tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020 Apr;24(8):4558-4564. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202004_21041.
Bioinformatic analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 is unrelated to known artificial coronaviruses.
Dallavilla T[SUP]1[/SUP], Bertelli M, Morresi A, Bushati V, Stuppia L, Beccari T, Chiurazzi P, Marceddu G.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the present coronavirus pandemic and some suggestions were made about its possible artificial origin. We, therefore, compared SARS-CoV-2 with such known viruses that were prepared in the laboratory and other relevant natural strains to estimate their genetic relatedness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
BLAST and clustalW were used to identify and align viral sequences of SARS-CoV-2 to other animal coronaviruses (human, bat, mouse, pangolin) and related artificial constructs. Phylogenetics trees were then prepared using iTOL.
RESULTS:
Our study supports the notion that known artificial coronaviruses, including the chimeric SL-SHC014-MA15 synthesized in 2015, differ too much from SARS-CoV-2 to hypothesize an artificial origin of the latter. On the contrary, our data support the natural origin of the COVID-19 virus, likely derived from bats, possibly transferred to pangolins, before spreading to man.
CONCLUSIONS:
Speculations about the artificial origin of SARS-CoV-2 are most likely unfounded. On the contrary, when carefully handled, engineered organisms provide a unique opportunity to study biological systems in a controlled fashion. Biotechnology is a powerful tool to advance medical research and should not be abandoned because of irrational fears.
PMID:32373995DOI:10.26355/eurrev_202004_21041
Bioinformatic analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 is unrelated to known artificial coronaviruses.
Dallavilla T[SUP]1[/SUP], Bertelli M, Morresi A, Bushati V, Stuppia L, Beccari T, Chiurazzi P, Marceddu G.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the present coronavirus pandemic and some suggestions were made about its possible artificial origin. We, therefore, compared SARS-CoV-2 with such known viruses that were prepared in the laboratory and other relevant natural strains to estimate their genetic relatedness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
BLAST and clustalW were used to identify and align viral sequences of SARS-CoV-2 to other animal coronaviruses (human, bat, mouse, pangolin) and related artificial constructs. Phylogenetics trees were then prepared using iTOL.
RESULTS:
Our study supports the notion that known artificial coronaviruses, including the chimeric SL-SHC014-MA15 synthesized in 2015, differ too much from SARS-CoV-2 to hypothesize an artificial origin of the latter. On the contrary, our data support the natural origin of the COVID-19 virus, likely derived from bats, possibly transferred to pangolins, before spreading to man.
CONCLUSIONS:
Speculations about the artificial origin of SARS-CoV-2 are most likely unfounded. On the contrary, when carefully handled, engineered organisms provide a unique opportunity to study biological systems in a controlled fashion. Biotechnology is a powerful tool to advance medical research and should not be abandoned because of irrational fears.
PMID:32373995DOI:10.26355/eurrev_202004_21041