新冠病毒產生149個突變和2個亞型,傳染性和毒性會改變嗎? HeHo 20200308
3月3日,《國家科學評論》(NSR)發表題為《關於SARS-CoV-2的起源和持續進化》的研究稱,新冠病毒已經演化出L和S兩個亞型,並且這兩種亞型的傳播能力、致病嚴重程度或許存在明顯區別。
《國家科學評論》上,一項研究分析了公共數據庫裡的103個新冠病毒基因組數據,發現這些病毒株一共存在149個突變位點,且多數突變在近期發生。
研究人員依據病毒RNA基因體的第28144位點將這些基因組數據分為2個組,L亞型是T鹼基(對應亮氨酸,Leu),S亞型是C鹼基(對應絲氨酸,Ser)。並得出S亞型新冠病毒與蝙蝠來源的冠狀病毒在進化樹上更接近,即S亞型相對更古老的結論。
作者表示,相對於S亞型,L亞型更具毒性,傳染力更強。論文稱,這個推斷將有助於新冠肺炎的差異化的治療和防控。
大眾對於「突變」過度恐慌!
台大教授:新冠還算是穩定的病毒 研究發布後,媒體紛紛以「新冠病毒已突變為2 個亞型」等字眼報導,似乎新冠病毒已經突變產生了新的威脅。 台灣大學醫學院教授葉秀慧指出表示,事實上,病毒突變符合正常流行病學規律,目前研究也沒有發現病毒產生重組。《國家科學評論》發表的這項研究是一個針對基因分型的研究,並沒有確證新冠病毒產生了功能的分型,對其傳染力和毒性的比較也只是猜測。
對於一個3萬鹼基對大小的大型RNA病毒來說,數月來的大規模傳播過程中累積產生149個突變並非意外。專家更是指出,新冠病毒相較起來還算是比較穩定的病毒
新冠病毒並沒有發生關鍵的突變
突變對於病毒來說是家常便飯,尤其是對於新冠病毒這類RNA病毒更是如此。新冠病毒在宿主中快速複製、傳播過程中,隨機突變會在基因體中累積。這種隨機突變可以幫助追蹤病原體的傳播,並了解其傳播途徑和動態。
葉秀慧指出,因為現在證據不足,沒辦法說這2個亞型會不會有什麼關鍵嚴重的差別。「但是因為新冠病毒約有3萬個鹼基,相當大型,所以要產生大的突變,其實沒有這麼容易。」
對於新冠病毒這類RNA病毒來說,最需要關注的特性就是傳染力和毒性,目前還沒有看到兩者發生關鍵的突變。有學者指出,2個亞型的比較只是一個猜測,需要實驗來驗證。
ABSTRACT
The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic started in late December 2019 in Wuhan, China,
and has since impacted a large portion of China and raised major global concern. Herein, we investigated the extent of
molecular divergence between SARS-CoV-2 and other related coronaviruses. Although we found only 4% variability in
genomic nucleotides between SARS-CoV-2 and a bat SARS-related coronavirus
(SARSr-CoV; RaTG13), the difference at neutral sites was 17%, suggesting the divergence between the two viruses is much larger
than previously estimated. Our
results suggest that the development of new
variations in functional sites in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of
the spike seen in SARS-CoV-2 and viruses from pangolin SARSr-CoVs are likely caused by mutations and natural selection
besides recombination. Population
genetic analyses of 103 SARS-CoV-2 genomes indicated that these viruses evolved into two major types (designated L
and S), that are well defined by two different SNPs that show nearly
complete linkage across the viral strains sequenced to date.
Although the L type (∼70%) is more prevalent than the S type (∼30%), the S type was found to be the ancestral
version. Whereas
the L type was more prevalent in the early stages of the outbreak in Wuhan, the
frequency of the L type decreased after early January 2020. Human
intervention may have placed more severe selective pressure on the L type,
which might be more aggressive and spread more quickly.
On the other hand, the S type, which is
evolutionarily older and less aggressive, might have increased in relative
frequency due to relatively weaker selective pressure.
These findings strongly support an urgent
need for further immediate, comprehensive studies that combine genomic
data, epidemiological data, and chart records of the clinical symptoms of
patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
沒有留言:
張貼留言
請網友務必留下一致且可辨識的稱謂
顧及閱讀舒適性,段與段間請空一行