Labs crack killer's code
Sequence shows that animal spawned SARS
virus.
15 April 2003
HELEN
PEARSON
 |
| In Asia
there is widespread concern
about the continued spread of
SARS. |
| © AP |
|
|
Scientists have worked out the genetic sequence of the virus that
is thought to cause severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). The
code supports the idea that the disease leapt from animals into
humans - and should help to refine a diagnostic test.
Over the weekend, two research groups separately revealed the
complete genetic make-up of the suspected SARS virus, called a
coronavirus. The flu-like disease has infected an estimated 3,169
people and killed 144 since November last year.
The sequence suggests that the coronavirus is "far from anything
known before", says Herbert Schmitz of the Bernhard Nocht Institute
for Tropical Medicine in Hamburg, Germany. Although it is more than
75% identical to known animal and human viruses in some regions, it
diverges widely in others.
Using this information, scientists are already devising a more
accurate diagnostic test for SARS. Existing tests have limitations -
for example, those that detect and amplify a single viral gene from
blood or lung samples may miss trace infections in some patients.
Tests that amplify different stretches of the viral genetic
sequence may be more sensitive or accurate, says Albert Osterhaus,
who is studying SARS at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, the
Netherlands. "There's room for improvement," he says.
Leap of faith
Despite the scientific advances, investigators remain worried
about the spread of SARS, particularly in Asia. In some cases, the
disease seems to spread to people who have not had close contact
with the sick - and there is no known treatment for the virus.
The unusual genetic sequence suggests that the SARS coronavirus
lurked undiscovered in animals before making the leap into humans.
"It suggests that it's been out there in a different host for
millennia," says coronavirus expert Kathryn Holmes of the University
of Colorado Health Sciences Center in Denver.
This could have happened when people came into contact with
infected animals to which they had rarely been exposed before.
Alternatively, an innocuous animal virus might have mutated to
penetrate or harm human cells.
A third hypothesis - that the new virus formed when two
coronavirus strains met in an animal and swapped genes - now seems
less likely, as the sequence contains nothing to support the idea,
says coronavirus expert Michael Lai of the University of Southern
California in Los Angeles.
Scientists plan to trace the origins of the virus by gathering
samples from animals in Guangdong Province, China, where the disease
probably arose. They could also assess whether changing patterns of
animal movement or agriculture might have facilitated the jump.
Armed with the genome, researchers can also begin to investigate
how the virus infects human cells - and how to block it with drugs
or vaccines. Within days, Osterhaus also hopes to reveal the
clinching evidence proving that coronavirus is the sole cause of
SARS: whether primates injected with the virus fall sick. |