Meta-Analysis of the Dynamics of the Emergence of Mutations and Variants of SARS-CoV-2
======================================================================================

* Nicolas Castonguay
* Wandong Zhang
* Marc-Andre Langlois

## ABSTRACT

The novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and is the causative agent for the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 is a 29,811 nucleotides positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus belonging to the betacoronavirus genus. Due to inefficient proofreading ability of the viral RNA-dependent polymerase complex, coronaviruses are known to acquire new mutations following replication, which constitutes one of the main factors driving the evolution of its genome and the emergence of new genetic variants. In the last few months, the identification of new B.1.1.7 (UK), B.1.351 (South Africa) and P.1 (Brazil) variants of concern (VOC) highlighted the importance of tracking the emergence of mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 genome and their impact on transmissibility, infectivity, and neutralizing antibody escape capabilities. These VOC demonstrate increased transmissibility and antibody escape, and reduce current vaccine efficacy. Here we analyzed the appearance and prevalence trajectory of mutations that appeared in all SARS-CoV-2 genes from December 2019 to January 2021. Our goals were to identify which modifications are the most frequent, study the dynamics of their spread, their incorporation into the consensus sequence, and their impact on virus biology. We also analyzed the structural properties of the spike glycoprotein of the B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1 variants. This study offers an integrative view of the emergence, disappearance, and consensus sequence integration of successful mutations that constitute new SARS-CoV-2 variants and their impact on neutralizing antibody therapeutics and vaccines.

**IMPORTANCE** SARS-CoV-2 is the etiological agent of COVID-19, which has caused > 2 million deaths worldwide as of January, 2021. Mutations occur in the genome of SARS-CoV-2 during viral replication and affect viral infectivity, transmissibility and virulence. In early March 2020, the D614G mutation in the spike protein emerged, which increased the viral transmissibility and is now found in >90% of all SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequences in GISAID database. Between October and December 2020, B.1.1.7 (UK), B.1.351 (South Africa) and P.1 (Brazil) variants of concern (VOCs) emerged, which have increased neutralizing antibody escape capabilities because of mutations in the receptor binding domain of the spike protein. Characterizing mutations in these variants is crucial because of their effect on adaptive immune response, neutralizing antibody therapy, and their impact on vaccine efficacy. Here we tracked and analyzed mutations in SARS-CoV-2 genes over a twelve-month period and investigated functional alterations in the spike of VOCs.

## INTRODUCTION

In late December 2019, a new betacoronavirus known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) emerged in Wuhan, the province of Hubei, China (1). SARS-CoV-2 is the etiological agent for the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic resulting in more than 90 million infected and 2 million death worldwide as of Dec. 2020 (2,3). SARS-CoV-2 is an enveloped, positive-sense single-stranded RNA (+ssRNA) virus with a genome length of 26,000 to 32,000 bps (4). The mutation rates of RNA viruses are generally higher than that of DNA viruses because of the low fidelity of their viral RNA polymerases (5,6). Mutations occur when viral replication enzymes introduce errors in the viral genome resulting in the creation of premature termination codons, deletions and insertions of nucleotides that can change open reading frames, and changes in the nucleotide sequence that can result in amino acid substitutions in the viral proteins. These mutations combined with the selective pressure of the human immune system leads to the selection and evolution of viral genomes (6,7). However, coronaviruses are one of the few members of the RNA virus family that possess limited but measurable proofreading ability via the 3’ to 5’ exoribonuclease activity of the non-structural viral protein 14 (nsp14) (8,9). Coronaviruses are therefore expected to evolve through genetic drift much slower than other RNA viruses that do not have this ability, such as influenza and HIV (8,10). Additionally, SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses have low known occurrences of recombination between family members (i.e., genetic shift), and therefore are mostly susceptible to genetic drift (11).

SARS-CoV-2 has reached pandemic status due to its presence on every continent and has since maintained a high level of transmissibility across hosts of varied ethnical and genetic backgrounds (2, 12). Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 infections have been reported to naturally infect minks, ferrets, cats, and dogs, which allows the virus to replicate in completely new hosts and mutate to produce new variants and possibly new strains (13,14). In March 2020, the now dominant D614G mutation first emerged in the spike protein (S) of SARS-CoV-2. The S protein is present as a trimer at the surface of the viral envelope and is responsible for attachment of the virus to the human angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (hACE2), the entry receptor for SARS-CoV-2 (15). Published evidence has now shown that D614G increases viral fitness, transmissibility and viral load but does not directly affect COVID-19 pathogenicity (16,17,18,19). Additionally, emerging evidence indicates that D614G may have epistatic interactions and exacerbate the impact of several other independent mutations (19). Mutations in the S protein, and particularly in receptor binding domain (RBD), are of very high concern given that they can direct influence viral infectivity, transmissibility and resistance to neutralizing antibodies and T cell responses.

New mutations are frequently and regularly detected in the genome of SARS-CoV-2 through whole genome sequencing, however very few of these mutations make it into the viral consensus sequence. The consensus sequence or reference strain is generally regarded as the dominant transmitted strain at a given time. This sequence is determined by aligning large numbers of recently sequenced genomes and establishing a consensus of the highest frequency nucleotide for each position in the viral genome. A genetic variant is a version of the reference strain that has acquire one or several mutations and acts as the founder for further genetic diversification. Mutations arise regularly in the reference strain, but few are longitudinally conserved. Genetic variants are therefore successful offshoots of the reference strain.

