Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Bioessays. 2021 May;43(5):e2000325. doi: 10.1002/bies.202000325. Epub 2021 Mar 9.
The origin of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the subject of many hypotheses. One of them, proposed by Segreto and Deigin, assumes artificial chimeric construction of SARS-CoV-2 from a backbone of RaTG13-like CoV and receptor binding domain (RBD) of a pangolin MP789-like CoV, followed by serial cell or animal passage. Here we show that this hypothesis relies on incorrect or weak assumptions, and does not agree with the results of comparative genomics analysis. The genetic divergence between SARS-CoV-2 and both its proposed ancestors is too high to have accumulated in a lab, given the timeframe of several years. Furthermore, comparative analysis of S-protein gene sequences suggests that the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 probably represents an ancestral non-recombinant variant. These and other arguments significantly weaken the hypothesis of a laboratory origin for SARS-CoV-2, while the hypothesis of a natural origin is consistent with all available genetic and experimental data.
严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)的起源是许多假说的主题。其中,Segreto 和 Deigin 提出的一种假说是,从类似于 RaTG13 的冠状病毒的主干和穿山甲 MP789 样冠状病毒的受体结合域(RBD)出发,通过连续的细胞或动物传代,人工嵌合构建 SARS-CoV-2。在这里,我们表明该假说依赖于不正确或薄弱的假设,并且与比较基因组学分析的结果不一致。鉴于几年的时间框架,SARS-CoV-2 与其两个假定祖先之间的遗传差异太大,不可能在实验室中积累。此外,S 蛋白基因序列的比较分析表明,SARS-CoV-2 的 RBD 可能代表一个祖先的非重组变体。这些和其他论点极大地削弱了 SARS-CoV-2 实验室起源的假说,而自然起源的假说与所有可用的遗传和实验数据一致。