Ryan Hisner Profile picture
Oct 29, 2023 48 tweets 16 min read Read on X
What’s new in the world of SARS-CoV-2 accessory proteins? In this 🧵, I’ll recap their evolution so far & describe a possible new trend: partial or total deletion of ORF7a, ORF7b, & ORF8—particularly in GW.5.1.1, an XBB.1.19 + FLip lineage—plus an ORF9b/N bonus TRS surprise! 1/45
Image
Image
The SARS-CoV-2 accessory proteins are ORF3a, ORF6, ORF7a, ORF8, ORF9b, and N* (the last absent from Delta). While the non-structural & structural proteins are absolutely essential for replication, accessory proteins are not. 2/45
In cell culture & in mice, deleting each accessory protein (one at a time) causes only slight-to-moderate reductions in viral replication & pathogenesis. ORF3a & ORF6 seem more crucial than ORF7a, ORF7b, and ORF8. (ORF9b & N* are excluded from these studies). 3/45 Image
Other studies have shown accessory proteins play important roles, often by mucking up normal cellular functions, especially innate immune defenses, like the interferon response. Some of the best work in this area has been by @KroganLab. 4/45
For a detailed look at some of the posited mechanisms by which accessory proteins evade innate immune responses, see the excellent, definitive review on this subject by @JudyMinkoff & @virusninja. 5/45
Earlier this year, @PeacockFlu, @siamosolocani, & I wrote a paper describing the loss of ORF8 in globally widespread lineages, first in Alpha, then BA.5, XBB.1*, and XBC.1 (a Delta-Omicron recombinant). Below is a thread I wrote on ORF8’s demise. 6/45
Eminent phylogenetics guru and genius-award winning @trvrb recently released a paper with @pavitrarc & @wcassias showing, through multiple lines of evidence, that ORF8 knockout has been positively selected for in SARS-CoV-2. 7/45
ORF3a has remained relatively untouched by large deletions, stop codons, and TRS destruction. So has ORF6, which @GreningerLab, @AminAddetia, & others have shown blocks import & export of cellular cargo, stonewalling our antiviral interferon response. 8/45 Image
ORF7a & ORF7b, on the other hand, have frequently been erased by large deletions, frameshift-causing deletions, & stop codons. In the thread below, I detail some evidence that there seems to be evolutionary pressure to reduce ORF7a expression. 9/45
In that thread, I showed that C27389T, which virtually abolishes ORF7a expression, showed marked growth within each variant wave. But you can see that two variants did not fit the pattern: BA.2 and XBB. I think there is a reason for this—ORF6:D61L. 10/45
ORF6:D61L is a rare bird—a 3-nuc mutation. It is present in all BA.2-derived lineages, including all XBB. It was also in BA.4 but not BA.5, & this may be one of the primary reasons BA.5 so easily outgrew BA.4—despite having an identical spike. 11/45 Image
In a superb ORF6 paper published last month, @LisaMiorin & @KroganLab show that ORF6:D61L seriously impairs ORF6’s immune evasion function by reducing its ability to block cellular trafficking in & out of the nucleus. 12/45
Image
Image
If D61L harms ORF6 function, why is it so prevalent? It may have just piggybacked on BA.2, which had a bevy of other beneficial mutations. And while a harmful 1-nuc mutation can revert easily enough, it’s much more difficult to walk back a 3-nuc mutation. 13/45
ORF6:D61L is a TRS-related mutation that almost certainly arose due to a “copy-choice” recombination event. D61L creates extended homology for the ORF7a TRS, which should increase its expression (i.e. create more copies of ORF7a mRNA). 14/45 Image
I use the term “TRS” a lot in this thread, & I know it’s confusing. That’s why I spent many hours putting together an explanation of what a TRS is and how it works. You can read it in tweets 4-21 in the thread below (if you haven’t already). 15/45
