| Literature DB >> 29973122 |
Gairu Li1,2, Huijuan Wang3, Shilei Wang1,2, Gang Xing1,2, Cheng Zhang1,2, Wenyan Zhang1,2, Jie Liu1,2, Junyan Zhang1,2, Shuo Su1,2, Jiyong Zhou3.
Abstract
Porcine circovirus 3 (PCV3) was found to be associated with reproductive disease in pigs, and since its first identification in the United States, it subsequently spread worldwide, especially in China, where it might pose a potential threat to the porcine industry. However, no exhaustive analysis was performed to understand its evolution in the prospect of codon usage pattern. Here, we performed a deep codon usage analysis of PCV3. PCV3 sequences were classified into two clades: PCV3a and PCV3b, confirmed by principal component analysis. Additionally, the degree of codon usage bias of PCV3 was slightly low as inferred from the analysis of the effective number of codons. The codon usage pattern was mainly affected by natural selection, but there was a co-effect of mutation pressure and dinucleotide frequency. Moreover, based on similarity index analysis, codon adaptation index analysis and relative codon deoptimization index analysis, we found that PCV3 might pose a potential risk to public health though with unknow pathogenicity. In conclusion, this work reinforces the systematic understanding of the evolution of PCV3, which was reflected by the codon usage patterns and fitness of this novel emergent virus.Entities:
Keywords: Porcine circovirus 3 (PCV3); codon usage bias; dinucleotide; host; natural selection
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29973122 PMCID: PMC6177243 DOI: 10.1080/21505594.2018.1492863
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virulence ISSN: 2150-5594 Impact factor: 5.882
Figure 1.(a) The relative and cumulative inertia of the first 35 axes from a COA of the RSCU values; (b) PCA of different genotypes. Green, blue, red and orange refer to PCV3a-1, PCV3a-2, PCV3a-IM and PCV3b, respectively.
Figure 2.ENC values of PCV3 and the different genotypes. Green, blue, red and orange represented PCV3a-1, PCV3a-2, PCV3a-IM and PCV3b, respectively.
RSCU analysis of PCV3 genotypes and potential hosts.
| Genotype | Potential host | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA | Codon | PCV3 | PCV3a-1 | PCV3a-2 | PCV3a-IM | PCV3b | ||||
| Ala | GCA | 0.62 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.55 | 0.64 | 0.74 | 0.91 | 0.79 |
| GCC | 0.93 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.9 | 0.89 | |||||
| GCG | 1.21 | 1.14 | 1.1 | 1.11 | 0.46 | 0.5 | 0.42 | 0.46 | ||
| GCT | 1.25 | 0.58 | 0.96 | 1.06 | 1 | |||||
| Cys | TGC | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.86 | 0.86 | 0.85 | ||||
| TGT | 0.80 | 0.79 | 0.91 | 0.85 | ||||||
| Asp | GAC | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.76 | 0.77 | 1.2 | 1.07 | 1.14 | |
| GAT | 0.75 | 0.8 | 0.93 | 0.86 | ||||||
| Glu | GAA | 0.90 | 0.87 | 0.89 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.84 | 0.79 |
| GAG | ||||||||||
| Phe | TTC | 0.92 | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.93 | ||||
| TTT | 0.95 | 0.79 | 0.93 | 0.82 | ||||||
| Gly | GGA | 1.00 | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1.06 | 0.95 | 0.93 | 0.91 | 1 | 0.97 |
| GGC | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.58 | |||||
| GGG | 0.51 | 1.05 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| GGT | 0.90 | 0.83 | 0.87 | 0.83 | 0.96 | 0.63 | 0.57 | 0.65 | 0.65 | |
| His | CAC | |||||||||
| CAT | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.78 | 0.7 | 0.84 | 0.78 | |
| Ile | ATA | 0.87 | 0.85 | 1 | 0.83 | 0.85 | 0.10 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.45 |
| ATC | 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.2 | 0.16 | 0.12 | |||||
| ATT | 0.97 | 0.91 | 1.08 | 0.96 | ||||||
| Lys | AAA | 0.63 | 0.76 | 0.87 | 0.79 | |||||
| AAG | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.83 | 0.83 | |||||
| Leu | CTA | 0.76 | 0.8 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.76 | 0.27 | 0.58 | 0.43 | 0.39 |
| CTC | 1.30 | 1.31 | 1.27 | 1.31 | 1.3 | 1.38 | 1.07 | 1.17 | 1.3 | |
| CTG | 1.44 | 1.29 | 1.44 | 1.47 | 1.5 | |||||
| CTT | 0.59 | 0.59 | 0.71 | 0.56 | 0.55 | 0.64 | 0.77 | 0.79 | 0.7 | |
| TTA | 0.38 | 0.37 | 0.36 | 0.41 | 0.38 | 0.42 | 0.38 | 0.46 | 0.35 | |
| TTG | 0.69 | 0.79 | 0.77 | 0.71 | ||||||
| Asn | AAC | |||||||||
| AAT | 0.86 | 0.94 | 0.83 | 0.95 | 0.82 | 0.63 | 0.79 | 0.94 | 0.87 | |
| Pro | CCA | 0.88 | 0.94 | 1.11 | 1.01 | |||||