Some variants rise rapidly in frequency and then collapse and disappear, others will rise and overtake the frequency of the reference strain and become the new reference, while others acquire additional mutations and continue their upward prevalence trajectory and evolution. There are three main genetic variants that have emerged in the past few months with a sustained upward frequency trajectory. The UK and South African variants have been reported in September and October 2020, respectively (20,21,22), while the P.1/501Y.N3 (P.1) variant is a branch off of the B.1.1.28 lineage, was first detected in travelers from Brazil that landed in Japan in January 2021 (23). These variants are associated with increased resistance to neutralizing antibodies (Nabs) (24). The UK variant known as B.1.1.7/501Y.V1 (B1.1.7) is present worldwide with local transmission in Europe, China, Oceania, North and South America (20,21). The South African variant also known as B.1.352/501Y.V2 (B.1.351) has reported local transmission in the South African region, Europe, and North America (21,22). The P.1. variant has since been identified in 42% of specimens in the Amazonian city of Manaus and was detected for the first time in the U.S. at the end of January 2021 (landed in Japan in January 2021) (23). All these variants possess the N501Y mutation, which is a mutation in the RBD that is critical for the spike to interact with hACE2 (25). This mutation is reported to cause increased resistance to Nabs, increased infectivity, and virulence in animal models (26). In addition to the N501Y mutation, both the South African and Brazil variants possesses RBD mutations K417N and E484K, which are also associated with increased Nabs escape capabilities (24).

Here we present a retrospective metadata analysis study of mutations reaching higher than 1% global frequency occurring throughout the SARS-CoV-2 genome over the past year and we specifically investigate their frequency trajectory over time and their fixation into the reference sequencing using the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data (GISAID) (27). Additionally, we analyzed mutations in the S protein of the B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1 variants and illustrated their impact on molecular interactions between the S protein and hACE2 and their potential impact on Nabs.

## MATERIALS AND METHODS

### Data collection and mutational analysis

Genomes uploaded to the GISAID EpiCoV™ server database were analyzed from December 1st, 2019, to December 31st, 2020, with collection of viral sequences from December 1st, 2019 to January 6, 2021. The mutations were selected by being in more than 500 reported genomes in August 2020, and another selection was made in January 2021 to capture mutations with more than 4000 reported genomes. Thus, allowing us to study mutations reaching at least 1% in global frequency. We filtered through 309,962 genomes for the analysis of selected mutations. The variants hCoV-19/Wuhan, hCoV-19/D614G, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1 were analyzed from December 1st, 2019 to February 17th, 2021. The collection dates were the same dates as the analysis. For the analysis of the mutations in B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1 variants, we used the GISAID EpiCoV™ server database and analyzed the mutations in the variants from December 1st, 2019, to February 17th, 2021. The same timeline was used for the collection dates of the viral sequences. We filtered through 429,514 genomes for the analysis of the variants. Only complete SARS-CoV-2 genomes (28 to 30 Kbps) isolated from human hosts were analyzed. MUSCLE alignment tool on UGene, and SnapGene was used to determine the nucleotide mutations and codon changes of the non-synonymous and synonymous mutations by sequence alignments with NCBI SARS-CoV-2 reference genome (NC_045512). We acknowledge all genomes uploaded to the GISAID database, and aligned genomes used for **Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4** are presented in supplementary material 1. Graphs of mutations and variants were performed on RStudio with timelines, and genomes illustrations were produced in Biorender.

View this table:
[Table 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/T1)

Table 1: 
Non-synonymous mutations in SARS-CoV-2 genes with a worldwide frequency >0.01%.

View this table:
[Table 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/T2)

Table 2: 
Non-synonymous, synonymous and deletion mutations in the B.1.1.7 variant

View this table:
[Table 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/T3)

Table 3: 
Non-synonymous mutations and deletions in the B.1.351 variant

View this table:
[Table 4:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/T4)

Table 4: 
Non-synonymous, synonymous and deletions in the P.1 variant.

### Structural modeling

Mutations in the spike protein in complex with hACE2 were analyzed using a mutagenesis tool on PyMOL (PDB: 7A94). Visualization of mutations in the B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1 variants was produced using the spike protein closed conformation (PDB: 6ZGE), interaction with hACE2 (PDB: 7A94), interaction with C102 Nab (PDB: 7K8M), and interaction with C121 Nab (PDB: 7K8X). Figures and rendering were prepared with PyMOL.

## RESULTS

### Identification of emerging mutations in various SARS-CoV-2 genes

Emerging mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 genome were investigated to determine the fluctuations of these mutations during a period of twelve months. We compiled mutations reported in 500> genomes in August, and 4000> genomes in early January from the GISAID database, and followed their appearance in reported SARS-CoV-2 genomes until December 31th, 2020. Genes NSP8, NSP10, NS6, NS7a, and E are not illustrated in **Figure 1** given that did not display mutation frequencies sufficiently high to meet our inclusion conditions during the periods of data collection of our study. This is also indicative that these appear to be the most conserved sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Our analysis focused on the emergence, fixation, and fading of the mutations analyzed that met our inclusion criteria. Our analysis highlights the fixation of the D614G mutation in the S protein and the P323L in the RdRp (**Fig.1**). Both are the only mutations to have been successful to reach reference strain status until now. They appeared to have emerged simultaneously in January, 2020 and became present in >90% of all sequenced genomes by June, 2020. However, some other mutations emerged rapidly and then stabilized or faded out. For example, Q57H (NS3), R203K (N), G204R (N) are mutations that emerged rapidly and appeared to have stabilized at a frequency of 15% to 40%. Others like I120F (NSP2), L37F (NSP6), S477N (S), and L84S (NS8) illustrate mutations that emerged rapidly and then faded-out. We also demonstrate that most genes in SARS-CoV-2 have mutations with frequencies lower than 10% (**Fig.1)**. Also, these mutations are summarized into **Table 1**, which illustrates nucleotide substitution producing the amino acid change, the frequency at the end of 2020 and their respective effects. (**Table 1**). These results indicate that only D614G (S) and P323L (NSP12) were fixed in the viral consensus sequence, many of the mutations either faded out or emerged and then stabilized at a frequency lower than 50%.

![Figure 1:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F1)

Figure 1: Variation of mutation frequency in SARS-CoV-2 genes.
The occurrence and frequency of mutations in various SARS-CoV-2 genes are presented for the time period between December 2019 to December 2020. SARS-CoV-2 genes are represented with non-structural proteins (NSPs) and the function on the genes in parentheses. Graphs were generated using RStudio.

