Department of Biochemistry, The
University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
Nuffield Department of Medicine, The
University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences
(CAMS) Oxford Institute (COI), The University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for
Virus Research, The University of GlasgowGlasgowUnited
Kingdom
Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research,
The University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
Sir William Dunn School of Pathology,
The University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
UK Health Security Agency, UKHSA-Porton
DownSalisburyUnited Kingdom
Department of Infectious Diseases,
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustBrightonUnited
Kingdom
James & Lillian Martin Centre, Sir
William Dunn School of Pathology, The University of OxfordOxfordUnited
Kingdom
Research Article
Cell Biology
Microbiology and Infectious Disease
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
variant of concern
B.1.1.7
single-molecule fluorescence in situ hybridisation
early replication
smFISH
Human
Viruses
publisher-id74153
doi10.7554/eLife.74153
elocation-ide74153
Abstract
Despite an unprecedented
global research effort on SARS-CoV-2, early replication events remain poorly understood.
Given the clinical importance of emergent viral variants with increased transmission,
there is an urgent need to understand the early stages of viral replication and
transcription. We used single-molecule fluorescence in situ hybridisation (smFISH) to
quantify positive sense RNA genomes with 95% detection efficiency, while simultaneously
visualising negative sense genomes, subgenomic RNAs, and viral proteins. Our absolute
quantification of viral RNAs and replication factories revealed that SARS-CoV-2 genomic
RNA is long-lived after entry, suggesting that it avoids degradation by cellular
nucleases. Moreover, we observed that SARS-CoV-2 replication is highly variable between
cells, with only a small cell population displaying high burden of viral RNA.
Unexpectedly, the B.1.1.7 variant, first identified in the UK, exhibits significantly
slower replication kinetics than the Victoria strain, suggesting a novel mechanism
contributing to its higher transmissibility with important clinical implications.
Introduction
Severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of the COVID-19 pandemic. The
viral genome consists of a single positive strand genomic RNA (+gRNA) approximately 30 kb
in length that encodes a plethora of viral proteins 44Kim et
al.202094Zhao et
al.2021. SARS-CoV-2 primarily targets the
respiratory tract and infection is mediated by Spike protein binding to human
angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE2), where the transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2)
triggers fusion of the viral and cell membranes 37Hoffmann
et al.202086Wan et
al.2020. Following virus entry and capsid
trafficking to the endoplasmic reticulum, the first step in the replicative life cycle is
the translation of the gRNA to synthesise the replicase complex. This complex synthesises
the negative sense genomic strand, enabling the production of additional positive gRNA
copies. In addition, a series of shorter subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs) are synthesised that
encode the structural matrix, Spike, nucleocapsid and envelope proteins, as well as a
series of non-structural proteins 44Kim et
al.202077Sola et
al.2015. The intracellular localisations of
these early events were described using electron microscopy 50Laue et
al.2021 and by antibody-based imaging of viral
double-stranded (ds)RNA 52Lean et al.2020.
However, the J2 dsRNA antibody lacks sensitivity and specificity at early times post
infection as the low abundance of SARS-CoV-2 dsRNA is indistinguishable from host dsRNAs
22Dhir et al.2018. Our
current knowledge of these early steps in the SARS-CoV-2 replicative life cycle is poorly
understood despite their essential role in the establishment of productive infection.
Since the initial outbreak in
the Wuhan province of China in 2019, several geographically distinct variants of concern
(VOCs) with altered transmission have arisen 15Chen et
al.202056Lythgoe
et al.2021. Emerging VOCs such as the
recently named Alpha strain (previously known and referred to herein as B.1.1.7), first
detected in Kent in the UK, possess a fitness advantage in terms of their ability to
transmit compared to the Victoria (VIC) isolate, an early strain of SARS-CoV-2 first
detected in Wuhan in China 11Caly et
al.202020Davies
et al.202143Kidd et
al.202184Volz et
al.2021. Many of the VOCs encode mutations
in the Spike (S) protein 67Rees-Spear et
al.2021 and, consequently, the effects of these amino
acid substitutions on viral entry and immuno-evasion are under intense study 46Kissler
et al.202188Washington et
al.2021. However, some of the mutations map
to non-structural proteins, so could impact viral replication dynamics. To date, the early
replication events of SARS-CoV-2 variants have not been characterised as the current
techniques for quantifying SARS-CoV-2 genomes and replication rates rely on bulk
approaches or have limited sensitivity.
The use of single-molecule and
single-cell analyses in biology offers unprecedented insights into the behaviour of
individual cells and the stochastic nature of gene expression that are often masked by
population-based studies 30Fraser
and Kaern200964Raj and
Oudenaarden2009. These approaches have
revealed how cells vary in their ability to support viral growth and how stochastic forces
can inform our understanding of the infection process 6Billman et
al.20177Boersma et
al.202016Chou and
Lionnet201874Shulla
and Randall201576Singer
et al.2021. Fluorescence in situ
hybridisation (FISH) was previously used to detect RNAs in hepatitis C virus and Sindbis
virus-infected cells with high sensitivity 32Garcia-Moreno et
al.201965Ramanan
et al.201676Singer
et al.2021. This approach has been applied
to SARS-CoV-2 in a limited capacity 9Burke et
al.202168Rensen
et al.2021 with most studies utilising
amplification-based signal detection methods to visualise viral RNA 5Best Rocha
et al.202014Carossino et
al.202034Guerini-Rocco et
al.202042Jiao et
al.202048Kusmartseva et
al.202052Lean et
al.202054Liu et
al.2020. These experiments used either
chromogenic histochemical detection using bright field microscopy or detection of
fluorescent dyes, which both lack the sensitivity to detect individual RNA molecules.
