ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2020
SARS-CoV-2 gene content and COVID-19 mutation impact by comparing 44 Sarbecovirus genomes.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite its overwhelming clinical importance, the SARS-CoV-2 gene set remains unresolved, hindering dissection of COVID-19 biology. Here, we use comparative genomics to provide a high-confidence protein-coding gene set, characterize protein-level and nucleotide-level evolutionary constraint, and prioritize functional mutations from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We select 44 complete Sarbecovirus genomes at evolutionary distances ideally-suited for protein-coding and non-coding element identification, create whole-genome alignments, and quantify protein-coding evolutionary signatures and overlapping constraint. We find strong protein-coding signatures for all named genes and for 3a, 6, 7a, 7b, 8, 9b, and also ORF3c, a novel alternate-frame gene. By contrast, ORF10, and overlapping-ORFs 9c, 3b, and 3d lack protein-coding signatures or convincing experimental evidence and are not protein-coding. Furthermore, we show no other protein-coding genes remain to be discovered. Cross-strain and within-strain evolutionary pressures largely agree at the gene, amino-acid, and nucleotide levels, with some notable exceptions, including fewer-than-expected mutations in nsp3 and Spike subunit S1, and more-than-expected mutations in Nucleocapsid. The latter also shows a cluster of amino-acid-changing variants in otherwise-conserved residues in a predicted B-cell epitope, which may indicate positive selection for immune avoidance. Several Spike-protein mutations, including D614G, which has been associated with increased transmission, disrupt otherwise-perfectly-conserved amino acids, and could be novel adaptations to human hosts. The resulting high-confidence gene set and evolutionary-history annotations provide valuable resources and insights on COVID-19 biology, mutations, and evolution.
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.