Cargando…

Virus classification – where do you draw the line?

High-throughput sequencing (HTS) and its use in recovering and assembling novel virus sequences from environmental, human clinical, veterinary and plant samples has unearthed a vast new catalogue of viruses. Their classification, known by their sequences alone, sets a major challenge to traditional...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Simmonds, Peter, Aiewsakun, Pakorn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Vienna 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6096723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30039318
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-018-3938-z
_version_ 1783348160562724864
author Simmonds, Peter
Aiewsakun, Pakorn
author_facet Simmonds, Peter
Aiewsakun, Pakorn
author_sort Simmonds, Peter
collection PubMed
description High-throughput sequencing (HTS) and its use in recovering and assembling novel virus sequences from environmental, human clinical, veterinary and plant samples has unearthed a vast new catalogue of viruses. Their classification, known by their sequences alone, sets a major challenge to traditional virus taxonomy, especially at the family and species levels, which have been historically based largely on descriptive taxon definitions. These typically entail some knowledge of their phenotypic properties, including replication strategies, virion structure and clinical and epidemiological features, such as host range, geographical distribution and disease outcomes. Little to no information on these attributes is available, however, for viruses identified in metagenomic datasets. If such viruses are to be included in virus taxonomy, their assignments will have to be guided largely or entirely by metrics of genetic relatedness. The immediate problem here is that the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV), an organisation that authorises the taxonomic classification of viruses, provides little or no guidance on how similar or how divergent viruses must be in order to be considered members of new species or new families. We have recently developed a method for scoring genomic (dis)similarity between viruses (Genome Relationships Applied to Virus Taxonomy – GRAViTy) among the eukaryotic and prokaryotic viruses currently classified by the ICTV. At the family and genus levels, we found large-scale consistency between genetic relationships and their taxonomic assignments for eukaryotic viruses of all genome configurations and genome sizes. Family assignments of prokaryotic viruses have, however, been made at a quite different genetic level, and groupings currently classified as sub-families are a much better match to the eukaryotic virus family level. These findings support the ongoing reorganisation of bacteriophage taxonomy by the ICTV Phage Study Group. A rapid and objective means to explore metagenomic viral diversity and make evidence-based assignments for such viruses at each taxonomic layer is essential. Analysis of sequences by GRAViTy provides evidence that family (and genus) assignments of currently classified viruses are largely underpinned by genomic relatedness, and these features could serve as a guide towards an evidence-based classification of metagenomic viruses in the future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6096723
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Vienna
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60967232018-08-24 Virus classification – where do you draw the line? Simmonds, Peter Aiewsakun, Pakorn Arch Virol In honor of Marc van Regenmortel High-throughput sequencing (HTS) and its use in recovering and assembling novel virus sequences from environmental, human clinical, veterinary and plant samples has unearthed a vast new catalogue of viruses. Their classification, known by their sequences alone, sets a major challenge to traditional virus taxonomy, especially at the family and species levels, which have been historically based largely on descriptive taxon definitions. These typically entail some knowledge of their phenotypic properties, including replication strategies, virion structure and clinical and epidemiological features, such as host range, geographical distribution and disease outcomes. Little to no information on these attributes is available, however, for viruses identified in metagenomic datasets. If such viruses are to be included in virus taxonomy, their assignments will have to be guided largely or entirely by metrics of genetic relatedness. The immediate problem here is that the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV), an organisation that authorises the taxonomic classification of viruses, provides little or no guidance on how similar or how divergent viruses must be in order to be considered members of new species or new families. We have recently developed a method for scoring genomic (dis)similarity between viruses (Genome Relationships Applied to Virus Taxonomy – GRAViTy) among the eukaryotic and prokaryotic viruses currently classified by the ICTV. At the family and genus levels, we found large-scale consistency between genetic relationships and their taxonomic assignments for eukaryotic viruses of all genome configurations and genome sizes. Family assignments of prokaryotic viruses have, however, been made at a quite different genetic level, and groupings currently classified as sub-families are a much better match to the eukaryotic virus family level. These findings support the ongoing reorganisation of bacteriophage taxonomy by the ICTV Phage Study Group. A rapid and objective means to explore metagenomic viral diversity and make evidence-based assignments for such viruses at each taxonomic layer is essential. Analysis of sequences by GRAViTy provides evidence that family (and genus) assignments of currently classified viruses are largely underpinned by genomic relatedness, and these features could serve as a guide towards an evidence-based classification of metagenomic viruses in the future. Springer Vienna 2018-07-24 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6096723/ /pubmed/30039318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-018-3938-z Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle In honor of Marc van Regenmortel
Simmonds, Peter
Aiewsakun, Pakorn
Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title_full Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title_fullStr Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title_full_unstemmed Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title_short Virus classification – where do you draw the line?
title_sort virus classification – where do you draw the line?
topic In honor of Marc van Regenmortel
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6096723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30039318
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-018-3938-z
work_keys_str_mv AT simmondspeter virusclassificationwheredoyoudrawtheline
AT aiewsakunpakorn virusclassificationwheredoyoudrawtheline