Genomic Epidemiology of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, Colombia

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.26.20135715: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    RandomizationIn sensitivity analysis and in order to measure the effect of the SARS-CoV-2 uneven genomic representativeness across the world, two down sampling strategies datasets were implemented where, based on location, the sequences were randomly resampled 100 times and the phylogenetic and migration inference was replicated.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Genomic library preparation and sequencing: Library preparation and sequencing were performed following the ARTIC network (real-time molecular epidemiology for outbreak response) protocol and using both Nanopore and Illumina technologies (22).
    Nanopore
    suggested: None
    Genomic sequence assembly: Nanopore reads were basecalled using Guppy version 3.2.2 (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Oxford, UK) and then demultiplexed and trimmed using Porechop version 0.3.2_pre (23).
    Porechop
    suggested: (Porechop, RRID:SCR_016967)
    Single nucleotide variants were called with a depth of at least 200x and then polished consensus was generated using Nanopolish version 0.13.2 (25).
    Nanopolish
    suggested: (Nanopolish, RRID:SCR_016157)
    MiSeq reads were demultiplexed and quality control was performed with a Q-score threshold of 30 using fastp (26).
    MiSeq
    suggested: (A5-miseq, RRID:SCR_012148)
    Processed reads were aligned against SARS-CoV-2 reference genome (GenBank NC_045512.2), single nucleotide variants were called with a depth of at least 100x and consensus genomes were generated using BWA-MEM version 0.7.17 (24) and BBMap (27).
    BWA-MEM
    suggested: (Sniffles, RRID:SCR_017619)
    BBMap
    suggested: (BBmap, RRID:SCR_016965)
    The full genomic dataset was classified in lineages (29) using PANGOLIN (Phylogenetic Assignment of Named Global Outbreak LINeages) (30) and aligned with 10 iterative refinements using MAFFT (31).
    MAFFT
    suggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study has some limitations. Firstly, the geographical sources of infection relied on people to self-report their own symptoms onset and travel history, which is subject to inaccuracies. Secondly, we use air travel data from important destinations in Colombia but other locations may also have fueled COVID-19 emergence and dissemination in the country; flight travel data was not available from March 9, 2020, onwards. Thirdly, the number of sequences sampled represented a tiny fraction of the documented number of imported cases into Colombia; the sample was selected to be a country-wide representative given limited resources for genome sequencing and consequently, the introduced viral diversity may also have been underestimated. Another limitation of this analysis is the inherent uncertainty stemming from global unsystematic sampling. Therefore, the inferences about the number of introductions and the corresponding geographical source need to be interpreted with caution. We attempted to overcome this by undertaking sensitivity analyses and contrasting the results with the available epidemiological data and our estimates from travel data. However, more sequence data from Colombia and undersampled countries together with information of sampling representativeness per country is needed in order to account for sampling uncertainty in a more statistically rigorous manner. Our study provided evidence that an important number of independent introductions occurred to Colombia with ...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    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.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.