4.6 Article

RotaC: A web-based tool for the complete genome classification of group A rotaviruses

期刊

BMC MICROBIOLOGY
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-9-238

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (FWO)-Vlaanderen
  2. Institute for the Promotion and Innovation through Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT Vlaanderen)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Group A rotaviruses are the most common cause of severe diarrhea in infants and children worldwide and continue to have a major global impact on childhood morbidity and mortality. In recent years, considerable research efforts have been devoted to the development of two new live, orally administered vaccines. Although both vaccines have proven to confer a good protection against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis, these vaccines will have to be screened and may have to be updated regularly to reflect temporal and spatial genotype fluctuations. In this matter, the genetic characterization of circulating and new emerging rotavirus strains will need to be compulsory and accurate. An extended classification system for rotaviruses in which all the 11 genomic RNA segments are used, has been proposed recently. The use of this classification system will help to elucidate the role of gene reassortments in the generation of genetic diversity, host range restriction, co-segregation of certain gene segments, and in adaptation to a new host species. Results: Here we present a web-based tool that can be used for fast rotavirus genotype differentiation of all 11 group A rotavirus gene segments according to the new guidelines proposed by the Rotavirus Classification Working Group (RCWG). Conclusion: With the increasing sequencing efforts that are being conducted around the world to unravel complete rotavirus genomes of human and animal origin, this tool will be of great help to analyze and correctly classify the large amount of new data. The web-based tool is freely available at http://rotac.regatools.be.

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