
scission directly, or it might alter the spacing of the M protein, which in turn is important for these
effects. It is also worth noting the varied requirement for E in virion morphogenesis as revealed by the
deletion studies in TGEV, MHV, and SARS-CoV [34–36,39,40]. The E protein is essential for TGEV
production, but not necessary for MHV or SARS-CoV production. Why different viruses have a varied
requirement for the E protein is not understood. One possibility is that a specific accessory protein
could complement the assembly process in the absence of E for some CoVs.
4. Post-Translational Modifications
The best characterized post-translational modification (PTM) on E is the addition of palmitic acid
onto membrane proximal cysteine residues. This modification has been reported for the E proteins of
IBV , SARS-CoV , and MHV [14,15]. It is likely that palmitoylation alters the conformation of
the tail in relation to the membrane. Palmitoylation is not important for proper targeting of the E
protein [13–15]. The functional significance of palmitoylation has been well studied for MHV E,
where it is important for assembly as judged both by VLP production and production of infectious
virus [14,15]. These studies suggest that palmitoylation of E affects how it interacts with the M
protein, possibly by allowing the E protein to gain access to specific lipid microdomains at the site of
Two other PTMs on the E protein have been reported, but not studied in depth. One study
demonstrated that transiently expressed SARS-CoV E is N-glycosylated on asparagine 66 ;
however the functional relevance of this is not known since the residue is on a portion of the protein
reported to be in the cytoplasm (see discussion on topology below). Two studies have shown that
SARS-CoV E can be ubiquitinated [41,42]. There is currently no known functional role for the
ubiquitination of CoV E.
5. CoV E and the Cell Stress Response
There are varying reports on the role of the E protein in apoptosis. It was shown that overexpression
of MHV E and epitope tagged SARS-CoV E induced apoptosis in some cultured cell lines [43,44].
However, a recent study compared the stress response of cells infected with SARS-CoV to cells
infected with SARS-CoVΔE. Using a microarray-based approach, it was shown that the virus lacking
E induced a much more robust stress response than the wild-type virus. The virus lacking E also
caused a greater degree of apoptosis compared to the wild-type virus . This result, while contrary
to the studies using overexpression, shows that SARS-CoV E may be anti-apoptotic during infection.
The suppression of the host stress response by E may be important for down regulating the immune
response and promoting pathogenesis.
Viruses 2012, 4
6. Protein-Protein Interactions
While the interaction between E and M has been established (reviewed in ), two recent studies
have identified novel protein interactions with the SARS-CoV E protein. In the first study, cells were
infected with SARS-CoV that had the E gene replaced with a C-terminally tagged version of E.
Tandem affinity purification coupled with tandem mass spectrometry was carried out on the infected
cells to find interacting proteins. Several candidates were identified, and the interaction of SARS-CoV
E with the N-terminal ubiquitin-like domain-1 of SARS-CoV nsp3 protein was characterized. Nsp3
and CoV E colocalize during infection and nsp3 may be responsible for the ubiquitination of
SARS-CoV E . Another report identified the tight junction protein PALS1 as an interactor with the
C-terminal domain of SARS-CoV E . The authors speculate that this interaction is important in the
pathogenesis of SARS-CoV by promoting disassembly of tight junctions in lung epithelium after
primary infection .
Understanding the protein-protein interactions of CoV E is an important step in elucidating the
functions of the protein. Since the sequences of the E proteins are quite divergent, it will be interesting
to determine if different CoV E proteins interact with the same host proteins, or are able to elicit a
similar effect through interactions with other proteins.
7. The Ion Channel Activity of CoV E
Many viruses encode small proteins that have ion channel activity including Hepatitis C virus
(HCV) p7 [47,48], influenza M2 , and picornavirus 2B . All of these proteins are small (63–97
amino acids) and contain one or two transmembrane domains, making oligomerization a requirement
for channel activity . The role of these proteins varies between viruses, but all of them affect the
secretory pathway. The M2 protein of influenza virus is the best characterized ion channel. M2 is a 97
amino acid type III membrane protein that forms a tetrameric pH activated proton channel . The
first described role for this activity was in the entry of the virus. Influenza virus is endocytosed after
binding to a susceptible cell, and upon endosome acidification M2 facilitates the transfer of protons
into the virion interior to aid in uncoating of the genome . It was later appreciated that the M2 ion
channel is active in infected cells, where M2 has an effect on the secretory pathway by raising the pH
of the trans-Golgi network . For some strains of influenza virus, this activity prevents the
premature activation of the fusion protein [53–55].
