Rampant C→U Hypermutation in the Genomes of SARS-CoV-2 and Other Coronaviruses: Causes and Consequences for Their Short- and Long-Term Evolutionary Trajectories
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The wealth of accurately curated sequence data for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), its long genome, and its low substitution rate provides a relatively blank canvas with which to investigate effects of mutational and editing processes imposed by the host cell. The finding that a large proportion of sequence change in SARS-CoV-2 in the initial months of the pandemic comprised C→U mutations in a host APOBEC-like context provides evidence for a potent host-driven antiviral editing mechanism against coronaviruses more often associated with antiretroviral defense. In evolutionary terms, the contribution of biased, convergent, and context-dependent mutations to sequence change in SARS-CoV-2 is substantial, and these processes are not incorporated by standard models used in molecular epidemiology investigations.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.01.072330: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.01.072330: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-