Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33976134›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

SARS-CoV-2 gene content and COVID-19 mutation impact by comparing 44 Sarbecovirus genomes.

Irwin Jungreis, Rachel Sealfon, Manolis Kellis

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

125 citing papers in PubMed, 173 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Extra gene coding capacity of SARS-CoV-2 provides a virus engineering platform for in vitro and in vivo applications.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. A Novel Fluorescence Polarization Binding Assay for the Main Protease (MACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. SARS-CoV-2 biology and host interactions.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2024
    Review
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Irwin JungreisMIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, MA, USA. iljungr@csail.mit.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3197-5367
Rachel SealfonCenter for Computational Biology, Flatiron Institute, Simons Foundation, New York, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3007-4698
Manolis KellisMIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, MA, USA. manoli@mit.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7113-9630
Broad Institute · USSimons Foundation · US

Funding

GENCODE Resource ProjectU41HG007234 · NHGRI · SANGER INSTITUTE · PI FLICEK, PAUL · 2013 to 2020
$20.3M
Regulatory Morif Discovery in the Human Genome Using Comparative GenomicsR01HG004037 · NHGRI · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI KELLIS, MANOLIS · 2007 to 2015
$3.9M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG004037NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG007234U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) U41HG007234
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite its clinical importance, the SARS-CoV-2 gene set remains unresolved, hindering dissection of COVID-19 biology. We use comparative genomics to provide a high-confidence protein-coding gene set, characterize evolutionary constraint, and prioritize functional mutations. We select 44 Sarbecovirus genomes at ideally-suited evolutionary distances, and quantify protein-coding evolutionary signatures and overlapping constraint. We find strong protein-coding signatures for ORFs 3a, 6, 7a, 7b, 8, 9b, and a novel alternate-frame gene, ORF3c, whereas ORFs 2b, 3d/3d-2, 3b, 9c, and 10 lack protein-coding signatures or convincing experimental evidence of protein-coding function. Furthermore, we show no other conserved protein-coding genes remain to be discovered. Mutation analysis suggests ORF8 contributes to within-individual fitness but not person-to-person transmission. Cross-strain and within-strain evolutionary pressures agree, except for fewer-than-expected within-strain mutations in nsp3 and S1, and more-than-expected in nucleocapsid, which shows a cluster of mutations in a predicted B-cell epitope, suggesting immune-avoidance selection. Evolutionary histories of residues disrupted by spike-protein substitutions D614G, N501Y, E484K, and K417N/T provide clues about their biology, and we catalog likely-functional co-inherited mutations. Previously reported RNA-modification sites show no enrichment for conservation. Here we report a high-confidence gene set and evolutionary-history annotations providing valuable resources and insights on SARS-CoV-2 biology, mutations, and evolution.

Indexed as

MutationBetacoronavirusCodonCOVID-19Evolution, MolecularGenes, ViralGenetic FitnessGenetic VariationGenome, ViralOpen Reading FramesPhylogenySARS-CoV-2Spike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusViral ProteinsCodonSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2Viral Proteins

Identifiers

PMID33976134
PMCPMC8113528
OpenAlexW3092226560

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.