ArticleBMC genomics2023
The 29-nucleotide deletion in SARS-CoV: truncated versions of ORF8 are under purifying selection.
Article in BMC genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Properties and Mechanisms of Deletions, Insertions, and Substitutions in the Evolutionary History of SARS-CoV-2.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- ORF3c is expressed in SARS-CoV-2-infected cells and inhibits innate sensing by targeting MAVS.EMBO reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccessory proteins have diverse roles in coronavirus pathobiology. One of them in SARS-CoV (the causative agent of the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak in 2002-2003) is encoded by the open reading frame 8 (ORF8). Among the most dramatic genomic changes observed in SARS-CoV isolated from patients during the peak of the pandemic in 2003 was the acquisition of a characteristic 29-nucleotide deletion in ORF8. This deletion cause splitting of ORF8 into two smaller ORFs, namely ORF8a and ORF8b. Functional consequences of this event are not entirely clear.
resultsHere, we performed evolutionary analyses of ORF8a and ORF8b genes and documented that in both cases the frequency of synonymous mutations was greater than that of nonsynonymous ones. These results suggest that ORF8a and ORF8b are under purifying selection, thus proteins translated from these ORFs are likely to be functionally important. Comparisons with several other SARS-CoV genes revealed that another accessory gene, ORF7a, has a similar ratio of nonsynonymous to synonymous mutations suggesting that ORF8a, ORF8b, and ORF7a are under similar selection pressure.
conclusionsOur results for SARS-CoV echo the known excess of deletions in the ORF7a-ORF7b-ORF8 complex of accessory genes in SARS-CoV-2. A high frequency of deletions in this gene complex might reflect recurrent searches in "functional space" of various accessory protein combinations that may eventually produce more advantageous configurations of accessory proteins similar to the fixed deletion in the SARS-CoV ORF8 gene.
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.