### Geographic localization and timeline of the viral genes with mutations higher than 50% frequency

To further study the mutations that have frequencies higher than 50%, we took the graphs of NSP12, S, and N genes from **Figure 1** and added worldwide geographic locations of the mutations provided from GISAID. These maps are useful to track down if a mutation is a localized and regional event or found worldwide. In the S protein, D614G is found worldwide with higher reported cases in the US, UK, and Australia, probably due to more large-scale testing, while A222V is mostly reported in the UK, but has not been reported in South America, Central and East African regions (**Fig. 2A)**. Like D614G, P323L in the RdRp is also found worldwide, with higher reported cases in the US, UK, and Australia (**Fig. 2B)**. The N gene doesn’t have successful mutations that have attained reference strain status, but R203K, G204R and A220V all had a frequency of 50% or higher during the past twelve months. Even if R203K and G204R frequencies have decreasing since July of 2020 and stabilized in November of 2020, both mutations are currently found worldwide. A220V emerged in August of 2020 and reached a frequency higher than 50% in October of 2020. Mutations G204R, R203K and A220V are reported at high frequency in the UK, but have not been detected in South America, Central, East, and South African regions (**Fig. 2C)**. The analyses of these data illustrate the localization of the most prevalent mutations to date, which appear to be mostly present in Western and developed countries. This, however, is undoubtable attributable to overall more testing.

![Figure 2:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F2)

Figure 2: Geographic location and timeline of dominant mutations in NSP12, S, and N genes.
A) Frequency of S protein mutations with corresponding geographic maps. B) Frequency of RdRp mutations with corresponding geographic maps. C) Frequency of Nucleoprotein mutations with corresponding geographic maps. D) Mutations reaching a frequency higher than 50% between December 2019 and December 2020. A low frequency of reported cases of the mutations is represented in white, while higher frequencies are represented in red. All maps were taken from GISAID. Graphs were generated using RStudio and Biorender.

### Localization and molecular interactions of recurrent S protein mutations

Here we illustrated the molecular interactions and spatial localization of the mutations in the S protein. PyMOL was used to model the structures of S protein and analyze the possible effects of specific mutations at given positions in the protein. **Figure 3A** presents an overview of the localization of the S protein mutations and their interactions with their environment. The A222V mutation has no reported effects on protein stability, neutralizing antibody escape, and affinity for hACE2 **(Table 1)**. The substitution from A to V results in a low steric clash between neighboring residues (**Fig. 3B)**. The S477N substitution in the RBD enables increased stability during hACE2-RBD interactions (**Table 1, Fig. 3C)**. In the N-terminal domain (NTD), mutagenesis of L18F leads to a steric clash between neighboring residues (**Fig. 3D)**. However, this does not appear to impact the stability of the protein given that no such effects have been reported for L18F so far (**Table 1)**. In the closed conformation, D614 makes an ionic bond with K854 in the S2 subunit of another S protein monomer (**Fig. 3F)** (28). In the open conformation, D614 (or G614) doesn’t make interactions or display steric clashes with neighboring residues (**Fig. 3E)**.

![Figure 3:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F3)

Figure 3: Structural rendering of most frequent mutation sin the S protein.
A) Surface representation of hACE2 (yellow) in complex with S protein trimers illustrated in grey, blue, and magenta. Recurrent mutations are represented in green. Cartoon representation of B) A222V, C) S477N, D) L18F, E) D614G in open conformation and F) D614G in closed conformation. Reference sequence residues are illustrated in green, and the mutant amino acid is represented in purple. The red circles illustrate the steric clash when the mutations are inserted into the structure. Graphs were generated using PyMOL.

### The emergence of the B.1.1.7 variant in the UK

A new variant was discovered in late 2020 in the UK that displayed increased affinity to hACE2 and Nabs escape capabilities (24,29,30). Here we attempted to further investigate the B.1.1.7 variant by looking at S protein mutations of this variant in complex with Nabs and hACE2. We mapped the localization of the mutations with available Cryo-EM structures of the S protein and assessed the frequency of the variant by interrogating the GISAID database. There are nine mutations in the S protein out of the total 24 mutations in the B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 genome (**Fig. 5A & 5E)**. Deletions and mutations in the S protein of the B.1.1.7 variant, apart from D614G, emerged in October of 2020 and reached a frequency of 68% to 72% mid February (**Fig. 4, Fig. 5C, Table 2)**. N501Y is found in the RBD and can interact with a lysine residue in hACE2 (**Fig. 5B & 5D, Fig. 8C)**. The N501Y mutation is associated with an increased affinity to hACE2, along with an increase in infectivity and virulence (**Table 2). Figure 5E** illustrates the whole genome of SARS-CoV-2 with all nucleotide substitutions of the B.1.1.7 variant. The C913T, C5986T, C14676T, C15279T, C16176T in ORF1ab, and T26801C in M protein are synonymous mutations. Also, the C27972T mutation has a frequency of 71% and produces a premature stop codon in NS8 that inactivates the protein (Q27stop) without obvious consequences (**Fig. 5E, Table 2)** (31). These results allow us to better understand the frequencies, localization, and interactions of mutations in the S protein of the B.1.1.7 variant. Importantly, for viruses, not only synonymous mutations are of important. Non-synonymous mutations can exercise very important roles at various stages of the viral infection cycle, such as replication and creating functional RNA loops that serve as docking points for ribonucleoproteins and primers.

![Figure 4:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F4.medium.gif)

[Figure 4:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F4)

Figure 4: Frequency of B.1.1.7, B.1351, P.1, D614G, and reference variants.
Database variants frequency were analyzed from December 2019, to February 17th, 2021. The hCoV-19/Wuhan is the reference strain, and hCoV-19/D614G is representing the D614G mutation in the S protein. B.1.1.7, B.1.3531, and P.1 represent the UK, South African, and Brazilians variants. *(overlapping curves).