HCV p7 is not as well studied as M2, but is relevant to the discussion because like CoVs, HCV
assembles intracellularly and must navigate the host secretory pathway. HCV p7 is targeted to the ER
and Golgi complex , where it is thought to oligomerize and act as an proton channel [48,57]. p7 is
important for the assembly and release of HCV virions [58,59]. Recently, it was shown that p7
alkalinizes acidic organelles in the secretory pathway, and that M2 can complement a version of HCV
lacking p7 . How this activity promotes release of particles is not known. It may create an
environment that protects virions from damage during exocytosis, or promote enlargement of Golgi
cisternae to accommodate large cargo (see discussion of CoV E and release below).
The channel activity of E was first demonstrated for SARS-CoV E in planar lipid bilayers, where it
was found that a synthetic peptide corresponding to the protein could permeabilize bilayers to Na+ and
Viruses 2012, 4
K+, with a 10-fold preference for Na+ . Further study generalized this property to other CoV
groups, as IBV E, MHV E, and HCoV-229E E all have ion channel activity for monovalent
cations . Furthermore, the channels formed by MHV E and HCoV 229E E were inhibited by the
broad spectrum Na+/H+ exchanger inhibitor hexamethylene amiloride (HMA) . Since the E protein
only has a single HD, formation of an ion channel would require oligomerization. This possibility was
originally addressed using computational modeling, which predicted that the E protein HD could form
stable dimers, trimers, and pentamers . This prediction was further bolstered by several
spectroscopic studies, which showed that the HD of SARS-CoV E forms a pentamer [63–65].
However, this result has not been confirmed for the other E proteins, or for the full length SARS-CoV
E protein in a natural membrane. Nonetheless, predictions can be made from these structural data. For
one, it appears that Asn15 in SARS-CoV E, and possibly the equivalent residue in other E proteins, is
likely important either for oligomerization or ion conductance. Indeed, when alanine is substituted for
this residue in a lysine-flanked peptide of the SARS-CoV E HD, conductance is largely inhibited .
Additionally, the equivalent residue in IBV E is required for perturbing the secretory pathway,
suggesting a role for the ion channel in this effect .
The role of the CoV E ion channel in infection is not entirely clear, but studies using inhibitors offer
some insight into its function. When HMA is added to the inoculum of either HCoV 229E or MHV,
replication is inhibited. Adding more weight to this result, when HMA is added to the inoculum of
MHVΔE no further growth defect is observed, showing that the inhibitory effect of HMA is dependent
on the presence of the E protein . While these studies suggest an important role for the ion channel
activity of the E protein, it is not clear what step of viral replication is blocked by the drug. Two other
studies have linked the putative ion channel activity with virus replication and release. A recombinant
version of MHV carrying mutations in the HD was shown to have a defect in both assembly and
release of particles . A version of IBV carrying an a mutated version of E where the HD was
replaced with that of an unrelated protein showed a defect in the release of infectious particles .
These results imply that the ion channel activity of E may be important in the release of virions from
cells, and are discussed in the section below.
8. Role of CoV E in Virion Release
8.1. The Mammalian Secretory Pathway and Large Cargo
Enveloped viruses that assemble intracellularly must navigate through the secretory pathway for
release (Figure 3). Whether these viruses simply follow the canonical trafficking pathway, or modify it
to handle the flux of large cargo is not known. To better understand this question, it is important to
appreciate how the compartments used by CoVs are linked. The ERGIC is the intermediate
compartment between the ER and Golgi. Its major function is to sort and concentrate cargo along the
biosynthetic pathway. The ERGIC may mature as a unit to form the cis-Golgi, or it may be a more
stable compartment . From the ERGIC, cargo traffics to the Golgi complex. The Golgi complex is
made up of polarized stacks of cisternae that are connected laterally into a ribbon. Golgi cisternae are
generally between 700–1100 nm in diameter and <20 nm thick [69,70]. The polarity of the Golgi from
cis-, medial-, to trans-Golgi is important for sequential processing and proper sorting of cargo. The
Viruses 2012, 4
mechanism by which cargo proteins move through the Golgi complex is controversial. It was
originally thought this occurred by the maturation of cisternae . This model was challenged when
intra-Golgi transport was reconstituted in vitro [72,73]. However, some large cargo proteins such as
procollagen I are too big to fit into normal transport vesicles. It was shown that procollagen I does not
leave the Golgi cisternae during its transport, and instead the cisternae mature, as Golgi resident
proteins are moved in a retrograde direction [74–76]. However, a different large cargo complex
(reversible protein aggregates) is transported between the Golgi cisternae in “megavesicles” .
