In article <c601591-2907951459500001 at 128.206.12.143>, Don Haut writes:
>In article <evans-2807951508000001 at ganymede.ahabs.wisc.edu>,
>evans at ahabs.wisc.edu (PSE) wrote:
>>>> Does it surprise anybody that an RNA virus that has been replicating in
>> the wild for almost 20 years has accumulated very few variations at the
>> nucleic acid level? Sanchez et al do not comment about the resulting
>> proteins, so many or all of these mutations may have been silent.
>>> Is this the kind of variation that would be expected from an RNA virus
>> over such a time period due to genetic drift (ie: neutral evolution")?
>> Is there any data about genetic drift in filoviruses, or other RNA
>> viruses?
>>Given the replication strategy of filoviruses which is fairly simple (see
>Feldman et al.) I am not surprised. All of this data might imply that the
>filovirus RNA dependant RNA Pol. is a very accurate Pol. I think these
>are really interesting questions and it will be fun to see what the answer
>is.
It could as well be that not many mutations are tolerated. In general RNA
pols tend to be more error prone because they lack the proof-reading
capabilities present in many DNA pols. I would prefer to see the data on
filovirus RNA-dep. RNA pol error rate before passing judgement on its
accuracy.
>>> Does the lack of genetic changes imply anything about Ebola's natural
>> reservior?
>>Possibly. As Sanchez suggested, there may be extreme selective pressure
>to maintain the Ebola Genome as it is.
>>Don
>>Don Haut
>Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
>University of Missouri-Columbia
>C601591 at showme.missouri.edu>314-882-3171
>
just MHO,
L
