4.7 Article

The persistent prevalence and evolution of cross-family recombinant coronavirus GCCDC1 among a bat population: a two-year follow-up

Journal

SCIENCE CHINA-LIFE SCIENCES
Volume 60, Issue 12, Pages 1357-1363

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11427-017-9263-6

Keywords

coronavirus; bat population; evolution

Categories

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC1200202]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81290342, 81461168030]
  3. Major Special Projects for Infectious Disease Research of China [2016ZX10004222-003]
  4. China National Grand S&T Special Project [2014ZX10004-001-006]
  5. CAS-TWAS President's Fellowship of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS)
  6. World Academy of Sciences (TWAS)
  7. NSFC Innovative Research Group [81621091]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bats are connected with the increasing numbers of emerging and re-emerging viruses that may break the species barrier and spread into the human population. Coronaviruses are one of the most common viruses discovered in bats, which were considered as the natural source of recent human-susceptible coronaviruses, i.e. SARS-COV and MERS-CoV. Our previous study reported the discovery of a bat-derived putative cross-family recombinant coronavirus with a reovirus gene p10, named as Ro-BatCoV GCCDC1. In this report, through a two-year follow-up of a special bat population in one specific cave of south China, we illustrate that Ro-BatCoV GCCDC1 persistently circulates among bats. Notably, through the longitudinal observation, we identified the dynamic evolution of Ro-BatCoV GCCDC1 in bats represented by continuously recombination events. Our study provides the first glimpse of the virus evolution in one longitudinally observed bat population cohort and underlines the surveillance and pre-warning of potential interspecies transmittable viruses in bats.

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