4.7 Article

An Infectious cDNA Clone of SARS-CoV-2

Journal

CELL HOST & MICROBE
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 841-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2020.04.004

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIA
  2. NIAID of the NIH [U19AI100625, R00AG049092, R24AI120942, AI114657, AI146081, 5UC7AI094660]
  3. STARs Award by the University of Texas System
  4. McLaughlin Fellowship Fund at UTMB
  5. IHII Pilot grant
  6. NIH [AI142759, AI145617, AI127744, AI136126, AI134907, UL1TR001439]
  7. Kleberg Foundation
  8. John S. Dunn Foundation
  9. Amon G. Carter Foundation
  10. Gilson Longenbaugh Foundation
  11. Summerfield Robert Foundation
  12. Clinical and Translational Science Award NRSA (TL1) Training Core from the NIH [TL1TR001440]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), underscores the urgency to develop experimental systems for studying this virus and identifying countermeasures. We report a reverse genetic system for SARS-CoV-2. Seven complimentary DNA (cDNA) fragments spanning the SARS-CoV-2 genome were assembled into a full-genome cDNA. RNA transcribed from the full-genome cDNA was highly infectious after electroporation into cells, producing 2.9 x 10(6) plaque-forming unit (PFU)/mL of virus. Compared with a clinical isolate, the infectious-clone-derived SARS-CoV-2 (icSARS-CoV-2) exhibited similar plaque morphology, viral RNA profile, and replication kinetics. Additionally, icSARS-CoV-2 retained engineered molecular markers and did not acquire other mutations. We generated a stable mNeonGreen SARS-CoV-2 (icSARS-CoV-2-mNG) by introducing this reporter gene into ORF7 of the viral genome. icSARS-CoV-2-mNG was successfully used to evaluate the antiviral activities of interferon (IFN). Collectively, the reverse genetic system and reporter virus provide key reagents to study SARS-CoV-2 and develop countermeasures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available