4.7 Article

Respiratory syncytial virus B sequence analysis reveals a novel early genotype

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-83079-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. CONACYT Convocatoria de Investigacion Cientifica Basica [CONACYT-A1-S-38080]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RSV-B virus has multiple genotypes, but the lack of genotype assignation criteria has direct implications on viral evolution, viral detection methods, and vaccine design. This study classified the previously described 37 genotypes of RSV-B into fifteen distinct genotypes, and identified a new early circulating genotype GB0.
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major cause of respiratory infections and is classified in two main groups, RSV-A and RSV-B, with multiple genotypes within each of them. For RSV-B, more than 30 genotypes have been described, without consensus on their definition. The lack of genotype assignation criteria has a direct impact on viral evolution understanding, development of viral detection methods as well as vaccines design. Here we analyzed the totality of complete RSV-B G gene ectodomain sequences published in GenBank until September 2018 (n=2190) including 478 complete genome sequences using maximum likelihood and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses, as well as intergenotypic and intragenotypic distance matrices, in order to generate a systematic genotype assignation. Individual RSV-B genes were also assessed using maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses and multiple sequence alignments were used to identify molecular markers associated to specific genotypes. Analyses of the complete G gene ectodomain region, sequences clustering patterns, and the presence of molecular markers of each individual gene indicate that the 37 previously described genotypes can be classified into fifteen distinct genotypes: BA, BA-C, BA-CC, CB1-THB, GB1-GB4, GB6, JAB1-NZB2, SAB1, SAB2, SAB4, URU2 and a novel early circulating genotype characterized in the present study and designated GB0.

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

4.7
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