This paper reports on an investigation of the role of codon usage evolution on the suggested bovine-to-human spillover of Bovine coronavirus (BCoV), an enteric/respiratory virus of cattle, resulting in the emergence of the exclusively respiratory Human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43). Analyses based on full genomes of BCoV and HCoV-OC43 and on both human and bovine mRNAs sequences of cholecystokinin (CCK) and surfactant protein 1 A (SFTP1-A), representing the enteric and respiratory tract codon usage, respectively, have shown natural selection leading to optimization or deoptimization of viral codon usage to the human enteric and respiratory tracts depending on the virus genes under consideration. A higher correlation was found for the nucleotide distance at the 3rd nucleotide position of codons and codon usage optimization to the human respiratory tract when BCoV and HCoV-OC43 were compared. An MCC tree based on relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) data integrating data from both viruses and hosts into a same analysis indicated three putative host/virus contact dates ranging from 1.54E8 to 2.44E5 years ago, suggesting that an ancestor coronavirus might have followed human evolution.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2022.
All research outputs
#8,266,531
of 29,329,308 outputs
Outputs from Genetics and Molecular Biology
#123
of 806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,520
of 350,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics and Molecular Biology
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,329,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,015 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
