4.6 Article

Seasonal Genetic Drift of Human Influenza A Virus Quasispecies Revealed by Deep Sequencing

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02596

关键词

influenza virus; quasispecies; NGS; genetic drift; influenza season

资金

  1. Israeli Ministry of Science, Technology and Space
  2. French Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  3. European Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] [278433-PREDEMICS]
  4. French Ministry of National Education, Higher Education and Research, through the Israeli-French High Council for Scientific and Technological Research (program Complexity in Biology: molecular aspects of infectious diseases)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

After a pandemic wave in 2009 following their introduction in the human population, the H1N1pdm09 viruses replaced the previously circulating, pre-pandemic H1N1 virus and, along with H3N2 viruses, are now responsible for the seasonal influenza type A epidemics. So far, the evolutionary potential of influenza viruses has been mainly documented by consensus sequencing data. However, like other RNA viruses, influenza A viruses exist as a population of diverse, albeit related, viruses, or quasispecies. Interest in this quasispecies nature has increased with the development of next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies that allow a more in-depth study of the genetic variability. NGS deep sequencing methodologies were applied to determine the whole genome genetic heterogeneity of the three categories of influenza A viruses that circulated in humans between 2007 and 2012 in France, directly from clinical respiratory specimens. Mutation frequencies and single nucleotide polymorphisms were used for comparisons to address the level of natural intrinsic heterogeneity of influenza A viruses. Clear differences in single nucleotide polymorphism profiles between seasons for a given subtype also revealed the constant genetic drift that human influenza A virus quasispecies undergo.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据