Research article

Single-molecule FRET reveals proofreading complexes in the large fragment of Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase I

  • Received: 14 March 2018 Accepted: 26 April 2018 Published: 09 May 2018
  • There is increasing interest in the use of DNA polymerases (DNA pols) in next-generation sequencing strategies. These methodologies typically rely on members of the A and B family of DNA polymerases that are classified as high-fidelity DNA polymerases. These enzymes possess the ability to selectively incorporate the correct nucleotide opposite a templating base with an error frequency of only 1 in 106 insertion events. How they achieve this remarkable fidelity has been the subject of numerous investigations, yet the mechanism by which these enzymes achieve this level of accuracy remains elusive. Several smFRET assays were designed to monitor the conformational changes associated with the nucleotide selection mechanism(s) employed by DNA pols. smFRET has also been used to monitor the movement of DNA pols along a DNA substrate as well as to observe the formation of proof-reading complexes. One member among this class of enzymes, the large fragment of Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase I (Bst pol I LF), contains both 5'→3' polymerase and 3'→5' exonuclease domains, but reportedly lacks exonuclease activity. We have designed a smFRET assay showing that Bst pol I LF forms proofreading complexes. The formation of proofreading complexes at the single molecule level is strongly influenced by the presence of the 3' hydroxyl at the primer-terminus of the DNA substrate. Our assays also identify an additional state, observed in the presence of a mismatched primer-template terminus, that may be involved in the transfer of the primer-terminus from the polymerase to the exonuclease active site.

    Citation: Thomas D. Christian, William H. Konigsberg. Single-molecule FRET reveals proofreading complexes in the large fragment of Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase I[J]. AIMS Biophysics, 2018, 5(2): 144-154. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2018.2.144

    Related Papers:

    [1] Jiangbo Hao, Lirong Huang, Maoxing Liu, Yangjun Ma . Analysis of the COVID-19 model with self-protection and isolation measures affected by the environment. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(4): 4835-4852. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024213
    [2] Abdelheq Mezouaghi, Salih Djillali, Anwar Zeb, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar . Global proprieties of a delayed epidemic model with partial susceptible protection. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(1): 209-224. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022011
    [3] Fang Wang, Lianying Cao, Xiaoji Song . Mathematical modeling of mutated COVID-19 transmission with quarantine, isolation and vaccination. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(8): 8035-8056. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022376
    [4] Yujie Sheng, Jing-An Cui, Songbai Guo . The modeling and analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic with vaccination and isolation: a case study of Italy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(3): 5966-5992. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023258
    [5] Hamdy M. Youssef, Najat A. Alghamdi, Magdy A. Ezzat, Alaa A. El-Bary, Ahmed M. Shawky . A new dynamical modeling SEIR with global analysis applied to the real data of spreading COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 7018-7044. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020362
    [6] Yong Zhou, Minrui Guo . Isolation in the control of epidemic. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(11): 10846-10863. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022507
    [7] Xinmiao Rong, Liu Yang, Huidi Chu, Meng Fan . Effect of delay in diagnosis on transmission of COVID-19. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(3): 2725-2740. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020149
    [8] Jiying Ma, Wei Lin . Dynamics of a stochastic COVID-19 epidemic model considering asymptomatic and isolated infected individuals. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(5): 5169-5189. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022242
    [9] Li-Xiang Feng, Shuang-Lin Jing, Shi-Ke Hu, De-Fen Wang, Hai-Feng Huo . Modelling the effects of media coverage and quarantine on the COVID-19 infections in the UK. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(4): 3618-3636. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020204
    [10] Fernando Saldaña, Hugo Flores-Arguedas, José Ariel Camacho-Gutiérrez, Ignacio Barradas . Modeling the transmission dynamics and the impact of the control interventions for the COVID-19 epidemic outbreak. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(4): 4165-4183. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020231
  • There is increasing interest in the use of DNA polymerases (DNA pols) in next-generation sequencing strategies. These methodologies typically rely on members of the A and B family of DNA polymerases that are classified as high-fidelity DNA polymerases. These enzymes possess the ability to selectively incorporate the correct nucleotide opposite a templating base with an error frequency of only 1 in 106 insertion events. How they achieve this remarkable fidelity has been the subject of numerous investigations, yet the mechanism by which these enzymes achieve this level of accuracy remains elusive. Several smFRET assays were designed to monitor the conformational changes associated with the nucleotide selection mechanism(s) employed by DNA pols. smFRET has also been used to monitor the movement of DNA pols along a DNA substrate as well as to observe the formation of proof-reading complexes. One member among this class of enzymes, the large fragment of Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase I (Bst pol I LF), contains both 5'→3' polymerase and 3'→5' exonuclease domains, but reportedly lacks exonuclease activity. We have designed a smFRET assay showing that Bst pol I LF forms proofreading complexes. The formation of proofreading complexes at the single molecule level is strongly influenced by the presence of the 3' hydroxyl at the primer-terminus of the DNA substrate. Our assays also identify an additional state, observed in the presence of a mismatched primer-template terminus, that may be involved in the transfer of the primer-terminus from the polymerase to the exonuclease active site.


