File image
File image

EXPERT REACTION: Origin of COVID-19 remains a mystery

Embargoed until: Publicly released:
Peer-reviewed: This work was reviewed and scrutinised by relevant independent experts.

Simulation/modelling: This type of study uses a computer simulation or mathematical model to predict an outcome. The original values put into the model may have come from real-world measurements (eg: past spread of a disease used to model its future spread).

Scientists using computer modelling to study SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, have discovered the virus is most ideally adapted to infect human cells – rather than bat or pangolin cells, again raising questions of its origin. In a new paper in Scientific Reports, Australian scientists describe how they used high-performance computer modelling of the form of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the beginning of the pandemic to predict its ability to infect humans and a range of 12 domestic and exotic animals.

Journal/conference: Scientific Reports

Link to research (DOI): 10.1038/s41598-021-92388-5

Organisation/s: Flinders University, La Trobe University

Funder: N/A

Media release

From: Flinders University

Scientists using computer modelling to study SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, have discovered the virus is most ideally adapted to infect human cells – rather than bat or pangolin cells, again raising questions of its origin.

In a paper published in Scientific Reports, Australian scientists describe how they used high-performance computer modelling of the form of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the beginning of the pandemic to predict its ability to infect humans and a range of 12 domestic and exotic animals.

Their work aimed to help identify any intermediate animal vector that may have played a role in transmitting a bat virus  to humans, and to understand any risk posed by the susceptibilities of companion animals such as cats and dogs, and commercial animals like cows, sheep, pigs and horses.

The scientists, from Flinders University and La Trobe University, used genomic data from the 12 animal species to painstakingly build computer models of the key ACE2 protein receptors for each species.  These models were then used to calculate the strength of binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to each species’ ACE2 receptor.

Surprisingly, the results showed that SARS-CoV-2 bound to ACE2 on human cells more tightly than any of the tested animal species, including bats and pangolins. If one of the animal species tested was the origin, it would normally be expected to show the highest binding to the virus.

“Humans showed the strongest spike binding, consistent with the high susceptibility to the virus, but very surprising if an animal was the initial source of the infection in humans” said La Trobe University Professor David Winkler.

The findings, originally released on the ArXiv preprint server, have now been peer reviewed and published in Scientific Reports (Springer Nature).

“The computer modelling found the virus’s ability to bind to the bat ACE2 protein was poor relative to its ability to bind human cells. This argues against the virus being transmitted directly from bats to humans. Hence, if the virus has a natural source, it could only have come to humans via an intermediary species which has yet to be found,” says Flinders affiliated Professor Nikolai Petrovsky.

The team’s computer modelling shows the SARS-CoV-2 virus also bound relatively strongly to ACE2 from pangolins, a rare exotic ant-eater found in some parts of South East Asia with occasional instances of use as food or traditional medicines.  David Winkler said pangolins showed the highest spike binding energy of all the animals the study looked at – significantly higher than bats, monkeys and snakes. 

“While it was incorrectly suggested early in the pandemic by some scientists that they had found SARS-CoV-2 in pangolins, this was due to a misunderstanding and this claim was rapidly retracted as the pangolin coronavirus they described had less than 90% genetic similarity to SARS-CoV-2 and hence could not be its ancestor” Professor Petrovsky says. 

This study and others have shown, however, that the specific part of the pangolin coronavirus spike protein that binds ACE2 was almost identical to that of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

“This sharing of the almost identical spike protein almost certainly explains why SARS-CoV-2 binds so well to pangolin ACE2.  Pangolin and SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins may have evolved similarities through a process of convergent evolution, genetic recombination between viruses, or through genetic engineering, with no current way to distinguish between these possibilities,” Professor Petrovsky says.

Overall, putting aside the intriguing pangolin ACE2 results, our study showed that the COVID-19 virus was very well adapted to infect humans,” he says.   

“We also deduced that some domesticated animals like cats, dogs and cows are likely to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection too,” Professor Winkler said.

The extremely important and open question of how the virus came to infect humans has two main explanations currently. The virus may have passed to humans from bats through an intermediary animal yet to be found (zoonotic origin), but it cannot yet be excluded that it was released accidently from a virology lab. A thorough scientific, evidence-based investigation is needed to determine which of these explanations is correct.