![Figure 5:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F5.medium.gif)

[Figure 5:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F5)

Figure 5: Frequency of B.1.1.7 spike protein mutations with structural confirmation and genome map.
A & B) Colour representation of S protein subdomains with mutations of the B.1.1.7 variant in red. NTD (green), RBD (blue), SD1 (purple), SD2 (light blue), and S2 (magenta) are illustrated. The other S protein monomers are displayed in grey and white. C) Frequency of the mutations in the S protein, B.1.1.7 variant from December 2019 to February 17th 2021. D) Interaction of the N501Y (red) mutation in the RBD (blue) of S protein with hACE2 (yellow). The dash lines indicate interactions with adjacent residues. E) Genome of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 variant with identified nucleotide substitutions and deletions. Graphs were generated using Biorender, PyMOL, and RStudio. *(overlapping curves).

### The emergence of the B.1.351 variant in South Africa

During the emergence of the B.1.1.7 variant in the UK, another variant was emerging in South Africa, known as B.1.351 (21,22). Similar to **Figure 5**, we illustrate the mutations in S protein and their respective frequencies. The GISAID database was used to track down mutations and Cryo-EM structures of the S protein to model the effects of point mutations. Most of the mutations in the S protein of the B.1.351 variant are localized in the S1 subunit, with only A701V in the S2 subunit. Additionally, three mutations reside in the RBD, among which two of them are not found in the B.1.1.7 variant (K417N, E484K) (**Fig. 6A & 6B**). This variant contains the D614G and N501Y, which are also seen in the B.1.1.7 variant (**Fig. 5A)**. Furthermore, many of the mutations found in the B.1.351 variant have global frequencies lower than 2%. The exception is D614G, L18F and N501Y (**Fig. 6C, Table 3)**. In comparison to B.1.1.7 and P.1 variants, B.1.351 variant has not reached a frequency higher than 1% as of mid February 2021 (**Fig. 4**). By using the mutagenesis tool of PyMOL, we modeled the S protein in complex with hACE2, and with C103 and C121 Nabs, which are human recombinant class I & II neutralizing antibodies, respectively(32). Our *in silico* mutagenesis predicts that mutations in the RBD induce a loss of interactions with C102 Nab and C121 Nab. At the position 417 in the S protein, a loss of interaction is predicted between the RBD and C102 Nab when the K417 is mutated to Asn producing Nabs escape capability. (**Fig. 6D & 8A)**. Another loss of interaction is predicted with the E484K mutation and the C121 Nab, which could lead to Nabs escape capability (**Fig. 6E & 8B)**. As previously mentioned, N501Y is also found in the B.1.351 strain and our modeling predicts that it will have similar effects as those observed with the B.1.1.7 variant (**Fig. 6F**). **Figure 6G** illustrates the nucleotide substitutions of the B.1.351 variant.

![Figure 6:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F6.medium.gif)

[Figure 6:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F6)

Figure 6: Frequency of B.1.351 spike protein mutations with structural confirmation and genome map.
A & B) Colour representation of S protein subdomains with mutations of the B.1.351 variant in orange. NTD (green), RBD (blue), SD1 (purple), SD2 (light blue), and S2 (magenta) are illustrated. The other S protein monomers are illustrated in grey and white. C) Frequency of the mutations in the S protein B.1.351 variant from December 2019 to February 17th 2021.Interaction of D) 417N with C102 Nab (green), E) 484K with C121 Nab (light pink), and F) 501Y with hACE2 (yellow). The mutant residues are illustrated in orange, and the dashed lines represent interactions with adjacent residues. G) Genome of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.351 variant with identified nucleotide substitutions or deletions. Graphs were generated using Biorender, PyMOL, and RStudio. *(overlapping curves).

### The emergence of the P.1 variant in Brazil

Similar to the B.1351 variant, the P.1 variant harbours the N501Y and E484K mutations, but position 417 of the S protein displays a threonine instead of a lysine residue (19,23). Similar to the UK and South African variants, we demonstrate mutations in the S protein producing the P.1 variant and their frequencies from December 2019 to 17th of February 2021 (**Fig. 7**). The P.1 variant harbours substitutions L18F, T20N, P26S, D138Y, and R190S in the NTD of the S protein. H655Y and T1027I are in the subdomain 2 (SD2) and S2 subunit, respectively (**Fig. 7A & 7B, Table 4)**. Overall, P.1-specific mutations have worldwide frequencies less than 2% (**Fig. 7C, Table 4)**. D614G, L18F and N501Y are not specific to P1. Similar to B.1.351, P.1 variant has low global frequency with less than 1% of global variant frequency as of mid February 2021 (**Fig. 4**). We then modeled mutations to investigate interaction alterations with known recombinant neutralizing antibodies (32). The K417T mutation reduces interactions with neighboring residues in the C102 Nab and therefore we predict, as with K417N in B.1.1.7, an increased ability to escape neutralization (**Fig. 7D**). Also, the P.1 variant has E484K, and N501Y mutations in the RBD. We predict they will have the same effect reported for the B.1.1.7, and B.1.351 variants (**Fig. 7E & 7F)**. In **Figure 7G**, we illustrate the synonymous, non-synonymous, and deletions in SARS-CoV-2 P.1 genome (**Table 4**).

![Figure 7:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F7.medium.gif)

[Figure 7:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F7)

Figure 7: Frequency of P.1 spike protein mutations with structural confirmation and genome map.
A& B) Colour representation of S protein subdomains with mutations of the P.1 variant in black. NTD (green), RBD (blue), SD1 (purple), SD2 (light blue), and S2 (magenta) are illustrated. The other S protein monomers are illustrated in grey and white. C) Frequency of P.1 variant S protein mutations from December 2019 to February 17th 2021. Interaction of D) 417T with C102 Nab (green), E) 484K with C121 Nab (light pink), and F) 501Y with hACE2 (yellow). The mutations are coloured in black and interaction with adjacent residues are demonstrated by dashed lines. G) Genome of the SARS-CoV-2 P.1 variant with identified nucleotides substitution, deletions, and insertions. Figures were generated using Biorender, PyMOL and RStudio. *(overlapping curves).