    In December 2019, COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 2019) named by the World Health Organization was first diagnosed in China. Until now, the COVID-19 in China is basically under control, but there are still many infections around the world. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on March 11, 2020 that COVID-19 has pandemic characteristics. The disease has now spread globally, including cases confirmed in 220 Countries. According to the latest real-time statistics of the WHO, as of November 26, 2020, there have been a total of 60,074,174 confirmed cases of COVID-19, and a total of 1,416,292 deaths [1]. The most infected countries distributed in descending order of infected cases are United States of America, India, Brazil, Russian Federation, France, Spain, The United Kingdom, Italy, etc. To defeat the epidemic, scientists in different fields have contributed to COVID-19 [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9].

    The disease dynamic models continue to play an important role in predicting the development trend of infectious disease epidemics, scientific prevention and control guidance, and provide important data basis and theoretical support for the decision-making of public health managers and the implementation of efficient intervention measures. The SIR model proposed by Kermack and McKendrick [10] has been widely used to study infectious diseases. Differential equations and dynamical system methods are widely used to study the origin, evolution and spread of various diseases. In particular, the dynamic model has achieved fruitful results in rabies [11,12], malaria [13], cholera [14], brucellosis [15] and HFMD(Hand, foot and mouth disease) [16]. There also has been a large amount of literatures using dynamic models to analyze the spread and outbreak of COVID-19 [2,3,8,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. Jiao et al. [2] studied an SEIR with infectivity in incubation period and homestead-isolation on the susceptible. Their research results indicate that governments should strictly implement the isolation system to make every effort to curb the spread of disease during the epidemic. Li et al. [3] revealed the effects of city lock-down date on the final scale of cases and analyzed the impact of the city lock-down date on the final scale of cases by studied the transmission of COVID-19 in Shanxi Province. He et al. [8] proposed an SEIR model for the COVID-19 which is built according to some related factors, such as hospital, quarantine and external input. The particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is applied to estimate the parameters of the system. They show that, for the given parameters, if there exists seasonality and stochastic infection, the system can generate chaos. Bouchnita [17] et al use a multi-scale model of COVID-19 transmission dynamics to quantify the effects of restricting population movement and wearing face masks on disease spread in Morocco. Bardina [19] and Zhang et al. [20] using a stochastic infectious disease model to study COVID-19. This research has shown that the social blockade is very effective in controlling the spread of disease.

    For COVID-19, there is no specific vaccines or antiviral drugs to treatment the disease and it is hard to control the spread of the disease. The best way to control the spread of COVID-19 is social blockade. However, the social blockade will have a serious impact on economic development and the normal lives of the people. Therefore, in order not to affect the normal life of non-infected persons, we proposed the strategy of isolating infected people to study the spread of the disease. Nowadays, there is a kind of infectious patients who have no symptoms, disseminating the infection disease and causing social panic. In 2013, Ma et al. [16] established an SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR epidemic model to study the spread of HFMD. The SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR isolates the infected person for treatment, while considering the role of recessive infection in the spread of HFMD. This is the same as our strategy in studying the spread of COVID-19. Therefore, we use the SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR model to study the impact of asymptomatic patients on the disease.

    This paper is organized as follows: in the next section, we give the SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR model and describe the each symbol of the system. In section 3, we study the stability analysis of disease-free equilibrium and the persistence of the endemic equilibrium. Next, we take some numerical simulations for the system of (2.1) in section 4. Finally, we give some conclusions about COVID-19.

