Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Reviews of "Evidence for SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Co-infections and Recombination"

Reviewers: F Spilki (Universidade Feevale) | 📗📗📗📗◻️ • K Stedman (Portland State University) | 📗📗📗📗◻️

Published onMar 30, 2022
Reviews of "Evidence for SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Co-infections and Recombination"
key-enterThis Pub is a Review of
Evidence for SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron co-infections and recombination
Description

Between November 2021 and February 2022, SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants co-circulated in the United States, allowing for co-infections and possible recombination events. We sequenced 29,719 positive samples during this period and analyzed the presence and fraction of reads supporting mutations specific to either the Delta or Omicron variant. We identified 18 co-infections, one of which displayed evidence of a low Delta-Omicron recombinant viral population. We also identified two independent cases of infection by a Delta-Omicron recombinant virus, where 100% of the viral RNA came from one clonal recombinant. In the three cases, the 5'-end of the viral genome was from the Delta genome, and the 3'-end from Omicron including the majority of the spike protein gene, though the breakpoints were different. Delta-Omicron recombinant viruses were rare, and there is currently no evidence that Delta-Omicron recombinant viruses are more transmissible between hosts compared to the circulating Omicron lineages.

To read the original manuscript, click the link above.

Summary of Reviews: This preprint examines the potential evidence for SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron co-infection and consequential recombination. Such events have been demonstrated several times already over the course of the pandemic, however, not every recombinant becomes a viable virus. Though it’s bibliographic citations and discussion section could be refined, reviewers agree that this paper provides strong evidence of co-infection, utilizes robust and appropriate methods, and addresses any caveats in their data.

Reviewer 1 (Fernando S…) | 📗📗📗📗◻️

Reviewer 2 (Kenneth S…) | 📗📗📗📗◻️

RR:C19 Strength of Evidence Scale Key

📕 ◻️◻️◻️◻️ = Misleading

📙📙 ◻️◻️◻️ = Not Informative

📒📒📒 ◻️◻️ = Potentially Informative

📗📗📗📗◻️ = Reliable

📘📘📘📘📘 = Strong

To read the reviews, click the links below. 


Comments
0
comment

No comments here

Why not start the discussion?