![Figure 8:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F8.medium.gif)

[Figure 8:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/F8)

Figure 8: Interactions of K417, E484, and N501 of the S protein with neutralizing antibodies and hACE2.
A) Interaction of K417 (blue) with C102 Nab (green) residues. B) Interaction of E484 (blue) with C121 Nab (light pink). C) Interaction of N501 (blue) with hACE2 (yellow) Dashes lines indicate interactions between residues. The graphs were generated using PyMOL.

## DISCUSSION

Research on the effect of mutations in SARS-CoV-2 has been carried out since the appearance of the virus, and the emergence of new genetic variants that are more transmissible and resistant to antibody neutralization have highlighted the importance of studying these mutations. The number of sequenced viral genomes uploaded to the GISAID database grew fast from 131,417 at the end of September to 451,913 by January 30th, 2021 (27). GISAID is a formidable tool for tracking the emergence of mutations, identifying the region where it emerged, and track its spread around the globe. Given the risk mutations and new variants pose for neutralizing antibody therapy and vaccines for SARS-CoV-2, it is crucial to continuously monitor the susceptibility of these variants to neutralization by humoral and cellular immune responses either induced through natural exposure to the reference strain or induced by vaccination (24). Recent reports on the vaccine efficacy of the Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines against the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variant is variable. All of these vaccines remain efficacious against the B.1.1.7 variant (30,33,34). However, the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine has displayed compromised efficacy against the B.1.351 variant with 21.4% (35). Preliminary data with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines also show reduction of efficacy against B.1.351 (34,36). Furthermore, antibodies induced by the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine appear to display a 15.1-fold decrease in neutralization efficacy against the P.1 variant (37) (**Table 5**). Nevertheless, humoral responses are only one component of the adaptive immune response. T and B cell responses have not been probed in detail against these variants at this time and may still provide robust protection.

View this table:
[Table 5:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.06.21252994/T5)

Table 5: 
Efficacy of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Furthermore, there is likely epistatic mutations in the S protein. Epistasis is the combinatory effect of two or more mutations in a genome (41). Epistasis has previously been studied in the surface protein hemagglutinin (HA) of the influenza viruses, and have illustrated positive epistasis in 11 regions of the HA receptor-binding domain (42). In relation to the S protein of SARS-CoV-2, it could, for instance, allow the S protein to adopt a specific conformation when all the mutations are present, thereby producing a unique folding of the protein. A recent study demonstrated the impact of antigenicity and infectivity of the D614G SARS-CoV-2 variants with a combination of different mutations occurring in the S protein (19). The study shows that D614G alone increases infectivity, but in combination with different other mutations in the S protein, these can either increase or decrease viral infectivity. Similar findings have been reported regarding sensitivity to Nabs. D614G alone has undetectable effects on Nabs escape. However, the combination of D614G with other mutations in S can enable Nabs escape. This data suggests that the continuous emergence of epistatic mutations in SARS-CoV-2 will likely be involved in further altering properties of the virus, including transmissibility, pathogenicity, stability and Nab resistance.

Our analyses have highlighted that several of the successful mutations analyzed had frequency trajectories that eventually plunged or stabilized at low frequencies. Only the D614G in the S protein and the P323L in the RdRp maintained their presence in the consensus sequence (**Fig. 1 & 2**). Analyses of the GISAID database also reveal which countries upload the most sequences to the database and are therefore carrying out the most testing and sequencing. The global frequency of mutations and variants in the database is therefore biased to represent the genetic landscape of the countries doing the most testing. Emergence of new variants may therefore go undetected until they leave their point of origin and enter countries with high testing and sequencing rates. This delayed notification constitutes a major obstacle in preventing the spread of nefarious variants that are potentially resistant to current vaccines and neutralizing antibody therapy.

In conclusion, our metadata analysis of emerging mutations has highlighted the natural upward and downward fluctuation in mutation prevalence. We also illustrate how mutations sometimes need to co-emerge in order to create a favorable outcome for virus propagation. Tracking mutations and the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 genome is critical for the development and deployment of effective treatments and vaccines. Thus, it is the responsibility of all countries and governing jurisdictions to increase testing and sequencing and upload SARS-CoV-2 genomes to databases in real-time. On then will we have the most accurate information to inform policy and decisions makers about interventions required to blunt the global transmission of the virus and ensure that our tools remain effective against the all circulating variants.

## Data Availability

All sequence data analyzed is freely available on GISAID:

[https://www.gisaid.org](https://www.gisaid.org) 

## CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no competing interests.

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank Sean Li for helpful comments on our manuscript. M.-A.L. holds a Canada Research Chair in Molecular Virology and Intrinsic Immunity. This study was supported by a COVID-19 Rapid Response grant to M-A Langlois by the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) and by a grant supplement by the Canadian Immunity Task Force (CITF).

*   Received March 6, 2021.
*   Revision received March 6, 2021.
*   Accepted March 8, 2021.


*   © 2021, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, Li X, Yang B, Song J, Zhao X, Huang B, Shi W, Lu R, Niu P, Zhan F, Ma X, Wang D, Xu W, Wu G, Gao GF, Tan W. 2020. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med 382:727–733.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa2001017&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

2.  2.Dong E, Du H, Gardner L. 2020. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. The Lancet Infectious Diseases 20:533–534.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

3.  3.Wu F, Zhao S, Yu B, Chen Y-M, Wang W, Song Z-G, Hu Y, Tao Z-W, Tian J-H, Pei Y-Y, Yuan M-L, Zhang Y-L, Dai F-H, Liu Y, Wang Q-M, Zheng J-J, Xu L, Holmes EC, Zhang Y-Z. 2020. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature 579:265–269.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

4.  4.Kim D, Lee J-Y, Yang J-S, Kim JW, Kim VN, Chang H. 2020. The Architecture of SARS-CoV-2 Transcriptome. Cell 181:914-921.e10.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

5.  5.Duffy S. 2018. Why are RNA virus mutation rates so damn high? PLOS Biology 16:e3000003.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pbio.3000003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30102691&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

6.  6.Mandary MB, Masomian M, Poh CL. 2019. Impact of RNA Virus Evolution on Quasispecies Formation and Virulence. Int J Mol Sci 20:4657.
    