    From the above discussions, we consider an SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR model with asymptomatic infected and quarantined on the symptomatic infected as following system

    $ {˙S(t)=Λβ1S(t)I(t)β2S(t)Ia(t)dS(t),˙E(t)=β1S(t)I(t)+β2S(t)Ia(t)σE(t)dE(t),˙I(t)=σpE(t)(γ1+k+δ1)I(t)dI(t),˙Ia(t)=σ(1p)E(t)γ3Ia(t)dIa(t),˙H(t)=kI(t)(γ2+δ2)H(t)dH(t),˙R(t)=γ1I(t)+γ2H(t)+γ3Ia(t)dR(t).
    $
    (2.1)

    Here $ S(t), E(t), I(t), I_{a}(t), H(t), R(t) $ represent the numbers of the susceptible, exposed, symptomatic infected, asymptomatic infected, quarantined, recovered population at time $ t $, respectively. $ \Lambda > 0 $ describes the annual birth rate, $ \beta_{1}, \beta_{2} $ are infection rates, $ \frac{1}{\sigma} $ represents the mean incubation period; $ p $ is the fraction of developing infectious cases, and the remaining fraction $ 1-p $ return to the recessive class; $ \delta_{1} $ and $ \delta_{2} $ are the disease-induced mortality for the infective and quarantined individuals, respectively; $ k $ is the quarantine rate; infective, quarantined and recessive individuals recover at the rate $ \gamma_{1} $, $ \gamma_{2} $ and $ \gamma_{3} $, respectively; $ d $ is the human natural mortality rate.

    Define $ N(t) = S(t)+E(t)+I(t)+I_a(t)+H(t)+R(t) $, from system (2.1), we know that

    $ \tfrac{dN}{dt}\leq \Lambda-dN\,, $

    it implies that the solutions of system (2.1) are bounded and the region

    $ X={(S,E,I,Ia,H,R)R6+:S+E+I+Ia+H+RΛd}
    $
    (3.1)

    is positively invariant for system (2.1). It is easy to see that system (2.1) has a disease-free equilibrium $ E_0 = (\tfrac{\Lambda}{d}, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) $. Using the next generation matrix formulated in Diekmam et al. [25] and van den Driessche and Watmough [26], we define the basic reproduction number by

    $ R0=β1ΛσpdM1M2+β2Λσ(1p)dM1M3,
    $
    (3.2)

    here we denote $ M_1 = \sigma+d, M_2 = \gamma_1+k+\delta_1+d, M_3 = \gamma_3+d $ and $ M_4 = \gamma_2+\delta_2+d $. Thus we have the following theorem.

    Theorem 3.1. If $ R_0 < 1 $, then the disease-free equilibrium $ E_0 = (\tfrac{\Lambda}{d}, 0, 0, 0, 0) $ of the system (2.1) is global asymptotically stable.

    Proof. we prove the global stability of the disease-free equilibrium. Define the Lypunov function as $ V(E, I, I_a) = \beta_1M_1M_3I+\beta_{2}M_1M_2I_a+\big(\beta_1 \sigma pM_3+\beta_{2}\sigma (1-p)M_2 \big)E $. For all $ t > 0 $, the derivative of $ V(t) $ is

    $ dVdt=β1M1M3(σpEM2I)+β2M1M2(σ(1p)EM3Ia)+(β1σpM3+β2σ(1p)M2)(β1SI+β2SIaM1E)=β1σpM3S(β1I+β2Ia)+β2σ(1p)M2S(β1I+β2Ia)M1M2M3(β1I+β2Ia)=M2M3M4(β1I+β2Ia)(β1σpSM1M2+β2σ(1p)SM1M31)M2M3M4(β1I+β2Ia)(R01).
    $
    (3.3)

    Here the relation $ S\leq \tfrac{\Lambda}{d} $ has been utilized. If $ R_0 < 1 $, we know that $ \tfrac{d V}{dt}\leq 0 $, and $ \tfrac{d V}{dt} = 0 $ holds if and only if $ S = \tfrac{\Lambda}{d} $, $ I = I_a = H = R = 0 $. Using the LaSalle's extension to Lyapunov's method, the limit set of each solution is contained in the largest invariant set in $ \{(S, E, I, I_{a}, H, R)\in X|\tfrac{d V}{dt} = 0\} $ is the singleton $ \{E_0\} $. This means that the disease-free equilibrium $ E_0 $ is globally asymptotically stable in $ X $ when $ R_0 < 1 $.