Thus, it is possible that both vesicle transport and cisternal maturation can move cargo through the
Golgi complex in mammalian cells.
Since virions are large cargo they would likely move through the Golgi complex via a cisternal
maturation mechanism or in megavesicles. However, differences between trafficking of small and
large cargo are not well understood . Some insight into the trafficking of virions can be gained by
examining how cells normally traffic very large cargo. Procollagen I forms 300 nm triple helical
bundles in the ER, which move through the secretory pathway. As mentioned above, the procollagen
filaments do not appear to move between the Golgi cisternae in vesicles, implying that they move
through the stack via a cisternal maturation mechanism . When procollagen bundles are present in
the Golgi complex, the cisternae appear distended [79,80]. Additionally, the trans-Golgi network
(TGN) expands in cells producing collagen, and this expansion is correlated with efficient release of
procollagen . The trafficking of lipoproteins induces similar changes in Golgi complex
morphology. Chylomicrons are large (400 nm) complexes made up of apoB-48 bound to
triacylglycerides . These complexes are formed in the ER of intestinal epithelial cells and traffic
through the Golgi complex during their biogenesis . It has long been known that the induction of
chylomicron production demands a substantial, but reversible, enlargement of the Golgi complex, as
seen in electron micrographs of rat enterocytes after the animals were fed a fatty meal . The
changes induced in Golgi complex morphology for both procollagen and chylomicrons seem to
underlie a necessary step in their trafficking. How the expansion of the Golgi complex aids in their
secretion, and the mechanism used to induce the reversible change(s) are not known. However,
it seems likely that enveloped viruses that assemble intracellularly may have evolved to exploit
8.2. Impact of CoV Infection on the Secretory Pathway
Like the trafficking of large cargo, CoV infection leads to a rearrangement of endomembranes
(Figure 3). It was initially observed that during MHV infection the Golgi complex is dispersed from its
juxtanuclear position . This result has recently been expanded upon using quantitative
immune-EM, where it was shown that several different types of membrane rearrangements occur
during MHV infection. Most relevant to the discussion here, virions were seen in large carriers derived
from Golgi/ERGIC membranes, suggesting that the rearrangement of the Golgi complex may be
important for virion trafficking . However, the mechanism underlying the change in Golgi
complex morphology is not currently known. These changes appear similar to those observed for the
large cargo described above, but may constitute a more dramatic change.
Viruses 2012, 4
Figure 3. CoVs use the secretory pathway for egress. (A) A cartoon depicting virions
within the Golgi complex. The Golgi cisternae are enlarged and fragmented during
infection, possibly to aid in the trafficking of virions. (B) Transmission electron
micrographs of uninfected or IBV infected Vero cells. (1) The Golgi complex of an
uninfected cell; (2) The Golgi complex of an IBV infected cell with enlarged Golgi
cisternae; (3) A putative virion carrier. Arrows denote virions. Scale bar is 500 nm. For
images (2) and (3) Vero cells were infected at an moi of 0.1, and samples were fixed and
processed 14 hrs post infection as described in .
Besides CoVs, several other enveloped viruses assemble intracellularly. If modifying the secretory
pathway is a requirement for virion trafficking, one would predict that an alteration of secretory
compartments would be a general feature of cells infected with these viruses. Indeed, many of them do
modify the secretory pathway in striking ways. Flaviviruses assemble and bud into the ER .
Interestingly, during flavivirus infection Golgi proteins localize to the ER at the site of assembly
during infection, but the function of this is not clear [88,89]. Bunyaviruses assemble by budding into
the Golgi lumen [90,91]. During bunyavirus infection, the ERGIC and Golgi complex appear
fragmented and vesiculated , but the underlying mechanism is not known. While it may not be
surprising that viruses rearrange cellular membranes for their own use, it is puzzling that these viruses
seemingly disrupt the very organelles that they depend on for egress. However, the apparent disruption
may represent an exaggeration of the mechanisms used by the large cargo described above. It seems
possible, or maybe even plausible, that these viruses are exploiting a pre-existing mechanism to
facilitate the release of large cargo from the secretory pathway.