    

7.  7.Duffy S, Shackelton LA, Holmes EC. 2008. Rates of evolutionary change in viruses: patterns and determinants. Nature Reviews Genetics 9:267–276.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nrg2323&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18319742&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000254084100010&link_type=ISI) 

8.  8.Eckerle LD, Becker MM, Halpin RA, Li K, Venter E, Lu X, Scherbakova S, Graham RL, Baric RS, Stockwell TB, Spiro DJ, Denison MR. 2010. Infidelity of SARS-CoV Nsp14-Exonuclease Mutant Virus Replication Is Revealed by Complete Genome Sequencing. PLOS Pathogens 6:e1000896.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.ppat.1000896&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20463816&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

9.  9.Minskaia E, Hertzig T, Gorbalenya AE, Campanacci V, Cambillau C, Canard B, Ziebuhr J. 2006. Discovery of an RNA virus 3′→5′ exoribonuclease that is critically involved in coronavirus RNA synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:5108.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTAzLzEzLzUxMDgiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMS8wMy8wOC8yMDIxLjAzLjA2LjIxMjUyOTk0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

10. 10.Ma Y, Wu L, Shaw N, Gao Y, Wang J, Sun Y, Lou Z, Yan L, Zhang R, Rao Z. 2015. Structural basis and functional analysis of the SARS coronavirus nsp14–nsp10 complex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:9436.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTEyLzMwLzk0MzYiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMS8wMy8wOC8yMDIxLjAzLjA2LjIxMjUyOTk0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

11. 11.Rausch JW, Capoferri AA, Katusiime MG, Patro SC, Kearney MF. 2020. Low genetic diversity may be an Achilles heel of SARS-CoV-2. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 117:24614.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMjoiMTE3LzQwLzI0NjE0IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMDMvMDgvMjAyMS4wMy4wNi4yMTI1Mjk5NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

12. 12.Andreano E, Piccini G, Licastro D, Casalino L, Johnson NV, Paciello I, Monego SD, Pantano E, Manganaro N, Manenti A, Manna R, Casa E, Hyseni I, Benincasa L, Montomoli E, Amaro RE, McLellan JS, Rappuoli R. 2020. SARS-CoV-2 escape in vitro from a highly neutralizing COVID-19 convalescent plasma. bioRxiv 2020.12.28.424451.
    
    

13. 13.Shi J, Wen Z, Zhong G, Yang H, Wang C, Huang B, Liu R, He X, Shuai L, Sun Z, Zhao Y, Liu P, Liang L, Cui P, Wang J, Zhang X, Guan Y, Tan W, Wu G, Chen H, Bu Z. 2020. Susceptibility of ferrets, cats, dogs, and other domesticated animals to SARS–coronavirus 2. Science 368:1016.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzNjgvNjQ5NC8xMDE2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMDMvMDgvMjAyMS4wMy4wNi4yMTI1Mjk5NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

14. 14.Li X, Giorgi EE, Marichannegowda MH, Foley B, Xiao C, Kong X-P, Chen Y, Gnanakaran S, Korber B, Gao F. 2020. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through recombination and strong purifying selection. Sci Adv 6:eabb9153.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo4OiJhZHZhbmNlcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMzoiNi8yNy9lYWJiOTE1MyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzAzLzA4LzIwMjEuMDMuMDYuMjEyNTI5OTQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

15. 15.Walls AC, Park Y-J, Tortorici MA, Wall A, McGuire AT, Veesler D. 2020. Structure, Function, and Antigenicity of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Glycoprotein. Cell 181:281-292.e6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.058&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

16. 16.Plante JA, Liu Y, Liu J, Xia H, Johnson BA, Lokugamage KG, Zhang X, Muruato AE, Zou J, Fontes-Garfias CR, Mirchandani D, Scharton D, Bilello JP, Ku Z, An Z, Kalveram B, Freiberg AN, Menachery VD, Xie X, Plante KS, Weaver SC, Shi P-Y. 2020. Spike mutation D614G alters SARS-CoV-2 fitness. Nature [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2895-3](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2895-3).
    
    

17. 17.Zhang L, Jackson CB, Mou H, Ojha A, Peng H, Quinlan BD, Rangarajan ES, Pan A, Vanderheiden A, Suthar MS, Li W, Izard T, Rader C, Farzan M, Choe H. 2020. SARS-CoV-2 spike-protein D614G mutation increases virion spike density and infectivity. Nature Communications 11:6013.
    
    

18. 18.Korber B, Fischer WM, Gnanakaran S, Yoon H, Theiler J, Abfalterer W, Hengartner N, Giorgi EE, Bhattacharya T, Foley B, Hastie KM, Parker MD, Partridge DG, Evans CM, Freeman TM, de Silva TI, Angyal A, Brown RL, Carrilero L, Green LR, Groves DC, Johnson KJ, Keeley AJ, Lindsey BB, Parsons PJ, Raza M, Rowland-Jones S, Smith N, Tucker RM, Wang D, Wyles MD, McDanal C, Perez LG, Tang H, Moon-Walker A, Whelan SP, LaBranche CC, Saphire EO, Montefiori DC. 2020. Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus. Cell 182:812-827.e19.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cell.2020.06.043&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

