Correlated substitutions reveal SARS-like coronaviruses recombine frequently with a diverse set of structured gene pools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantifying SARS-like coronavirus (SL-CoV) evolution is critical to understanding the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and the molecular processes that could underlie future epidemic viruses. While genomic analyses suggest recombination was a factor in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, few studies have quantified recombination rates among SL-CoVs. Here, we infer recombination rates of SL-CoVs from correlated substitutions in sequencing data using a coalescent model with recombination. Our computationally-efficient, non-phylogenetic method infers recombination parameters of both sampled sequences and the unsampled gene pools with which they recombine. We apply this approach to infer recombination parameters for a range of positive-sense RNA viruses. We then analyze a set of 191 SL-CoV sequences (including SARS-CoV-2) and find that ORF1ab and S genes frequently undergo recombination. We identify which SL-CoV sequence clusters have recombined with shared gene pools, and show that these pools have distinct structures and high recombination rates, with multiple recombination events occurring per synonymous substitution. We find that individual genes have recombined with different viral reservoirs. By decoupling contributions from mutation and recombination, we recover the phylogeny of non-recombined portions for many of these SL-CoVs, including the position of SARS-CoV-2 in this clonal phylogeny. Lastly, by analyzing >400,000 SARS-CoV-2 whole genome sequences, we show current diversity levels are insufficient to infer the within-population recombination rate of the virus since the pandemic began. Our work offers new methods for inferring recombination rates in RNA viruses with implications for understanding recombination in SARS-CoV-2 evolution and the structure of clonal relationships and gene pools shaping its origins.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".