Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27252529›Full record

ArticleJournal of virology2016

Time-Dependent Rate Phenomenon in Viruses.

Pakorn Aiewsakun, Aris Katzourakis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

92 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. "Fertile" Mutations in SARS-CoV-2 RNA More Frequently Occurred in Hairpin Loops That Determine Virus Evolution.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Phylodynamics beyond neutrality: the impact of incomplete purifying selection on viral phylogenies and inference.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Host-Calibrated Time Tree Caps the Age of Giant Viruses.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Pakorn AiewsakunDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United KingdomUniversity of Illinois at Chicago.
Aris KatzourakisDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United KingdomUniversity of Illinois at Chicago aris.katzourakis@zoo.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledAmong the most fundamental questions in viral evolutionary biology are how fast viruses evolve and how evolutionary rates differ among viruses and fluctuate through time. Traditionally, viruses are loosely classed into two groups: slow-evolving DNA viruses and fast-evolving RNA viruses. As viral evolutionary rate estimates become more available, it appears that the rates are negatively correlated with the measurement timescales and that the boundary between the rates of DNA and RNA viruses might not be as clear as previously thought. In this study, we collected 396 viral evolutionary rate estimates across almost all viral genome types and replication strategies, and we examined their rate dynamics. We showed that the time-dependent rate phenomenon exists across multiple levels of viral taxonomy, from the Baltimore classification viral groups to genera. We also showed that, by taking the rate decay dynamics into account, a clear division between the rates of DNA and RNA viruses as well as reverse-transcribing viruses could be recovered. Surprisingly, despite large differences in their biology, our analyses suggested that the rate decay speed is independent of viral types and thus might be useful for better estimation of the evolutionary time scale of any virus. To illustrate this, we used our model to reestimate the evolutionary timescales of extant lentiviruses, which were previously suggested to be very young by standard phylogenetic analyses. Our analyses suggested that these viruses are millions of years old, in agreement with paleovirological evidence, and therefore, for the first time, reconciled molecular analyses of ancient and extant viruses. IMPORTANCE: This work provides direct evidence that viral evolutionary rate estimates decay with their measurement timescales and that the rate decay speeds do not differ significantly among viruses despite the vast differences in their molecular features. After adjustment for the rate decay dynamics, the division between the rates of double-stranded DNA (dsDNA), single-stranded RNA (ssRNA), and ssDNA/reverse-transcribing viruses could be seen more clearly than before. Our results provide a guideline for further improvement of the molecular clock. As a demonstration of this, we used our model to reestimate the timescales of modern lentiviruses, which were previously thought to be very young, and concluded that they are millions of years old. This result matches the estimate from paleovirological analyses, thus bridging the gap between ancient and extant viral evolutionary studies.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenome, ViralDNADNA VirusesHumansPhylogenyRNA VirusesTime FactorsDNA

Identifiers

PMID27252529
PMCPMC4984659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.