    Theorem 3.2. If $ R_0 > 1 $, then the disease is uniformly persistent, i.e., there is a constant $ \varepsilon > 0 $ such that every positive solution of system (2.1) satisfies

    $ limtI(t)ε,  limtIa(t)ε.
    $
    (3.4)

    Proof. Define

    $ X={x(t)X:E(t)=0},X0=XX.
    $

    In order to prove that the disease is uniformly persistent, we only need to show that $ \partial X $ repels uniformly the solutions of system (2.1) in $ X_0 $. It is easy to verify that $ \partial X $ is relatively closed in $ X $ and is point dissipative. Let

    $ X={x(t):x(t)X,t>0}.
    $
    (3.5)

    We now show that $ X_{\partial} = \{(S_1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0): 0 < S_1 \leq \tfrac{\Lambda}{d} \} $. Assume that $ x(t)\in X_{\partial} $ for all $ t\geq 0 $, then we have $ E(t) = 0 $ for all $ t\geq0 $. Thus, by the second equation of system (2.1), we have $ S(t)[\beta_{1}I_{1}(t)+\beta_{2}I_{a}(t)] = 0 $, which implies that $ I(t) = 0, I_a(t) = 0 $ for all $ t\geq 0 $. Indeed, if $ I(t)\neq 0, I_a(t)\neq 0 $, there is a $ t_0\geq 0 $ such that $ I(t_0) > 0, I_a(t) > 0 $, form the second equation of system (2.1), we have

    $ dEdt|t=t0=β1SI(t0)+β2SIa(t0)>0.
    $
    (3.6)

    It exists a $ t_1 > t_0 $ such that $ E(t_1) > 0, \tfrac{dI}{dt}\big{|}_{t_1} = \sigma p E(t_1) > 0, \tfrac{dI_a}{dt}\big{|}_{t_1} = \sigma (1-p) E(t_1) > 0 $, it follows that there is a $ \eta > 0 $ such that $ I(t), I_a(t) > 0 $ for $ t_1 < t < t_1+\eta $. This means that $ x(t)\notin X_{\partial} $ for $ t_1 < t < t_1+\eta $, which contradicts to the assume $ x(t)\in X_{\partial} $ for all $ t \geq 0 $. Therefore, $ X_{\partial} = \{(S_1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0): 0 < S_1 \leq \tfrac{\Lambda}{d} \} $.

    By analyzing system (2.1), it is clear that $ E_0 $ is unique equilibrium in $ \partial_X $. Next, we will show that $ E_0 $ repels the solutions of system (2.1) in $ X_0 $. We analyze the behavior of any solution $ x(t) $ of system (2.1) close to $ E_0 $. We divide the initial data into two cases.

    ● If $ E(0) = I(0) = I_a(0) = 0 $, then $ E(t) = I(t) = I_a(t) = 0 $. System (2.1) implies that $ S(t) $ goes away from $ E_0 $ as $ t\rightarrow -\infty $.

    ● If $ E(0), I(0), I_a(0) > 0 $, then $ E(t), I(t), I_a(t)\geq0 $ for all $ t > 0 $. When $ x(t) $ stays close to $ E_0 $, by the system (2.1) there exists a $ \rho $ small enough such that

    $ {dEdt>˜a11E+˜a12I+˜a13Ia,dIdt=˜a21E+˜a22I,dIadt=˜a31E+˜a33Ia.
    $
    (3.7)

    where $ \tilde{a}_{11} = -(d+\sigma)-\rho $, $ \tilde{{a}}_{12} = \frac{\Lambda\beta_1}{d}-\rho $, $ \tilde{{a}}_{13} = \frac{\Lambda\beta_2}{d}-\rho $, $ \tilde{a}_{21} = \sigma p $, $ \tilde{a}_{22} = -M_2 $, $ \tilde{a}_{31} = \sigma_1(1-p), \; \tilde{a}_{33} = -(d+\gamma_3), $ and largest eigenvalue of the coefficient matrix $ \tilde{A}(\tilde{a}_{ij}) $ of the right hand of (3.7) is positive, since $ R_0 > 1 $ [25]. Hence the solutions of the linear quasi-monotonic system

    $ \left\{dxdt=˜a11x+˜a12y1+˜a13yadydt=˜a21x+˜a22y1dyadt=˜a31x+˜a33ya,
    \right. $

    with $ y_1(0), y_a(0) > 0 $ are increasing as $ t\rightarrow \infty $. By the comparison principle, $ (E, I_1, I_a) $ goes away from $ (0, 0, 0, 0, 0) $. Therefore, $ \{E_0\} $ is an isolated invariant set and acyclic. Using Theorem 4.3 in Freedman [27], system (2.1) is uniformly persistent. Thus, the proof of Theorem 3.2 is completed.

    Biologically speaking, Theorem 3.2 shows that the disease is uniformly persistent if $ R_0 > 1 $, and all the solutions of system are ultimately bounded in $ X $, then system has at least one positive solution By Zhao [28]. Therefore, we have the following theorem.