19. 19.Li Q, Wu J, Nie J, Zhang L, Hao H, Liu S, Zhao C, Zhang Q, Liu H, Nie L, Qin H, Wang M, Lu Q, Li X, Sun Q, Liu J, Zhang L, Li X, Huang W, Wang Y. 2020. The Impact of Mutations in SARS-CoV-2 Spike on Viral Infectivity and Antigenicity. Cell, 2020/07/17 ed. 182:1284-1294.e9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=S0092-8674(20)30877-1&link_type=DOI) 

20. 20.Rambaut A, Loman N, Pybus O, Barclay W, Barrett J, Carabelli A, Connor T, Peacock T, Robertson D, Volz E, on behalf of CoG-UK. 2020. Preliminary genomic characterisation of an emergent SARS-CoV-2 lineage in the UK defined by a novel set of spike mutations. [https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563](https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563)
    
    

21. 21.O’Toole, A, Hill V, et al. (2021) Tracking the international spread of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 and B.1.351/501Y-V2. [https://virological.org/t/tracking-the-international-spread-of-sars-cov-2-lineages-b-1-1-7-and-b-1-351-501y-v2/592](https://virological.org/t/tracking-the-international-spread-of-sars-cov-2-lineages-b-1-1-7-and-b-1-351-501y-v2/592)
    
    

22. 22.Tegally H, Wilkinson E, Giovanetti M, Iranzadeh A, Fonseca V, Giandhari J, Doolabh D, Pillay S, San EJ, Msomi N, Mlisana K, von Gottberg A, Walaza S, Allam M, Ismail A, Mohale T, Glass AJ, Engelbrecht S, Van Zyl G, Preiser W, Petruccione F, Sigal A, Hardie D, Marais G, Hsiao M, Korsman S, Davies M-A, Tyers L, Mudau I, York D, Maslo C, Goedhals D, Abrahams S, Laguda-Akingba O, Alisoltani-Dehkordi A, Godzik A, Wibmer CK, Sewell BT, Lourenço J, Alcantara LCJ, Pond SLK, Weaver S, Martin D, Lessells RJ, Bhiman JN, Williamson C, de Oliveira T. 2020. Emergence and rapid spread of a new severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage with multiple spike mutations in South Africa. medRxiv 2020.12.21.20248640.
    
    

23. 23.Faria, Nuno R.; et al. (12 January 2021). Genomic characterisation of an emergent SARS-CoV-2 lineage in Manaus: preliminary findings. Virological. Retrieved 23 January 2021. [https://virological.org/t/genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-manaus-preliminary-findings/586](https://virological.org/t/genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-manaus-preliminary-findings/586)
    
    

24. 24.Wang P, Liu L, Iketani S, Luo Y, Guo Y, Wang M, Yu J, Zhang B, Kwong PD, Graham BS, Mascola JR, Chang JY, Yin MT, Sobieszczyk M, Kyratsous CA, Shapiro L, Sheng Z, Nair MS, Huang Y, Ho DD. 2021. Increased Resistance of SARS-CoV-2 Variants B.1.351 and B.1.1.7 to Antibody Neutralization. bioRxiv 2021.01.25.428137.
    
    

25. 25.Yi C, Sun X, Ye J, Ding L, Liu M, Yang Z, Lu X, Zhang Y, Ma L, Gu W, Qu A, Xu J, Shi Z, Ling Z, Sun B. 2020. Key residues of the receptor binding motif in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 that interact with ACE2 and neutralizing antibodies. Cellular & Molecular Immunology 17:621–630.
    
    

26. 26.Gu H, Chen Q, Yang G, He L, Fan H, Deng Y-Q, Wang Y, Teng Y, Zhao Z, Cui Y, Li Y, Li X-F, Li J, Zhang N-N, Yang X, Chen S, Guo Y, Zhao G, Wang X, Luo D-Y, Wang H, Yang X, Li Y, Han G, He Y, Zhou X, Geng S, Sheng X, Jiang S, Sun S, Qin C-F, Zhou Y. 2020. Adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 in BALB/c mice for testing vaccine efficacy. Science 369:1603.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzNjkvNjUxMS8xNjAzIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMDMvMDgvMjAyMS4wMy4wNi4yMTI1Mjk5NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

27. 27.Shu Y, McCauley J. 2017. GISAID: Global initiative on sharing all influenza data - from vision to reality. Euro Surveill 22:30494.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.13.30494&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28382917&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

28. 28.Benton DJ, Wrobel AG, Xu P, Roustan C, Martin SR, Rosenthal PB, Skehel JJ, Gamblin SJ. 2020. Receptor binding and priming of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 for membrane fusion. Nature 588:327–330.
    
    

29. 29.Starr TN, Greaney AJ, Hilton SK, Ellis D, Crawford KHD, Dingens AS, Navarro MJ, Bowen JE, Tortorici MA, Walls AC, King NP, Veesler D, Bloom JD. 2020. Deep Mutational Scanning of SARS-CoV-2 Receptor Binding Domain Reveals Constraints on Folding and ACE2 Binding. Cell 182:1295-1310.e20.
    
    

30. 30.Muik A, Wallisch A-K, Sänger B, Swanson KA, Mühl J, Chen W, Cai H, Maurus D, Sarkar R, Türeci Ö, Dormitzer PR, Şahin U. 2021. Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 pseudovirus by BNT162b2 vaccine–elicited human sera. Science eabg6105.
    
    

31. 31.Pereira F. 2020. Evolutionary dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 ORF8 accessory gene. Infect Genet Evol, 2020/09/02 ed. 85:104525–104525.
    
    

32. 32.Barnes CO, Jette CA, Abernathy ME,  Dam K-MA, Esswein SR, Gristick HB, Malyutin AG, Sharaf NG, Huey-Tubman KE, Lee YE, Robbiani DF, Nussenzweig MC, West AP, Bjorkman PJ. 2020. SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody structures inform therapeutic strategies. Nature 588:682–687.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33045718&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

33. 33.Emary KR, Golubchik T, Aley PK, Ariani CV, Angus BJ, Bibi S, Blane B, Bonsall D, Cicconi P, Charlton S. 2021. Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 VOC 202012/01 (B. 1.1. 7).
    