A few functions of these accessory proteins are understood, but like most things in biology, most of what they do is unknown. But whatever their exact functions, I think there’s likely a large amount of overlap, esp. between ORF6 & ORF7ab—as @KroganLab has hinted at. 16/45 Image
Witness the remarkable inverse relationship between the prevalence of ORF6:D61L (which hobbles ORF6) compared to the combined prevalence of three ORF7a TRS-killing mutations & large ORF7a deletions. (Y-axis scales are different to make the relationship clear). 17/45 Image
Due to the frequency of low-quality sequences, it’s much more difficult to accurately determine the prevalence of deletions. But a Cov-Spectrum search for deletions in ORF7a of about 25 or more nucleotides reveals a similar inverse trend with ORF6:D61L. 18/45 Image
For reasons unknown, global trends in ORF7a ablation are enormously magnified in South Africa, with peaks in ORF7a-TRS-killers & large deletions ~20-fold higher—note identical y-axis scales. Any ideas, @Tuliodna, @Rajeev_the_king, @sigallab, @houzhou, @DarrenM98230782? 19/45 Image
It seems that as long as ORF6 is fully functional and not hobbled by ORF6:D61L, ORF7a is disposable. But when ORF6:D61L is present, there is strong selection against mutations that knock out ORF7a, suggesting they may have overlapping functions. 20/45
This may be relevant to the primary subject of this thread: the possible disappearance of ORF7a, ORF7b, and ORF8 from one of the fastest-growing SARS-CoV-2 lineages, GW.5.1.1—a rare XBB.1* that had an intact ORF8—and similar deletions in other lineages. 21/45 Image
First a question: Since the ORF8 protein has been axed in the vast majority of viruses, why hasn’t the ORF8 gene been deleted from the genome? The transcription of each genome & 8/10 subgenomic mRNAs require copying the dead, 366-nuc ORF8 gene—a real waste of resources. 22/45 Image
One possible reason the ORF8 gene still hangs about, despite being saddled with a stop codon, is explained by pre-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirologist expert @wanderer_jasnah: Such a large deletion might scramble the secondary RNA structure. 23/45
When we talk about mutations, we're normally concerned with the amino acid (AA) change they cause, which in turn can affect the function of the protein (by making it less vulnerable to antibodies, for example). But even silent mutations (which do not cause an AA change)… 24/45 Image
…can affect secondary RNA structure, which is the way the RNA genome twists, turns, loops, & pairs with itself. Some parts of this structure are absolutely essential, such as the stem-loops at the beginning of the genome (the 5’ UTR) shown below. 25/45 Image
Most relevant here is the RNA structure around each subgenomic RNA TRS—7 of 8 TRS’s are located on stem-loops, & all but one face “upward,” i.e. toward the loop at the end of the stem. I don’t think the precise reason for this is known, but you can bet it’s important. 26/45 Image
As Jasnah explains, the N/ORF9b TRS is likely the most important of all, so any deletion of ORF8 would likely need to preserve the secondary RNA structure characterizing this region. 27/45
While nothing has been confirmed yet, I believe a large branch of GW.5.1.1 likely has a deletion spanning ORF7a, ORF7b, and ORF8. Nearly every genome in this branch has NNN’s (which signify “unknown”) starting just before ORF7a & ending just after ORF8. 28/45 Image
The deletion is so large & unexpected it confuses sequencing software, hence the NNN’s. Aligning genomes from this GW.5.1.1 branch with the invaluable Nextclade & viewing on Aliview, sequences from different countries & labs mostly match up well. 29/45 Image
Similarly, using the NIH’s BLAST (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool), sequences from various labs appear remarkably similar, with near-identical stretches of NNN’s. (Some sequences, mostly from labs known for less-than-perfect sequencing, differ somewhat.) 30/45