    Theorem 3.3. If $ R_0 > 1 $, then the system (2.1) has an endemic equilibrium $ E_{\star} = (S^{*}, E^{*}, \; I^{*}, I_a^{*}, H^{*}, R^{*}) $.

    Proof. From the third and forth equations of system (2.1), we can conclude that

    $ σpE=M2I,σ(1p)E=M3Ia,
    $

    then we have

    $ I=σpEM2,  Ia=σ(1p)EM3.
    $

    We also obtain

    $ S=ΛM1Ed,  H=kσpEM2M4,  R=1d(σpγ1M2+σ(1p)γ2M3+kσpγ3M2M4)E,
    $

    where $ M_1, M_2, M_3 $ and $ M_4 $ are mentioned in (3.2). Substituting $ S^* $, $ I^* $ and $ I_a^* $ in the second equation of (2.1) at steady state, we obtain the following equation

    $ E=M2M3dβ1M3σp+β2M2σ(1p)(R01).
    $
    (3.8)

    Here we should show the term $ S^* $ is positive, from the above Eq (3.8), we have $ S^* = \tfrac{M_1M_2M_3}{\beta_1M_3\sigma p+\beta_2M_2\sigma(1-p)} > 0 $. From the similar argument, we have $ I^{*}, I^{*}_{a}, H^*, R^* > 0 $, i.e., the system has at most one positive solution. Therefore, if $ R_0 > 1 $, the system has an endemic equilibrium.

    Since the first case was reported to WHO on 31st December 2019, the COVID-19 has spread rapidly worldwide. As of December 21, 2020 there are 220 countries were infected, and there are many countries still trap in the epidemic. In this section, we consider the study of spread of COVID-19 disease in India. India is observing an increase in the number of patients each day. The accuracy of our proposed model is validated by using the official data of India from[29,30,31].

    The study consider currently infected patients of India from May 1st 2020 to November 15th 2020. The population of India is around $ N = 1386750000 $[29], thus we assumed that the initial value is $ S(0) = N-E(0)-I_{a}(0)-I(0)-H(0)-R(0) $, $ E(0) = 315236 $, $ I_{a} = 78809 $, $ I(0) = 236427 $, $ H(0) = 7880 $, $ R(0) = 59646 $. Then we illustrate the source of parameters in following. We can get the value of population input into the susceptible class through birth 77575 per day in India, and the average life expectancy of India is 70.42. Noting that $ 1/d $ is the average life expectancy, the value of parameter $ d $ can be calculated as $ d = 1/(70.42\times365) = 3.8904\times10^{-5} $. We choose the $ 1/\sigma = 2.5 $ which represent the average period of from the susceptible to the exposed. Because the average recovered period of the quarantined about is 14 days, so we choose the parameter $ \gamma_{2} = 1/14 = 0.0714 $. The parameters of system (2.1) are listed in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Descriptions and values of parameters.
    Para. Value Unit Interpretation Source
    $ \Lambda $ $ 7.7575\times10^{4} $ day$ ^{-1} $ population input [29]
    $ d $ $ 3.8905\times10^{-5} $ day$ ^{-1} $ Natural death rate [29]
    $ \sigma $ $ 0.33 $ day The average incubation period [30]
    $ p $ $ 0.25 $ none The fraction of developing infected cases [30]
    $ k $ $ 0.1 $ day$ ^{-1} $ The quarantine rate [31]
    $ \gamma_{1} $ $ 0.3303 $ day Recovery rate of the infected [32]
    $ \gamma_{2} $ $ 0.0714 $ day Recovery rate of the quarantined [33]
    $ \gamma_{3} $ $ 0.1398 $ day Recovery rate of the recessive [32]
    $ \delta_{1} $ $ 0.0135 $ day$ ^{-1} $ The infected disease-related death rate Estimated
    $ \delta_{2} $ $ 0.0328 $ day$ ^{-1} $ The quarantined disease-related death rate [32]

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    We use the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method to fit the parameters $ \beta_{1} $, $ \beta_{2} $ to the data, and adopt an adaptive Metropolis-Hastings (M-H) algorithm to carry out the MCMC procedure. The algorithm is run for 10,000 iterations with a burn-in of the first 6,000 iterations, and the Geweke convergence diagnostic method is employed to assess convergence of chains. In Figure 1, we have plotted the curves between the total number of COVID-19 cases versus days (till November 15, 2020) in India based on the actual data and the proposed model (2.1). The estimation results some parameters are given in Table 2 and Figure 2.