Viruses 2012, 4
8.3. Effect of CoV E on the Secretory Pathway and Role in Release of Virions
The results discussed above suggest a connection between the morphological changes during CoV
infection and virion trafficking. However, the relationship between the two has been elusive. Recent
studies of CoV E have shed light on this issue, and it is now apparent that a link exists between the E
protein, virion trafficking, and morphological changes in the Golgi complex. Several studies have
shown that the E protein is important for virion release. The E protein of TGEV is essential for the
propagation of the virus [39,40]. However, further characterization of TGEVΔE showed that virions
were assembled in infected cells, but appeared arrested in the secretory pathway, apparently unable to
traffic properly . Analysis of a version of SARS-CoV lacking the E gene showed that virions
accumulated intracellularly with aberrant material, suggesting that they may be sorted improperly in
the absence of E . As mentioned above, mutations introduced into the HD of MHV or IBV
compromised the release of infectious particles from cells [31,67]. Additionally it was shown that
expression of IBV E altered the secretory pathway in a manner dependent on a single residue within its
HD, an effect that correlates with the release of particles [31,66]. These results have led to speculation
that the E protein acts as an ion channel in the secretory pathway, driving the rearrangement of
secretory organelles through the alteration of lumenal environments. This in turn leads to efficient
trafficking of virions. This process may be analogous to what occurs for the large protein cargo
mentioned above and should be further examined.
9. Topology of CoV E
The topology of the CoV E protein is debated in the literature. The E protein does not have a
canonical cleaved signal sequence , suggesting that the E protein is likely a type II or type III
membrane protein. However, that is where the consensus ends. The C-terminus of TGEV E was
detected at the surface of non-permeabilized infected cells, suggesting it adopted an NcytoCexo topology
(Figure 4(3)) . IBV E has been reported as a transmembrane protein with the opposite topology,
NexoCcyto (Figure 4(1))  The C-terminus of MHV E is present in the cytoplasm of infected cells, and
on the inside of the virion . Later it was shown, using an N-terminally FLAG tagged version of
MHV E, that the N-terminus is present in the cytoplasm . These results suggested an NcytoCcyto
topology, which is very strange for a protein with a single predicted HD, and suggests that the HD
forms a membrane hairpin (Figure 4(2)). Multiple topologies have been reported for SARS-CoV E.
Using transient expression of an N- or C-terminally FLAG tagged version of SARS-CoV E, both
termini were present in the cytoplasm, supporting the membrane hairpin topology . Additionally,
this study also found that at least a portion of the expressed protein has its C-terminus modified with
N-linked oligosaccharides, which would require the C-terminus to be in the ER lumen as a type II
membrane protein . More recently, an untagged version of SARS CoV E was shown to largely
adopt an NexoCcyto topology in infected cells and in cells transiently expressing the protein . These
results, along with those reported in  demonstrate the danger of using epitope tags to determine
topology. Complicating matters, when prediction programs are used to model the topology of the E
protein the results are not consistent with, and often are in direct opposition to, what has been observed
experimentally (Table 1).
Viruses 2012, 4
Figure 4. Topologies of the CoV E protein. The three proposed topologies of CoV E.
(1) shows a type III membrane protein; (2) shows a membrane hairpin; and (3) shows a
type II membrane protein with a putative N-linked oligosaccharide.
Table 1. TM Pred , HMMTop , TMHMM 2.0 , MEMSAT3 , and
MEMSAT-SVM  were used to predict the topology of four different CoV E proteins.
The location of the N- and C-termini, as well as the number of predicted transmembrane
passes are shown.
