ArticleVirus evolution2025
Recently reported SARS-CoV-2 genomes suggested to be intermediate between the two early main lineages are instead likely derived.
Article in Virus evolution, 2025. 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.
- COVID's origins: what we do and don't know.Nature · 2026Article
- Isolation, identification and pathogenicity analysis of BCoV epidemic strains in Xinjiang.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding the genomic diversity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at the outset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic can provide insight into the circumstances leading to its emergence. Early SARS-CoV-2 genomic diversity has been classified into two distinct viral lineages, denoted "A" and "B," which we hypothesized were separately introduced into humans. Recently published data contain two genomes with a haplotype suggested to be an evolutionary intermediate to these two lineages, known as "T/T." We used a phylodynamic approach to analyze SARS-CoV-2 genomes from early 2020 to determine whether these two T/T genomes represent an evolutionarily intermediate haplotype between lineages A and B, or if they are a later descendent of either of these two lineages. We find that these two recently published T/T genomes do not represent an evolutionarily intermediate haplotype and were, instead, derived from either lineage A or lineage B. However, we cannot conclusively determine from which lineage they were derived. After including additional data from the start of the pandemic, including these two T/T genomes, we again find a discrepancy in the molecular clock when inferring the ancestral haplotype of SARS-CoV-2, corroborating existing evidence for the separate introductions of SARS-CoV-2 lineages A and B into the human population in late 2019.
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.