    Figure 1.  COVID spread in India and simulated by MCMC(Days from May 1st 2020).
    Table 2.  The values of $ \beta_{1} $ and $ \beta_{2} $ given by MCMC.
    Para. Mean Value Range Unit Interpretation Geweke
    $ \beta_{1} $ $ 1.3958\times10^{-9} $ $ [1.37, 1.42]\times10^{-9} $ day Infection rate of the Recessive 0.99942
    $ \beta_{2} $ $ 1.5155\times10^{-11} $ $ [1.2, 2.0]\times10^{-11} $ day Infection rate of the Infectious 0.99284

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 2.  The distribution of $ \beta_{1} $ and $ \beta_{2} $ given by MCMC.

    For the quarantine rate $ k $, we have chosen two different values as a comparison to show the importance of quarantine measures for symptomatic infected to control the spread of disease. Figure 3 shows the relationship between quarantine rate $ k $ and basic reproduction number $ R_{0} $. We can see that $ R_{0} $ and $ k $ are negatively correlated. After calculation, we get the critical point $ k_{c} = 0.4949 $, then we have $ R_{0} $ is equal to 1. Figure 4 is the evolution of system (2.1) when $ k = 0.8 $, $ 0.01 $, respectively. If $ k = 0.8 $, we compute the basic reproduction number $ R_{0} = 0.7741 < 1 $, it can be seen that the disease-free equilibrium $ E_{0} $ is globally asymptotically stable (see Figure 4a). If $ k = 0.01 $, we calculate the basic reproduction number $ R_{0} = 2.1321 > 1 $, it can be seen that system (2.1) has a positive equilibrium point and it is is uniformly persistent (see Figure 4b).

    Figure 3.  The relationship between quarantine rate $ k $ and $ R_{0} $.
    Figure 4.  The evolution of system (2.1).

    Next, the impact of the treatment period($ 1/\gamma_{2} $) for quarantined on COVID-19 is analyzed. Figures 5 and 6 show the number of infected ($ I+I_{a}+H $), quarantined ($ H $), and cumulative deaths (COVID-19 deaths, excluding natural deaths) in different treatment period for $ R_{0} < 1 $ and $ R_{0} > 1 $ respectively. When $ R_{0} < 1 $, the shorter the treatment period, the disease will die out faster, and the fewer people will be isolated. At the same time, the cumulative number of deaths will be lower. When $ R_{0} > 1 $, the longer the treatment period, the more people will be infected and quarantined. Assuming that there are no individual differences, the treatment period is negatively related to the medical level. That is, the higher the medical level, the shorter the treatment period. This means that improving the level of medical treatment is conductive to the control of COVID-19. Therefore, it is urgent for India and other countries to develop specific drugs against COVID-19.

    Figure 5.  The impact of the treatment period for quarantined on COVID-19: $ k = 0.8, R_{0} = 0.7741 < 1 $.
    Figure 6.  The impact of the treatment period for quarantined on COVID-19: $ k = 0.01, R_{0} = 2.1321 > 1 $.

    Then, we show the relationship between parameters $ k, \beta_2 $ and $ R_0 $. From Figure 7a, we know that the parameters $ k $ and $ R_{0} $ are negatively correlated, and the parameters $ \beta_2 $ and $ R_{0} $ are positively correlated. When $ \beta_{2} = 2.0\times10^{-11} $, the quarantine rate $ k $ has the maximum threshold $ k = 0.5411 > k_{c} $. When $ \beta_2 = 0 $, the quarantine rate $ k $ has the minimum threshold $ k = 0.3519 < k_{c} $. Figure 7b, 7c show the relationship between $ \beta_2 $ and $ R_0 $ when $ k = 0.01, 0.8 $, respectively. When $ k = 0.01 $, the disease is uniformly persistent, even the the parameter $ \beta_2 = 0 $. If we select $ k = 0.8 $, only when $ \beta_2 > 3.6639\times10^{-11} $ can affect the spread of the disease. Therefore, we deduce that when $ k > 0.5411 $, asymptomatic infections do not affect the spread of the disease; when $ 0.3519 < k < 0.5411 $, it is related to the infection rate of asymptomatic people whether the disease persists. In general, the higher the quarantine rate of people with symptoms, the easier it is to control the spread of the disease.

    Figure 7.  The relationship between parameters $ k, \beta_2 $ and $ R_0 $.