lumen lumen 2 lumencyto 1 cyto lumen1 lumen cyto 1
lumen lumen 2 lumenlumen2 lumenlumen2 cyto lumen1
cyto cyto 2 lumencyto 1 lumenlumen2 lumen cyto 1
It seems possible that the E protein may adopt multiple topologies during infection. Certainly the
putative ion channel activity of E would require a transmembrane protein, but another function, such as
membrane bending in assembly, could require a membrane hairpin. To address this possibility,
versions of IBV E were developed that adopted either a transmembrane (by adding a canonical cleaved
signal sequence) or a membrane hairpin (by putting a FLAG tag on the N-terminus). The results
showed that only the transmembrane protein could alter the secretory pathway (possibly through ion
channel activity), but was not as efficient at forming particles as judged by VLP production . This
may mean that a small portion of wild-type IBV E protein exists as a membrane hairpin and plays a
If CoV E is inserted into the membrane both in a transmembrane and membrane hairpin orientation,
one question that arises is how a single protein might adopt multiple topologies. Certainly a type II or
type III membrane protein could be generated using the signal recognition particle (SRP)-translocon
pathway. However, can a membrane hairpin topology be achieved using SRP-translocon mediated
membrane insertion? Caveolin is between 18–24 kD depending on the isoform, and has a ~32 amino
acid long HD which is inserted as a hairpin . The membrane insertion of caveolin is dependent on
Viruses 2012, 4
Sec61, suggesting that the ER translocon can generate proteins with a membrane hairpin
topology . Thus, it is possible that SRP-mediated membrane insertion could produce multiple
topologies, including a membrane hairpin and a transmembrane protein. Nonetheless, the E protein is
very different than caveolin, both in overall size and in the hydrophobicity of its HD. It is important to
consider alternate membrane insertion pathways. Tail-anchored proteins are generally considered to
have fewer than 30 amino acids following their transmembrane domain . Many CoV E proteins
are just outside of this range, but no studies have investigated the role of the GET pathway (guided
entry of tail anchored proteins) in CoV E membrane insertion. Finally, the possibility exists that the E
protein may be inserted into the membrane via a novel mechanism of post-translational insertion .
It is interesting to speculate that CoV E may be inserted into the membrane via multiple mechanisms,
resulting in distinct topologies.
One last point is that the topology of CoV E proteins may differ for different CoVs. In addition to
the variability shown in the prediction programs, there are also differences in the overall
hydrophobicity and length of the transmembrane segments. How this impacts membrane topology is
unknown, but it is worth noting that IBV E is the only E protein predicted to have two transmembrane
domains. It is also possible that differences in the hydrophobic domains could affect the ion channel
activity of the proteins.
10. Perspectives on CoV E
The CoV E protein is an enigmatic protein. There is a high degree of variability in the behavior of
the E proteins from different CoVs, including their requirement for assembly, virion trafficking, ion
channel function, and method of expression in the genome. Yet, this protein is present in all known
CoVs, suggesting it has a conserved role. It is interesting to speculate that the E protein from different
CoVs has evolved to perform different functions. This could be due to cell-type specific requirements
for each virus, or the ability of an accessory protein to complement a function normally carried out by
E. Understanding how the E proteins from different CoVs vary is a crucial step in elucidating the
mechanism of CoV assembly and egress.
While the results reviewed here have better characterized the E protein, much work still remains to
understand the mechanism of E protein function. The putative ion channel activity of E needs to be
further examined. To this end, comprehensive electrophysiological analysis of the various E proteins in
their natural setting (inserted into a Golgi membrane with normal post-translational modifications)
needs to be carried out. It should also be noted that the E protein from different CoVs show variability
in ion specificity, conductivity, and sensitivity to HMA. The reasons for this are not clear.
Understanding how the ion channel activity of E affects replication is an important step in elucidating
the function(s) of the protein with particular attention to cell types infected in the natural host.
Recombinant viruses should be developed that encode other small ion channels along with E proteins
that can support assembly but have no ion channel activity to determine if other channels can substitute
for E. Additionally, analysis of the ion composition of the disrupted secretory pathway in IBV E
expressing cells needs to be carried out to confirm that altered ion balance is responsible for
Viruses 2012, 4
The idea that the E protein alters the secretory pathway to allow for virion trafficking is intriguing.
If this modification is required for efficient trafficking of virions due to their large size, one would
predict that the E protein should facilitate the trafficking of other large cargo such as procollagen I and
chylomicrons. To this end, trafficking assays should be developed which allow for the quantitative
monitoring of procollagen I and chylomicrons through the Golgi complex in the presence or absence of
the E protein. It is also possible that the morphological changes in the Golgi complex are the end result
of microenvironment alterations required to protect virions from proteolytic damage during egress. To
test this, the lumenal ion concentration of both cells expressing E and infected cells should be
investigated using ratiometric imaging.