Image
Image
Image
Assuming this is, in fact, a deletion—not yet a certainty—its location may not perfectly coincide with the NNN’s, as this can be affected by various sequencing technicalities (primers, etc). 31/45
But if the stretch of NNN’s roughly coincides with the posited GW.5.1.1 deletion, something remarkable occurs: the recently departed ORF7a’s TRS is hacked off & shamelessly stolen by N/ORF9b! (N & ORF9b share the same TRS.) 32/45 Image
In my ORF9b 🧵, I argued that a major theme in SARS-2 evolution has been recurring mutations that increase N/ORF9b expression—especially ORF9b, whose voracious appetite for TRS is infamous. The theft of ORF7a’s TRS—if true—takes this to a new level. 33/45
I actually consider this posited new TRS to be the 3rd one for N/ORF9b, the second consisting of a slightly suboptimal TRS with impressive extended homology on its 3’ end (right side)—4/5 and 8/11 are perfect matches for the 3’ end of the TRS-L. 34/45 Image
Adding something like a 3rd TRS for N/ORF9b, however, is not *entirely* unprecedented. Gamma had a 4-nucleotide insertion in the middle of the N/ORF9b double TRS that, astonishingly, added a third, overlapping TRS. 35/45 Image
But what about the evidence, discussed above, that for lineages with the ORF6-crippling D61L, an intact ORF7a is essential? In yet another astounding twist, this GW.5.1.1 deletion has radically changed ORF6:61—either by reverting 2 nucs to form ORF6:L61H… 36/45 Image
…reverting entirely to ORF6:L61D, or maybe by trashing the stop codon & extending ORF6 by another. It’s not 100% clear what’s happened at ORF6:61 because the edges of the posited deletion are messy, but most sequences imply some major change has occurred. 37/45 Image
GW.5.1.1 is not the only new lineage that appears to possess large deletions across ORF7ab-ORF8. At least two others, probably more, have similar, but somewhat shorter, deletions. One branch of EG.5.1, e.g., features NNN’s across ORF8 & half of ORF7b. 38/45 Image
Dozens of sequences in this branch from Japan actually register a deletion where others only have NNN’s, but the resulting mutant is too heinous for Nextclade to contemplate. 39/45 Image
BLAST, however, looks the hideous mutant straight in the eye, & seems to give a truthful report. 40/45 Image
ORF7a is spared, while half of ORF7b is lost. The kicker? This deletion *also* seems to add a 3rd TRS for ORF9b/N. This time N/ORF9b, like a graverobber swiping the boots from a corpse, pilfers the TRS of the newly deceased ORF8 gene. 41/45 Image
I want to emphasize that while I strongly suspect something like what I’ve described above is going on, nothing has been verified or is certain. It’s possible something entirely different is happening. We await word from the oracular readers of raw sequences. 42/45
But assuming it is real, what does it all mean? Possibly nothing. After all, this is only a very small fraction of sequences, & like various other peculiarities—such as the various double-FCS lineages with S:P812R—this may be a lot of sound & fury, signifying nothing. 43/45
Seeing similar deletions in multiple branches suggests changing selection pressures & reinforces the impressive ability of SARS-CoV-2 to refashion itself & the real possibility of future abrupt genomic changes. But the precise real-world consequences? Impossible to predict. 44/45
Before ending, let’s acknowledge the impressive foresight of @wanderer_jasnah, who predicted ORF8 loss & eventual deletion (see above: tweets 23, 27) & @trvrb, whose recent ORF8 knockout paper suggested ORF7a, ORF7b, & ORF8 are prime candidates for deletion. 45/end Image
Thank you:
• @theosanderson for making GenSplore, an essential tool used in many of the diagrams above (whose only flaw is the lack of ORF7b labeling)
• @ChaoranChen_ for creating & continually improving the amazing Cov-Spectrum
Thank you:
• Lab workers, who do the groundwork without which any kind of analysis would be impossible—esp. sequencers in Japan in this case.
• @DarrenM98230782, @PeacockFlu, @siamosolocani, @Asinickle, @nzm8qs, @JosetteSchoenma, @gianlucac1, @shay_fleishon, @wolfeagle1989
Thank you:
• Lab workers, who do the groundwork without which any kind of analysis would be impossible—esp. sequencers in Japan in this case.
• @DarrenM98230782, @PeacockFlu, @siamosolocani, @Asinickle, @nzm8qs, @JosetteSchoenma, @gianlucac1, @shay_fleishon, @wolfeagle1989