    In this paper, we consider an SEII$ { _\rm a} $HR epidemic model with asymptomatic infection and isolation. First, We have proved that the disease-free equilibrium $ E_{0} $ is globally asymptotically stable if and only if $ R_{0} < 1 $ and the system (2.1) is uniformly persistent if $ R_{0} > 1 $. Our numerical simulation results are consistent with theoretical analysis. Second, we showed the impact of the treatment period($ 1/\gamma_{2} $) for quarantined on COVID-19. The better the medical treatment, the COVID-19 is more likely to die out or be controlled at a lower level. Therefore, it is urgent for India and other countries around the world to develop specific drugs against COVID-19. Third, we deduced that the parameters $ k $ and $ R_{0} $ are negatively correlated, and the parameters $ \beta_{2} $ and $ R_{0} $ are positively correlated. At the same time, we found that asymptomatic infections will affect the spread of the disease when the quarantine rate is within the range of $ [0.3519, 0.5411] $ and isolating people with symptoms is very important to control and eliminate the disease in India and other countries.

    The authors would like to thank the referees for helpful comments which resulted in much improvement of the paper. Project Supported by National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12071445, 12001501), Fund for Shanxi 1331KIRT, Shanxi Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 201901D211216) and the outstanding youth fund of North University of China.

    The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

    [1] Joyce CM, Steitz TA (1994) Function and structure relationships in DNA polymerases. Annu Rev Biochem 63: 777–822. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bi.63.070194.004021
    [2] Joyce CM, Benkovic SJ (2004) DNA polymerase fidelity: kinetics, structure, and checkpoints. Biochemistry 43: 14317–14324. doi: 10.1021/bi048422z
    [3] Roy R, Hohng S, Ha T (2008) A practical guide to single-molecule FRET. Nat Methods 5: 507–516. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1208
    [4] Santoso Y, Joyce CM, Potapova O, et al. (2010) Conformational transitions in DNA polymerase I revealed by single-molecule FRET. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 715–720. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0910909107
    [5] Hohlbein J, Aigrain L, Craggs TD, et al. (2013) Conformational landscapes of DNA polymerase I and mutator derivatives establish fidelity checkpoints for nucleotide insertion. Nat commun 4: 2131.
    [6] Lamichhane R, Berezhna SY, Gill JP, et al. (2013) Dynamics of site switching in DNA polymerase. J Am Chem Soc 135: 4735–4742. doi: 10.1021/ja311641b
    [7] Berezhna SY, Gill JP, Lamichhane R, et al. (2012) Single-molecule Forster resonance energy transfer reveals an innate fidelity checkpoint in DNA polymerase I. J Am Chem Soc 134: 11261–11268. doi: 10.1021/ja3038273
    [8] Steitz TA (1999) DNA polymerases: structural diversity and common mechanisms. J biol chem 274: 17395–17398. doi: 10.1074/jbc.274.25.17395
    [9] Wu EY, Beese LS (2011) The structure of a high fidelity DNA polymerase bound to a mismatched nucleotide reveals an "ajar" intermediate conformation in the nucleotide selection mechanism. J biol chem 286: 19758–19767. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.191130
    [10] Beese LS, Derbyshire V, Steitz TA (1993) Structure of DNA polymerase I Klenow fragment bound to duplex DNA. Science 260: 352–355. doi: 10.1126/science.8469987
    [11] Beese LS, Steitz TA (1991) Structural basis for the 3'-5' exonuclease activity of Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I: a two metal ion mechanism. EMBO J 10: 25–33.
    [12] Derbyshire V, Pinsonneault JK, Joyce CM (1995) Structure-function analysis of 3'-5' exonuclease of DNA polymerases. Method Enzymol 262: 363–385. doi: 10.1016/0076-6879(95)62030-3
    [13] Aliotta JM, Pelletier JJ, Ware JL, et al. (1996) Thermostable Bst DNA polymerase I lacks a 3'-5' proofreading exonuclease activity. Genet Anal 12: 185–195. doi: 10.1016/S1050-3862(96)80005-2
    [14] Rastgoo N, Sadeghizadeh M, Bambaei B, et al. (2009) Restoring 3'-5' exonuclease activity of thermophilic Geobacillus DNA polymerase I using site-directed mutagenesis in active site. J Biotechnol 144: 245–252. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2009.09.006