The topology of E appears to be predominately NexoCcyto; however, the existence of mixed
membrane topologies cannot be ruled out. One possibility is that a small portion of the E protein is
inserted as a membrane hairpin, and that this conformation facilitates particle assembly, but not
efficient trafficking of virions. To address this possibility, recombinant viruses expressing
topologically constrained versions of E (like those developed in ) should be developed, and
particle production as well as infectious particle release monitored. Additionally, in vitro membrane
translocation assays should be carried out to determine the components necessary for membrane
integration of the E protein (SRP mediated, GET mediated, or a novel route).
Finally, because there is variability in the functions of E protein in different viruses, experiments to
elucidate which functions are conserved and which are not should be performed. The ability of the
different CoV E proteins to rescue the E deletions of other CoVs should be tested much the same way
as they were for MHV . In addition, membrane associated accessory proteins from different CoVs
should be examined in this same assay to determine if any of them can substitute for E. Finally, the
tandem-affinity approach used to identify interacting proteins for SARS-CoV  should be extended
to other CoVs.
It is now clear that the CoV E protein has multiple functions during infection, although they are not
clearly understood. Also, the role(s) for the E protein in different CoVs may not be identical. A
comprehensive model of E protein function will provide a better understanding of CoV biology and the
mammalian secretory pathway, and may provide a target for therapeutic intervention during
We would like to thank Andy Pekosz for thoughtful discussion on the E protein. The work in the
authors’ laboratory was funded by the NIH. TRR was supported by the Isaac Morris and Lucille
Elizabeth Hay Graduate Fellowship.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Viruses 2012, 4
References and Notes
Masters, P.S. The molecular biology of coronaviruses. Adv. Virus. Res. 2006, 66, 193–292.
Hogue, B.G.; Machamer, C.E. Coronavirus structural proteins and virus assembly. In Nidoviruses;
Perlman, S., Gallagher, T., Snijder, E.J., Eds.; ASM Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008;
Boursnell, M.E.; Binns, M.M.; Brown, T.D. Sequencing of coronavirus IBV genomic RNA: Three
open reading frames in the 5' 'unique' region of mRNA D. J. Gen. Virol. 1985, 66, 2253–2258.
Budzilowicz, C.J.; Weiss, S.R. In vitro synthesis of two polypeptides from a nonstructural gene of
coronavirus mouse hepatitis virus strain A59. Virology 1987, 157, 509–515.
Corse, E.; Machamer, C.E. Infectious bronchitis virus E protein is targeted to the Golgi complex
and directs release of virus-like particles. J. Virol. 2000, 74, 4319–4326.
Raamsman, M.J.; Locker, J.K.; de Hooge, A.; de Vries, A.A.; Griffiths, G.; Vennema, H.; Rottier,
P.J. Characterization of the coronavirus mouse hepatitis virus strain A59 small membrane protein
E. J. Virol. 2000, 74, 2333–2342.
Liao, Y.; Yuan, Q.; Torres, J.; Tam, J.P.; Liu, D.X. Biochemical and functional characterization of
the membrane association and membrane permeabilizing activity of the severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus envelope protein. Virology 2006, 349, 264–275.
Cohen, J.R.; Lin, L.D.; Machamer, C.E. Identification of a Golgi complex-targeting signal in the
cytoplasmic tail of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus envelope protein. J. Virol.
2011, 85, 5794–5803.
Nieto-Torres, J.L.; Dediego, M.L.; Alvarez, E.; Jimenez-Guardeno, J.M.; Regla-Nava, J.A.;
Llorente, M.; Kremer, L.; Shuo, S.; Enjuanes, L. Subcellular location and topology of severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus envelope protein. Virology 2011, 415, 69–82.
10. Yuan, Q.; Liao, Y.; Torres, J.; Tam, J.P.; Liu, D.X. Biochemical evidence for the presence of
mixed membrane topologies of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus envelope
protein expressed in mammalian cells. FEBS Lett. 2006, 580, 3192–3200.
11. Maeda, J.; Repass, J.F.; Maeda, A.; Makino, S. Membrane topology of coronavirus E protein.
Virology 2001, 281, 163–169.
12. Godet, M.; L'Haridon, R.; Vautherot, J.F.; Laude, H. TGEV corona virus ORF4 encodes a
membrane protein that is incorporated into virions. Virology 1992, 188, 666–675.
13. Corse, E.; Machamer, C.E. The cytoplasmic tail of infectious bronchitis virus E protein directs
Golgi targeting. J. Virol. 2002, 76, 1273–1284.
14. Boscarino, J.A.; Logan, H.L.; Lacny, J.J.; Gallagher, T.M. Envelope protein palmitoylations are
crucial for murine coronavirus assembly. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 2989–2999.
