ArticleGene reports2020
Genetic variations among SARS-CoV-2 strains isolated in China.
Article in Gene reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- SARS-CoV-2 E protein: Pathogenesis and potential therapeutic development.Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie · 2023Review
- COVID-19: Establishing, implementing and assessment safety strategy, descriptive interventional study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variants in anPolish journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Mutations and their Viral Variants.Cytokine & growth factor reviews · 2022Review
- Characterization of altered genomic landscape of SARS-CoV-2 variants isolated in Saudi Arabia in a comparativeSaudi journal of biological sciences · 2021Article
- Unique SARS-CoV-2 Variant Exhibiting Plenteous Missense Mutations in Structural and Nonstructural Genes.Cytology and genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid spread of COVID-19, which has led to a global pandemic, has placed public health systems under severe pressure. Identifying variations in SARS-CoV-2 strains from different regions is a key factor for understanding the pathogenic mechanisms, aid in diagnosis, prevention and therapy of this disease. The present study is an analytical descriptive study aimed to determine genetic variations among SARS-CoV-2 strains isolated in China. Sixty six complete genome sequences of the virus were retrieved from NCBI, the sequence of original Wuhan strain accession number NC 045512 was used as the reference sequence. Each genome sequence was blasted against the original Wuhan strain; the analysis was done using NCBI Nucleo-blast. The collected sequences showed 10 different variants. One hundred and thirty four mutations were identified among the variants of SARS-CoV-2 in this study; most of them 52.2% (70/134) were missense point mutation, majority of the mutations 65.7% (88/134) occurred in the open reading frame a/b (ORFab), few mutations occurred in the structural viral genome, each of spike (S) gene and nucleocapsid (N) gene showed 4 mutations; 2 silent point mutations and 2 missense point mutations occurred in each gene whereas membrane (M) gene showed silent point mutation and no mutation observed in the envelope E gene. The remarkable observation in this study showed by Yunnan variant accession number MT226610 which exhibited high incidence of mutations, it displayed 28 different point mutations; only 3(10.7%) of them were silent mutations while the rest were missense mutations. Our analysis showed several mutations including spike S gene and membrane M gene which may be responsible for a change in the structures of target proteins.
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.