ArticleCurrent microbiology2023
Retrospect of the Two-Year Debate: What Fuels the Evolution of SARS-CoV-2: RNA Editing or Replication Error?
Article in Current microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- MPXV RNA-seq data provide evidence for protection of viral transcripts from APOBEC3 editing.Journal of virology · 2026Article
- Accurate interpretation of inosines in RNAs: recognized as G is more than basepairing with C.Epigenomics · 2025Article
- Sputnik V-Induced Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Variants during the Dissemination of the Gamma Variant in Venezuela.Viruses · 2024Article
- Targeted accurate RNA consensus sequencing (tARC-seq) reveals mechanisms of replication error affecting SARS-CoV-2 divergence.Nature microbiology · 2024Article
- Neutralization of Different Variants of SARS-CoV-2 by a F(ab')2 Preparation from Sera of Horses Immunized with the Viral Receptor Binding Domain.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mutation is one of the mechanisms of the evolutionary divergence of an organism. Under this global COVID-19 pandemic, the fast evolution of SARS-CoV-2 became one of the most worrying issues. Some researchers believed that the hosts' RNA deamination systems (APOBECs and ADARs) are the major source of mutations and have driven the evolution of SARS-CoV-2. However, apart from RNA editing, the RDRP (RNA-dependent RNA polymerase)-mediated replication errors may also contribute to the mutation of SARS-CoV-2 (just like the single-nucleotide polymorphisms/variations in eukaryotes caused by DNA replication errors). Unfortunately, it is technically unable to distinguish RNA editing and replication errors (SNPs) in this RNA virus. Here comes a fundamental question: we indeed observed the fast evolution of SARS-CoV-2, but what exactly fuels its evolution: RNA editing or replication errors? This debate lasts for 2 years. In this piece, we will retrospect the 2-year debate on RNA editing versus SNPs.
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.