How and where the SARS-CoV-2 virus adapted to become such an effective human pathogen remains a mystery, the researchers conclude, adding that finding the origins of the disease will help efforts to protect humanity against future coronavirus pandemics.

The article, In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin (2021)  by Sakshi Piplani (Flinders University), Puneet Kumar Singh (Vaxine), David A. Winkler (La Trobe, Monash, University of Nottingham, CSIRO Data61) and Nikolai Petrovsky (Flinders University, Vaxine) has been published in Scientific Reports (link) DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-92388-5  (www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5)

Expert Reaction

These comments have been collated by the Science Media Centre to provide a variety of expert perspectives on this issue. Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Views expressed are the personal opinions of the experts named. They do not represent the views of the SMC or any other organisation unless specifically stated.

Dr Stuart Turville is an Associate Professor in the Immunovirology and Pathogenesis Program at UNSW Sydney's Kirby Institute

It is an in silico approach to looking at the way the virus binds to various animal ACE2 receptors. It is a novel way of address interactions and systematically goes through several species and how the virus would engage each different ACE2 receptor. It does conclude that the Spike of SARS CoV-2 is well suited in binding to human ACE2. For a virus that has crossed into the human population that is to be expected. Early papers suggested that SARS CoV1 had similar affinity to ACE2 as SARS CoV2, but follow up papers now suggest that the latter has a far greater affinity for ACE2.

Of note though is that emerging SARS CoV2 variants globally that are more infectious are changing their spike to have a greater affinity for human ACE2. So there are viral spikes now that bind better to human ACE2 and this trend will likely continue as long as the virus is spreading at its current rate.

In the discussion it states:

"It remains to be addressed whether SARS-CoV-2 is completely natural and was transmitted to humans by an intermediate animal vector or whether it might have arisen from a recombination event that occurred in a laboratory handling coronaviruses, inadvertently or intentionally, with the new virus being accidentally released into the local human population.”

For the animal reservoir hypothesis, the key will be to find a virus that has greater genetic similarity to SARS CoV2 than the ones that are already identified.

Overall this may take time to find. Science is a slow and methodical business as we need to have confidence prior to making conclusions.

Last updated: 24 Jun 2021 7:11pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
Dt Turville's team screens serum for the author's (Petrovsky's) laboratory for novel vaccine candidates
Professor Dominic Dwyer is the Director of NSW Health Pathology at Westmead Hospital. He is also a Clinical Professor in Medicine (Immunology & Infectious Diseases) at the Westmead Clinical School Institute for Clinical Pathology and Medical Research, University of Sydney. He was also a member of the WHO-convened team that examined the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

While it is clear early viruses had a high propensity for human receptors, that doesn’t mean they were ‘man-made’. Such conclusions remain speculative.

Last updated: 24 Jun 2021 5:36pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
Dominic was a member of the WHO-convened team that examined the origins of SARS-CoV-2
Associate Professor Ian Mackay is a clinical virologist at the University of Queensland

This is an interesting predictive modelling-based study into how a key region of SARS-CoV-2 may interact with the ACE2 molecule on a range of animal cells. This study doesn't contribute any new experimental data to this analysis and so should be very carefully interpreted. It would have been helpful if the publication included infectivity experiments, such as those which the authors identified as from half a dozen other laboratories, into a single experimental series, under the same conditions which included additional bat species. Despite that, evidence provided by Professor Petrovsky highlights that SARS-CoV-2 can bind to ACE2 on animal cells from a wide range of species. 

 
Care is required about over-interpreting these results or taking them out of context. It would, in my opinion, be an over-reach to draw any further conclusions from this modelling with regard to the origin of SARS-CoV-2. We must maintain an open mind until we have evidence. However, the centuries-old history of coronavirus emergence into humans is littered with zoonoses from bats and other animal hosts - even among those coronaviruses we now call "common cold" viruses. Given this history combined with how poorly we have characterised the viral populations of bats, cats, sheep, camels and any other animal population worldwide, the zoonotic origin of a novel coronavirus appears to edge out other potential scenarios. Studies such as this one support how promiscuous coronaviruses can be. It's amazing that a coronavirus-driven pandemic has been such a rarity. 

Last updated: 24 Jun 2021 5:32pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
Ian has declared he has no conflicts of interest.

News for:

Australia
International
NSW
VIC
QLD
SA

Media contact details for this story are only visible to registered journalists.