4.5 Article

The evolution of endogenous retroviral envelope genes in bats and their potential contribution to host biology

期刊

VIRUS RESEARCH
卷 270, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2019.197645

关键词

Bat; EDI; ERV; Retrovirus; Envelope; Syncytin

类别

资金

  1. Royal Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bats are the primary reservoirs and carriers of a wide range of viruses of unknown infectivity and pathogenic potential. Some of those if transmitted to other species can cause enormous economic losses in agriculture, and mortality in humans. Bats can be persistently infected with viruses while not showing any symptoms of disease, despite having high virus titre levels in their tissues and shedding virions for months or years after primary infection. It has been suggested that the lack of symptoms of viral infections and low mortality rate in bats might be due to immune adaptations that result from their long-term co-evolution with viruses. In this study, we screened all publicly available bat genomes from six bat families within which we have identified several envelope sequences of retroviral origin (gammaretroviruses). We analysed the identified sequences with Bayesian methods and maximum-likelihood inference to generate a phylogenetic tree with additional reference sequences of known endogenous and exogenous viral envelope genes. We also identified groups of orthologous viral envelopes and analysed them to determine if any of them might be an EVE (endogenous virus element) with an EDI (EVE-derived immunity) function or a candidate for a bat syncytin gene, which is an endogenized viral envelope, mostly known from its function in placentation in animals. Our study shows that bat genomes contain a substantial number of large, intact envelopes with open reading frames, which were found clustering closely on a phylogenetic tree reconstruction with syncytin sequences of other species. That might indicate that such sequences are good candidates for further bat-syncytin/EDI search.

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

4.5
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