ArticleChinese science bulletin = Kexue tongbao2003
Phylogeny of SARS-CoV as inferred from complete genome comparison.
Article in Chinese science bulletin = Kexue tongbao, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The global population of SARS-CoV-2 is composed of six major subtypes.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Characterization of the 3a protein of SARS-associated coronavirus in infected vero E6 cells and SARS patients.Journal of molecular biology · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SARS-CoV, as the pathogeny of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), is a mystery that the origin of the virus is still unknown even a few isolates of the virus were completely sequenced. To explore the genesis of SARS-CoV, the FDOD method previously developed by us was applied to comparing complete genomes from 12 SARS-CoV isolates to those from 12 previously identified coronaviruses and an unrooted phylogenetic tree was constructed. Our results show that all SARS-CoV isolates were clustered into a clique and previously identified coronaviruses formed the other clique. Meanwhile, the three groups of coronaviruses depart from each other clearly in our tree that is consistent with the results of prevenient papers. Differently, from the topology of the phylogenetic tree we found that SARS-CoV is more close to group 1 within genus coronavirus. The topology map also shows that the 12 SARS-CoV isolates may be divided into two groups determined by the association with the SARS-CoV from the Hotel M in Hong Kong that may give some information about the infectious relationship of the SARS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.