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ryan Hisner

Ryan Hisner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LongDesertTrain

Dec 24
BA.3.2 emerged in Nov 2024 after ~3 years of intrahost evolution with >50 new spike AA muts, but since then, it's changed very little. Could the drug molnupiravir (MOV) galvanize BA.3.2 into pursuing new evolutionary paths? A new 89-mut MOV BA.3.2 seq suggests it could. 1/11 Image
Background on MOV: It's a mutagenic drug. Its purpose is to cause so many mutations that the virus becomes unviable & is cleared. But we've long known this often does not happen. Instead, the virus persists in highly mutated form & can be transmitted. 2/
I was an author on a paper published in @Nature that conclusively showed not only that MOV has created highly mutated, persistent viruses, but that these viruses have transmitted numerous times. See 🧵 below by lead author @theosanderson. 3/
Read 11 tweets
Dec 22
The most valuable viral research tools—@nextstrain & CovSpectrum—are being destroyed, not only blocked from new data but now forbidden from even sharing info from the PAST. Why?

Because GISAID is run dictatorially by a con man, paranoid egomaniac, & liar named Peter Bogner. 1/
I use CovSpectrum & Nextstrain every day—& I'm not the only one. Every Covid thread I've ever posted here has relied partly on CovSpectrum & Nextstrain for information & visuals. These vital tools have now been stolen from us by a world-class grifter. 2/ thinkglobalhealth.org/article/to-fin…Image
For years scientists knew something was very, very wrong with GISAID, but the breakout story (from which much of this 🧵is based) came 2 years ago in @ScienceMagazine from @sciencecohen & Martin Enserik. 3/
science.org/content/articl…
Read 22 tweets
Dec 9
3/77 sequences from the latest Netherlands upload are BA.3.2 as well as 4/86 seqs from Queensland, Australia, consistent w/the steady, slow growth we've seen in Germany, the UK, Ireland, & much of Australia.
1/4
One interesting (and possibly coincidental) aspect of the BA.3.2 tree: Two large branches have NSP14 mutations at adjacent AA residues—ORF1b:T1896I and ORF1b:H1897Y. 2/4 Image
I don't have any idea what functional effects either of these mutations would have. They are both C->T mutations, which is the most common type, but they've been relatively uncommon throughout the pandemic, with fewer than 8000 sequences combined. 3/4 Image
Read 4 tweets
Nov 22
Fascinating 🧵. The grotesquely mutated spike of this NJ Cryptic binds ACE2 very tightly.

It raises a broader question: Can cryptic wastewater-like lineages transmit?

YES

We knew it happened once. Now we know it's happened at least twice. The results were not pretty. 1/15
The first instance involved a small cluster of sequences that hospitalized several people & resulted in the death of a young child in early 2022. More on this one later. 2/15 Image
The most recent example requires some background. In late 2024, a spectacularly mutated Delta appeared in Spain with 40 new spike mutations and numerous Cryptic markers.

Normally, I would write a thread about such a remarkable sequence, but there were some issues... 3/15 Image
Read 15 tweets
Nov 5
Slovenia gets its first BA.3.2. Its (slow) geographic spread continues.

Also, 2/4 sequences uploaded from Western Australia (WA) today are BA.3.2.2.

If you're not familiar with BA.3.2, see posts 3 & 4 below for an introduction. 1/4
@StuartTurville has pointed out that WA delayed Covid spread longer than elsewhere in Australia. China has a somewhat similar immune history (as do other SE Asian countries). Perhaps BA.3.2 will do well in China once it arrives there? 2/4
Read 4 tweets
Oct 22
I beg to differ! If it is not a sequencing mistake—and it looks clean—one of these BA.3.2 has something completely novel in SARS-CoV-2 evolution: an FCS-adjacent deletion!

One of the two QT repeats appears to have been deleted. I've never seen anything like this before. Image
Work by @TheMenacheryLab looked at a similar, more extensive, deletion. They deleted both QT repeats plus the next AA (∆QTQTN). In Vero cells (monkey kidney cells), it produced extra-large plaques & outcompeted WT virus—similar to furin cleavage site (FCS)-deletion mutants. 2/12 Image
But in human lung cancer (Calu3) cells, the ∆QTQTN-mutant replication was dramatically reduced (2.5 orders of magnitude), and in infected hamsters disease was much milder. 3/12 Image
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(