    

34. 34.Wu K, Werner AP, Koch M, Choi A, Narayanan E, Stewart-Jones GBE, Colpitts T, Bennett H, Boyoglu-Barnum S, Shi W, Moliva JI, Sullivan NJ, Graham BS, Carfi A, Corbett KS, Seder RA, Edwards DK. 2021. Serum Neutralizing Activity Elicited by mRNA-1273 Vaccine — Preliminary Report. N Engl J Med [https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2102179](https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2102179)
    
    

35. 35.Madhi SA, Baillie V, Cutland CL, Voysey M, Koen AL, Fairlie L, Padayachee SD, Dheda K, Barnabas SL, Bhorat QE, Briner C, Kwatra G, Ahmed K, Aley P, Bhikha S, Bhiman JN, Bhorat AE,  Plessis J du, Esmail A, Groenewald M, Horne E, Hwa S-H, Jose A, Lambe T, Laubscher M, Malahleha M, Masenya M, Masilela M, McKenzie S, Molapo K, Moultrie A, Oelofse S, Patel F, Pillay S, Rhead S, Rodel H, Rossouw L, Taoushanis C, Tegally H, Thombrayil A,  Eck S van, Wibmer CK, Durham NM, Kelly EJ, Villafana TL, Gilbert S, Pollard AJ, de Oliveira T, Moore PL, Sigal A, Izu A. 2021. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) Covid-19 vaccine against the B.1.351 variant in South Africa. medRxiv 2021.02.10.21251247.
    
    

36. 36.Liu Y, Liu J, Xia H, Zhang X, Fontes-Garfias CR, Swanson KA, Cai H, Sarkar R, Chen W, Cutler M, Cooper D, Weaver SC, Muik A, Sahin U, Jansen KU, Xie X, Dormitzer PR, Shi P-Y. 2021. Neutralizing Activity of BNT162b2-Elicited Serum — Preliminary Report. N Engl J Med [https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2102017](https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2102017).
    
    

37. 37.Garcia-Beltran WF, Lam EC, Denis KSt, Nitido AD, Garcia ZH, Hauser BM, Feldman J, Pavlovic MN, Gregory DJ, Poznansky MC, Sigal A, Schmidt AG, Iafrate AJ, Naranbhai V, Balazs AB. 2021. Circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants escape neutralization by vaccine-induced humoral immunity. medRxiv 2021.02.14.21251704.
    
    

38. 38.Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N, Absalon J, Gurtman A, Lockhart S, Perez JL, Pérez Marc G, Moreira ED, Zerbini C, Bailey R, Swanson KA, Roychoudhury S, Koury K, Li P, Kalina WV, Cooper D, Frenck RW, Hammitt LL, Türeci Ö, Nell H, Schaefer A, Ünal S, Tresnan DB, Mather S, Dormitzer PR, Şahin U, Jansen KU, Gruber WC. 2020. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. N Engl J Med 383:2603–2615.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa2034577&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

39. 39.Baden LR, El Sahly HM, Essink B, Kotloff K, Frey S, Novak R, Diemert D, Spector SA, Rouphael N, Creech CB, McGettigan J, Khetan S, Segall N, Solis J, Brosz A, Fierro C, Schwartz H, Neuzil K, Corey L, Gilbert P, Janes H, Follmann D, Marovich M, Mascola J, Polakowski L, Ledgerwood J, Graham BS, Bennett H, Pajon R, Knightly C, Leav B, Deng W, Zhou H, Han S, Ivarsson M, Miller J, Zaks T. 2020. Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine. N Engl J Med 384:403–416.
    
    

40. 40.Voysey M, Clemens SAC, Madhi SA, et al. 2021. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. The Lancet 397:99–111.
    
    

41. 41.Phillips PC. 2008. Epistasis — the essential role of gene interactions in the structure and evolution of genetic systems. Nature Reviews Genetics 9:855–867.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nrg2452&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18852697&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000260162500010&link_type=ISI) 

42. 42.Wu NC, Xie J, Zheng T, Nycholat CM, Grande G, Paulson JC, Lerner RA, Wilson IA. 2017. Diversity of Functionally Permissive Sequences in the Receptor-Binding Site of Influenza Hemagglutinin. Cell Host & Microbe 21:742-753.e8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.chom.2017.05.011&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28618270&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F08%2F2021.03.06.21252994.atom) 

43. 43.COVID-19 GENOMIC UK CONSORTIUM. 2021. COG-UK report on SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutations of interest in the UK. [https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Report-2\_COG-UK\_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf](https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Report-2_COG-UK_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf)
    
    

44. 44.Zahradník J, Marciano S, Shemesh M, Zoler E, Chiaravalli J, Meyer B, Rudich Y, Dym O, Elad N, Schreiber G. 2021. SARS-CoV-2 RBD in vitro evolution follows contagious mutation spread, yet generates an able infection inhibitor. bioRxiv 2021.01.06.425392.
    
    

45. 45.Kannan SR, Spratt AN, Quinn TP, Heng X, Lorson CL, Sönnerborg A, Byrareddy SN, Singh K. 2020. Infectivity of SARS-CoV-2: there Is Something More than D614G? J Neuroimmune Pharmacol, 2020/09/15 ed. 15:574–577.
    
    

46. 46.Ugurel OM, Mutlu O, Sariyer E, Kocer S, Ugurel E, Inci TG, Ata O, Turgut-Balik D. 2020. Evaluation of the potency of FDA-approved drugs on wild type and mutant SARS-CoV-2 helicase (Nsp13). Int J Biol Macromol, 2020/09/24 ed. 163:1687–1696.
    
    

47. 47.Wu S, Tian C, Liu P, Guo D, Zheng W, Huang X, Zhang Y, Liu L. 2020. Effects of SARS-CoV-2 mutations on protein structures and intraviral protein–protein interactions. Journal of Medical Virology n/a.