| CCC | 0.90 | 0.89 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | |||||
| CCG | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.86 | 0.44 | 0.56 | 0.45 | 0.48 | |
| CCT | 1.04 | 1.02 | 1.05 | 1.03 | 1.04 | 1.13 | 1.05 | 1.15 | 1.08 | |
| Gln | CAA | 0.29 | 0.44 | 0.53 | 0.5 | |||||
| CAG | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.68 | |||||
| Arg | AGA | 1.58 | 1.12 | 1.19 | ||||||
| AGG | 1.55 | 1.51 | 1.49 | 1.52 | 1.20 | 1.23 | 1.27 | |||
| CGA | 0.38 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.36 | 0.38 | 0.60 | 0.6 | 0.65 | 0.64 | |
| CGC | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.75 | 0.78 | 0.77 | 1.40 | 1.1 | 1.21 | ||
| CGG | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.89 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.50 | 1.29 | 1.21 | 1.25 | |
| CGT | 0.75 | 0.72 | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.77 | 0.60 | 0.44 | 0.48 | 0.44 | |
| Ser | AGC | |||||||||
| AGT | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.62 | 0.6 | 0.63 | 0.40 | 0.77 | 0.9 | 0.85 | |
| TCA | 0.19 | 0.2 | 0.21 | 0.1 | 0.21 | 0.35 | 0.73 | 0.9 | 0.77 | |
| TCC | 1.24 | 1.18 | 1.24 | 1.31 | 1.24 | 1.60 | 1.5 | 1.31 | 1.45 | |
| TCG | 0.92 | 0.98 | 1.03 | 1.01 | 0.83 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.36 | |
| TCT | 0.82 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.8 | 0.83 | 1.15 | 0.99 | 1.13 | 1.08 | |
| Thr | ACA | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1.05 | 1.03 | 0.92 | 1.14 | 1.03 |
| ACC | ||||||||||
| ACG | 0.44 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.44 | 0.43 | 0.27 | 0.57 | 0.46 | 0.52 | |
| ACT | 1.13 | 1.18 | 1.13 | 1.13 | 1.1 | 0.49 | 0.83 | 0.99 | 0.89 | |
| Val | GTA | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.23 | 0.34 | 0.47 | 0.41 |
| GTC | 0.44 | 0.39 | 0.38 | 0.44 | 0.49 | 1.40 | 1.07 | 0.95 | 1.07 | |
| GTG | 0.74 | 0.74 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.73 | |||||
| GTT | 0.65 | 0.57 | 0.73 | 0.58 | ||||||
| Tyr | TAC | 0.78 | 0.86 | 0.77 | 0.8 | 0.76 | ||||
| TAT | 0.42 | 0.73 | 0.89 | 0.79 | ||||||
Notes: optimal codons are displayed in bold. Over-represented (RSCU > 1.6) codons are marked in bold and italics.
Figure 3.ENC-plot analysis (ENC plotted against GC3s). The black curve represents the expected curve derived from the positions of strains when the codon usage was only determined by the GC3s composition. PCV3a-1, PCV3a-2, PCV3a-IM and PCV3b are represented in green, blue, red and orange, respectively.
Correlation analysis among codon composition, ENC value, nucleic acid composition, Gravy, Aroma and axis 1, axis2.
| A% | C% | G% | T% | T3s | C3s | A3s | G3s | GC | GC3s | ENC | Gravy | Aromo | axis1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C% | −0.149 | |||||||||||||
| G% | −0.733** | −0.362** | ||||||||||||
| T% | −0.071 | −0.801** | 0.170 | |||||||||||
| T3s | −0.174 | −0.765** | 0.333* | 0.873** | ||||||||||
| C3s | −0.336* | 0.677** | −0.108 | −0.436** | −0.316* | |||||||||
| A3s | 0.833** | 0.077 | −0.682** | −0.256 | −0.494** | −0.432** | ||||||||
| G3s | −0.764** | −0.221 | 0.881** | 0.147 | 0.362** | −0.022 | −0.788** | |||||||
| GC | −0.731** | 0.668** | 0.452** | −0.627** | −0.465** | 0.567** | −0.475** | 0.491** | ||||||
| GC3s | −0.796** | 0.441** | 0.515** | −0.312* | −0.102 | 0.739** | −0.810** | 0.641** | 0.837** | |||||
| ENC | 0.079 | 0.563** | −0.358** | −0.461** | −0.503** | 0.070 | 0.324* | −0.182 | 0.248 | −0.012 | ||||
| Gravy | −0.426** | −0.263 | 0.356* | 0.424** | 0.418** | 0.320* | −0.620** | 0.343* | 0.046 | 0.417** | −0.366** | |||
| Aromo | 0.078 | 0.165 | −0.042 | −0.267 | −0.051 | −0.079 | 0.098 | 0.006 | 0.115 | −0.047 | 0.105 | −0.627** | ||
| axis1 | −0.469** | −0.279* | 0.514** | 0.321* | 0.624** | 0.291* | −0.777** | 0.530** | 0.144 | 0.495** | −0.485** | 0.491** | 0.208 | |
| axis2 | 0.461** | −0.615** | −0.107 | 0.461** | 0.311* | −0.388** | 0.267 | −0.242 | −0.676** | −0.514** | −0.520** | −0.074 | 0.013 | 0.000 |
The **p < 0.01, * 0.05 < p < 0.01.
Figure 4.PR2 analysis of PCV3 and specific genes. Red, green and blue refer to complete coding sequences, ORF1 and ORF2, respectively.
Figure 5.Neutrality plot analysis (GC12s plotted against GC3s) for all the coding sequences of PCV3 and the different genotypes.
Figure 6.(a) CAI and (b) SiD analysis of different genotypes of PCV3 coding sequences in relation to potential host species, including Sus scrofa (purple), Homo sapiens (green), Canis familiaris (blue) and Rhinclophus ferrumequinum (brown).