    [15] Kiefer JR, Mao C, Hansen CJ, et al. (1997) Crystal structure of a thermostable Bacillus DNA polymerase I large fragment at 2.1 Å resolution. Structure 5: 95–108.
    [16] Wang CX, Zakharova E, Li J, et al. (2004) Pre-steady-state kinetics of RB69 DNA polymerase and its exo domain mutants: effect of pH and thiophosphoryl linkages on 3'-5' exonuclease activity. Biochemistry 43: 3853–3861. doi: 10.1021/bi0302292
    [17] Kirmizialtin S, Nguyen V, Johnson KA, et al. (2012) How conformational dynamics of DNA polymerase select correct substrates: experiments and simulations. Structure 20: 618–627. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2012.02.018
    [18] Johnson KA (2010) The kinetic and chemical mechanism of high-fidelity DNA polymerases. BBA- Proteins Proteom 1804: 1041–1048. doi: 10.1016/j.bbapap.2010.01.006
    [19] Datta K, Johnson NP, LiCata VJ, et al. (2009) Local conformations and competitive binding affinities of single- and double-stranded primer-template DNA at the polymerization and editing active sites of DNA polymerases. J Biol Chem 284: 17180–17193. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109.007641
    [20] Tsai YC, Johnson KA (2006) A new paradigm for DNA polymerase specificity. Biochemistry 45: 9675–9687. doi: 10.1021/bi060993z
    [21] Previte MJ, Zhou C, Kellinger M, et al. (2015) DNA sequencing using polymerase substrate-binding kinetics. Nat Commun 6: 5936. doi: 10.1038/ncomms6936
    [22] Walsh MT, Roller EE, Ko KS, et al. (2015) Measurement of DNA polymerase incorporation kinetics of dye-labeled nucleotides using total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy. Biochemistry 54: 4019–4021. doi: 10.1021/acs.biochem.5b00269
    [23] Capson TL, Peliska JA, Kaboord BF, et al. (1992) Kinetic characterization of the polymerase and exonuclease activities of the gene 43 protein of bacteriophage T4. Biochemistry 31: 10984–10994. doi: 10.1021/bi00160a007
    [24] Joyce CM, Potapova O, Delucia AM, et al. (2008) Fingers-closing and other rapid conformational changes in DNA polymerase I (Klenow fragment) and their role in nucleotide selectivity. Biochemistry 47: 6103–6116. doi: 10.1021/bi7021848
    [25] Christian TD, Romano LJ, Rueda D (2009) Single-molecule measurements of synthesis by DNA polymerase with base-pair resolution. P Natl Acad Sci USA 106: 21109–21114. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908640106
  • biophy-05-02-144-s1.pdf
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Yifei Ma, Shujun Xu, Qi An, Mengxia Qin, Sitian Li, Kangkang Lu, Jiantao Li, Lijian Lei, Lu He, Hongmei Yu, Jun Xie, Coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic prediction in Shanghai under the “dynamic zero-COVID policy” using time-dependent SEAIQR model, 2022, 4, 25889338, 105, 10.1016/j.jobb.2022.06.002
    2. R. Prem Kumar, Sanjoy Basu, P.K. Santra, D. Ghosh, G.S. Mahapatra, Optimal control design incorporating vaccination and treatment on six compartment pandemic dynamical system, 2022, 7, 26667207, 100115, 10.1016/j.rico.2022.100115
    3. Rongping Zhang, Maoxing Liu, Boli Xie, The analysis of discrete-time epidemic model on networks with protective measures on game theory, 2022, 158, 09600779, 112029, 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112029
    4. Songbai Guo, Yuling Xue, Rong Yuan, Maoxing Liu, An improved method of global dynamics: Analyzing the COVID-19 model with time delays and exposed infection, 2023, 33, 1054-1500, 10.1063/5.0144553
    5. 江波 郝, Dynamic Analysis of Epidemic Models with Self-Protection and Isolation Measures, 2023, 12, 2324-7991, 4998, 10.12677/AAM.2023.1212491
    6. Jiangbo Hao, Lirong Huang, Maoxing Liu, Yangjun Ma, Analysis of the COVID-19 model with self-protection and isolation measures affected by the environment, 2024, 21, 1551-0018, 4835, 10.3934/mbe.2024213
    7. Erhui Li, Qingshan Zhang, Global dynamics of an endemic disease model with vaccination: Analysis of the asymptomatic and symptomatic groups in complex networks, 2023, 31, 2688-1594, 6481, 10.3934/era.2023328
    8. Feng Chen, Jing Hu, Yuming Chen, Qimin Zhang, Stability of a semi-Markovian hybrid switching system with application to an epidemic model, 2024, 0, 1531-3492, 0, 10.3934/dcdsb.2024185
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(4396) PDF downloads(978) Cited by(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog