| Literature DB >> 35746727 |
Dongchang He1, Xiyue Wang1, Huiguang Wu1, Xiaoquan Wang1,2,3, Yayao Yan1, Yang Li1, Tiansong Zhan1, Xiaoli Hao1, Jiao Hu1,2,3, Shunlin Hu1,2,3, Xiaowen Liu1,2,3, Chan Ding2,4, Shuo Su5, Min Gu1,2,3, Xiufan Liu1,2,3.
Abstract
Reassortment with the H9N2 virus gave rise to the zoonotic H7N9 avian influenza virus (AIV), which caused more than five outbreak waves in humans, with high mortality. The frequent exchange of genomic segments between H7N9 and H9N2 has been well-documented. However, the reassortment patterns have not been described and are not yet fully understood. Here, we used phylogenetic analyses to investigate the patterns of intersubtype and intrasubtype/intralineage reassortment across the eight viral segments. The H7N9 virus and its progeny frequently exchanged internal genes with the H9N2 virus but rarely with the other AIV subtypes. Before beginning the intrasubtype/intralineage reassortment analyses, five Yangtze River Delta (YRD A-E) and two Pearl River Delta (PRD A-B) clusters were divided according to the HA gene phylogeny. The seven reset segment genes were also nomenclatured consistently. As revealed by the tanglegram results, high intralineage reassortment rates were determined in waves 2-3 and 5. Additionally, the clusters of PB2 c05 and M c02 were the most dominant in wave 5, which could have contributed to the onset of the largest H7N9 outbreak in 2016-2017. Meanwhile, a portion of the YRD-C cluster (HP H7N9) inherited their PB2, PA, and M segments from the co-circulating YRD-E (LP H7N9) cluster during wave 5. Untanglegram results revealed that the reassortment rate between HA and NA was lower than HA with any of the other six segments. A multidimensional scaling plot revealed a robust genetic linkage between the PB2 and PA genes, indicating that they may share a co-evolutionary history. Furthermore, we observed relatively more robust positive selection pressure on HA, NA, M2, and NS1 proteins. Our findings demonstrate that frequent reassortment, particular reassorted patterns, and adaptive mutations shaped the H7N9 viral genetic diversity and evolution. Increased surveillance is required immediately to better understand the current state of the HP H7N9 AIV.Entities:
Keywords: H7N9; avian influenza virus; diversity; highly pathogenic; reassortment; tanglegram
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35746727 PMCID: PMC9230085 DOI: 10.3390/v14061256
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Viruses ISSN: 1999-4915 Impact factor: 5.818
Figure 1Diversity and evolutionary rates of H7N9 eight gene segments.
Figure 2The genotypes heatmap of H7N9 viruses. Each segment’s cluster assignment is based on MCC trees with a median branch length distance threshold of 0.20 identified using PhyloPart. The left panel is the time-scaled HA tree with two lineages (Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta), and tips are colored based on clusters. The right panel displays the heatmap of each segment cluster. Shared colors and numbers indicate sequences of the same segment assigned to the same cluster. The same color and number in different segments are not correlative. Detailed clusters are available in the Supplementary Table S1.
Figure 3The gene clusters proportion of YRD-E. The same color and number in different segments are not correlative. PB2 c05 (79.03%) and M c08 (78.23%) are dominant clusters in the epidemic wave 5. Viruses have PB2 c05, and M c08 account for 62.10%.
Figure 4Intersubtype reassortment between H7N9 and H5, H6, and H9 subtypes of avian influenza viruses.
Figure 5Phylogenetic incongruence analysis. MCC trees for the HA segment and all internal genes NA, PB2, PB1, PA, NP, and M from equivalent strains connect across the trees. Tips and connecting lines are colored according to the HA clusters.
Figure 6Estimate of MCC reassortment network between HA and NA genes of H7N9 viruses. Icytree visualizes the network as a base tree connected by dotted branches, indicating a reassortment event. The green dots indicate the tips of the tree.
Figure 7Evolutionary relationships of each gene segment with HA. Incongruence phylogenetic analysis shows interclade reassortment between the HA segment and seven additional genes (NA, PB2, PB1, PA, NP, and M). Equivalent strains connect across the trees. Tips and connecting lines are colored according to the HA clusters. Unentanglement is used to minimize crossings of the hybridization network between the paired trees. The values are determined by the degree of inter-segment reassortment.
Figure 8Correlations in time to the most recent common ancestor (tMRCA) among H7N9 viral segments as depicted by a multidimensional scaling (MDS) graphic. MDS enables a two-dimensional representation of the total level of cross-correlation between all segments. Cloud points represent phylogenetic uncertainty based on 500 trees for each segment sampled in the program of BEAST, with pairwise comparisons to other segments limited to viruses sampled in the same year. In the absence of reassortment, segments are likely to have highly correlated TMRCAs due to shared evolutionary history showing as overlapping dots. Reversely, segments split up by reassortment are predicted to inhabit various plot regions. Only the first two scaling dimensions are visible.
Selection pressures and positively and negatively selected codons of coding regions of H7N9 viruses circulating between 2013 and 2019.
| Coding Region | No. of Codons | dN/dS | No. of Selected Sites (% of Codons) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positively Selected | Negatively Selected (SLAC) | ||||||
| SLAC a | FUBAR b | FEL c | MEME d | ||||
| PB2 | 759 | 0.1200 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 | 670 (88.16%) |
| PB1 | 757 | 0.0977 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 657 (75.60%) |
| PA | 716 | 0.1137 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 573 (79.92%) |
| HA [ | 564 | 0.2656 | 16 | 13 | 16 | 14 | 374 (66.19%) |
| NP | 498 | 0.1026 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 413 (82.77%) |
| NA [ | 465 | 0.2946 | 13 | 8 | 15 | 13 | 280 (60.09%) |
| M1 | 252 | 0.0752 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 190 (75.10%) |
| M2 | 97 | 0.5398 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 26 (26.53%) |
| NS1 | 217 | 0.3087 | 13 | 6 | 14 | 10 | 115 (52.75%) |
| NEP | 121 | 0.2766 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 55 (45.08%) |
a p-value < 0.05; b posterior probability of ≥0.9; c p-value < 0.1; d p-value < 0.05