15. Lopez, L.A.; Riffle, A.J.; Pike, S.L.; Gardner, D.; Hogue, B.G. Importance of conserved cysteine
residues in the coronavirus envelope protein. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 3000–3010.
16. Larkin, M.A.; Blackshields, G.; Brown, N.P.; Chenna, R.; McGettigan, P.A.; McWilliam, H.;
Valentin, F.; Wallace, I.M.; Wilm, A.; Lopez, R.; et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0.
Bioinformatics 2007, 23, 2947–2948.
17. Waterhouse, A.M.; Procter, J.B.; Martin, D.M.; Clamp, M.; Barton, G.J. Jalview Version 2—A
multiple sequence alignment editor and analysis workbench. Bioinformatics 2009, 25, 1189–1191.
Viruses 2012, 4 Download full-text
18. Tooze, J.; Tooze, S.; Warren, G. Replication of coronavirus MHV-A59 in sac- cells:
Determination of the first site of budding of progeny virions. Eur. J. Cell Biol.1984, 33, 281–293.
19. Klumperman, J.; Locker, J.K.; Meijer, A.; Horzinek, M.C.; Geuze, H.J.; Rottier, P.J. Coronavirus
M proteins accumulate in the Golgi complex beyond the site of virion budding. J. Virol. 1994, 68,
20. Vennema, H.; Godeke, G.J.; Rossen, J.W.; Voorhout, W.F.; Horzinek, M.C.; Opstelten, D.J.;
Rottier, P.J. Nucleocapsid-independent assembly of coronavirus-like particles by co-expression of
viral envelope protein genes. EMBO J. 1996, 15, 2020–2028.
21. Baudoux, P.; Carrat, C.; Besnardeau, L.; Charley, B.; Laude, H. Coronavirus pseudoparticles
formed with recombinant M and E proteins induce alpha interferon synthesis by leukocytes.
J. Virol. 1998, 72, 8636–8643.
22. Huang, Y.; Yang, Z.Y.; Kong, W.P.; Nabel, G.J. Generation of synthetic severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus pseudoparticles: Implications for assembly and vaccine production.
J. Virol. 2004, 78, 12557–12565.
23. Hsieh, P.K.; Chang, S.C.; Huang, C.C.; Lee, T.T.; Hsiao, C.W.; Kou, Y.H.; Chen, I.Y.; Chang,
C.K.; Huang, T.H.; Chang, M.F. Assembly of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus
RNA packaging signal into virus-like particles is nucleocapsid dependent. J. Virol. 2005, 79,
24. Tseng, Y.T.; Wang, S.M.; Huang, K.J.; Lee, A.I.; Chiang, C.C.; Wang, C.T. Self-assembly of
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus membrane protein. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285,
25. Fang, Y.; Wu, N.; Gan, X.; Yan, W.; Morrell, J.C.; Gould, S.J. Higher-order oligomerization
targets plasma membrane proteins and HIV gag to exosomes. PLoS Biol. 2007, 5, e158.
26. Siu, Y.L.; Teoh, K.T.; Lo, J.; Chan, C.M.; Kien, F.; Escriou, N.; Tsao, S.W.; Nicholls, J.M.;
Altmeyer, R.; Peiris, J.S.; et al. The M, E, and N structural proteins of the severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus are required for efficient assembly, trafficking, and release of virus-like
particles. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 11318–11330.
27. Ruch, T.R.; Machamer, C.E. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Unpublished Work, 2010.
28. Lim, K.P.; Liu, D.X. The missing link in coronavirus assembly. Retention of the avian
coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus envelope protein in the pre-Golgi compartments and
physical interaction between the envelope and membrane proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276,
29. Corse, E.; Machamer, C.E. The cytoplasmic tails of infectious bronchitis virus E and M proteins
mediate their interaction. Virology 2003, 312, 25–34.
30. Fischer, F.; Stegen, C.F.; Masters, P.S.; Samsonoff, W.A. Analysis of constructed E gene mutants
of mouse hepatitis virus confirms a pivotal role for E protein in coronavirus assembly. J. Virol.
1998, 72, 7885–7894.
31. Ruch, T.R.; Machamer, C.E. The hydrophobic domain of infectious bronchitis virus E protein
alters the host secretory pathway and is important for release of infectious virus. J. Virol. 2011,