***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature
***DOCUMENTATION*** 
***EXAMPLES*** 
Input:
Output:

***EXAMPLES***
Input: Functionally analogous enzymes are those that catalyze similar reactions on similar substrates but do not share common ancestry, providing a window on the different structural strategies nature has used to evolve required catalysts. Identification and use of this information to improve reaction classification and computational annotation of enzymes newly discovered in the genome projects would benefit from systematic determination of reaction similarities. Here, we quantified similarity in bond changes for overall reactions and catalytic mechanisms for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes (non-homologous enzymes with identical first three numbers of their EC codes) from the MACiE database. Similarity of overall reactions was computed by comparing the sets of bond changes in the transformations from substrates to products. For similarity of mechanisms, sets of bond changes occurring in each mechanistic step were compared; these similarities were then used to guide global and local alignments of mechanistic steps. Using this metric, only 44% of pairs of functionally analogous enzymes in the dataset had significantly similar overall reactions. For these enzymes, convergence to the same mechanism occurred in 33% of cases, with most pairs having at least one identical mechanistic step. Using our metric, overall reaction similarity serves as an upper bound for mechanistic similarity in functional analogs. For example, the four carbon-oxygen lyases acting on phosphates (EC 4.2.3) show neither significant overall reaction similarity nor significant mechanistic similarity. By contrast, the three carboxylic-ester hydrolases (EC 3.1.1) catalyze overall reactions with identical bond changes and have converged to almost identical mechanisms. The large proportion of enzyme pairs that do not show significant overall reaction similarity (56%) suggests that at least for the functionally analogous enzymes studied here, more stringent criteria could be used to refine definitions of EC sub-subclasses for improved discrimination in their classification of enzyme reactions. The results also indicate that mechanistic convergence of reaction steps is widespread, suggesting that quantitative measurement of mechanistic similarity can inform approaches for functional annotation.
Output:  When species evolve, their genes duplicate and diverge to allow for adaptation of their functional repertoires to the changing environment. In this scenario, unrelated genes can convergently evolve to produce proteins with the same molecular function, termed “functionally analogous.” A quantitative determination of the reaction similarities among functionally analogous enzymes could provide insight about the different structural solutions nature has used to evolve similar catalysts. Bond changes between substrates and products, and between successive reaction intermediates, were used to compare the reactions catalyzed and the mechanisms of catalysis for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes. Less than half of the reactions catalyzed by unrelated enzymes, but defined as similar by the Enzyme Commission (EC) classification, are similar in terms of bond changes, suggesting that this classification often fails to capture quantitative differences between many enzyme reactions. Furthermore, we addressed for the first time whether the chemical mechanisms by which similar overall reactions are achieved in functional analogs are also similar. We conclude that convergence of reaction is often accompanied by convergence of chemical mechanism. These results will be useful for classifying enzymes, guiding functional annotation of newly determined enzyme sequences and structures and for informing the engineering of enzymes with new functions.

Input:  Primate lentiviruses encode four “accessory proteins” including Vif, Vpu, Nef, and Vpr/Vpx. Vif and Vpu counteract the antiviral effects of cellular restrictions to early and late steps in the viral replication cycle. We present evidence that the Vpx proteins of HIV-2/SIVSM promote virus infection by antagonizing an antiviral restriction in macrophages. Fusion of macrophages in which Vpx was essential for virus infection, with COS cells in which Vpx was dispensable for virus infection, generated heterokaryons that supported infection by wild-type SIV but not Vpx-deleted SIV. The restriction potently antagonized infection of macrophages by HIV-1, and expression of Vpx in macrophages in trans overcame the restriction to HIV-1 and SIV infection. Vpx was ubiquitylated and both ubiquitylation and the proteasome regulated the activity of Vpx. The ability of Vpx to counteract the restriction to HIV-1 and SIV infection was dependent upon the HIV-1 Vpr interacting protein, damaged DNA binding protein 1 (DDB1), and DDB1 partially substituted for Vpx when fused to Vpr. Our results indicate that macrophage harbor a potent antiviral restriction and that primate lentiviruses have evolved Vpx to counteract this restriction.


Output:

Defense against infection by the primate lentiviruses HIV/SIV is mediated primarily by antibodies that can neutralize the virus and by cytotoxic cells that can recognize and kill other virus-infected cells. However, in the past several years, research has revealed the existence of an additional line of host defense against HIV/SIV. It is now apparent that cells contain factors (also known as cellular restrictions) that potently inhibit virus infection. This has forced primate lentiviruses to evolve a strategy to counteract these cellular restriction factors. For example, HIV/SIV encode an accessory protein called Vif, whose function is to neutralize a cellular restriction to HIV/SIV infection. Our study provides evidence for a novel restriction that is expressed by macrophages and which potently antagonizes HIV and SIV infection. We describe how the virus protects itself from this cellular restriction. The goal is to harness this cellular restriction as the basis for a novel therapeutic strategy against HIV infection.