Consequently, the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 RNA replication and transcription during the
early phase of infection are not well understood and lack quantitative, spatial and
temporal information on the genesis of gRNA and sgRNAs. To address this gap, we developed
a single-molecule (sm)FISH method based on earlier published protocols 28Femino
et al.199863Raj et
al.200876Singer
et al.202183Titlow
et al.2018 to visualise SARS-CoV-2 RNAs with
high sensitivity and spatial precision, providing a powerful new approach to track
infection through the detection and quantification of viral replication factories. Our
results uncover a previously unrecognised heterogeneity among cells in supporting
SARS-CoV-2 replication and a surprisingly slower replication rate of the B.1.1.7 variant
when compared to the early lineage VIC strain.
Results
SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA at
single-molecule resolution
To explore the spatial and
temporal aspects of SARS-CoV-2 replication at single-molecule and cell levels, we carried
out smFISH experiments with fluorescently labelled probes directed against the 30 kb viral
gRNA. 48 short antisense DNA oligonucleotide probes were designed to target the viral
ORF1a and labelled with a single fluorescent dye to detect the positive sense gRNA, as
described previously (33Gaspar et al.2017;
Figure 1A). The
probe set detected single molecules of gRNA within SARS-CoV-2-infected Vero E6 cells,
visible as well-resolved diffraction-limited single spots with a consistent fluorescence
intensity and shape (Figure 1B). Treatment of the infected cells
with RNase or the viral polymerase inhibitor remdesivir (RDV) ablated the probe signal,
confirming specificity (Figure 1—figure supplement 1A). To assess
the efficiency and specificity of detection of the +ORF1a probe set, we divided the probes
into two groups of 24 alternating oligonucleotides (‘ODD’ and ‘EVEN’) that were labelled
with different fluorochromes. Interlacing the probes minimised chromatic aberration
between spots detected by the two colours (Figure 1C). Analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 gRNA
with these probes showed a mean distance of <250 nm between the two fluorescent spots,
indicating near-perfect colour registration and a lack of chromatic aberration. 95% of the
diffraction-limited spots within infected cells were dual labelled, demonstrating
efficient detection of single SARS-CoV-2 gRNA molecules (Figure 1C). To assess whether
virion-encapsulated RNA is accessible to the probes, we immobilised SARS-CoV-2 particles
from our viral stocks on glass and incubated them with the +ORF1a probes. We observed a
large number of spots in the immobilised virus preparation that was compatible with single
RNA molecules (Figure 1—figure supplement 1B), suggesting
that detection of RNA within viral particles was achieved.
To verify the specificity of
the +ORF1a probes for SARS-CoV-2, we aligned their sequences against other coronaviruses
and the transcriptomes of both human and African green monkeys. Many of the
oligonucleotides showed mismatches with SARS-CoV-1, MERS, and other coronaviruses along
with human and green monkey RNAs (Figure 1D). The specificity of the +ORF1a
probes highlights the applicability of our probes to detect SARS-CoV-2 in different
mammalian hosts. The high level of mismatches with other coronaviruses predicts that the
+ORF1a probes are unlikely to hybridise with RNAs of other coronaviruses. To evaluate
this, we assessed the ability of the +ORF1a probe set to hybridise RNA from the common
cold coronavirus HCoV-229E. Although the antibody against dsRNA (J2) detected dsRNA foci
in the HCoV-229E-infected Huh7.5 hepatoma cells, no signal was detected with the
SARS-CoV-2 +ORF1a probe set (Figure 1—figure supplement 1C). In contrast,
the +ORF1a probe set bound with intense signals in J2-positive SARS-CoV-2-infected Calu-3
cells.
Next, we tested whether smFISH
could be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE)
lung tissue from experimentally infected Golden Syrian hamsters. The animals were
inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 BVIC01 (5 × 104 plaque-forming unit [PFU]) by
intranasal delivery and infection assessed by qPCR measurement of viral RNA (mean 6.5 ×
106 copies/ml) and titration of
infectious virus (mean 5.3 × 103 PFU/ml) in throat swabs at 4
days post infection. Animals were assessed daily for the onset of clinical symptoms with
the most severe being the presence of laboured breathing that was noted in all infected
animals from day 3 post infection onwards 26Dowall et
al.2021. Infected animals lost weight from day 1 post
infection and by day 4 a loss of 10% total body mass was recorded; however, no significant
change was noted in body temperature. The +ORF1a probes detected SARS-CoV-2 gRNA in a
representative section of the infected lung tissue, showing variable intracellular RNA
levels within the lung tissue (Figure 1E). Our results demonstrate the
specificity of the +ORF1a probe set to detect single molecules of SARS-CoV-2 gRNA within
infected tissue samples fixed and treated in a manner similar to clinically derived
tissues. We conclude that smFISH is likely to work well in clinical studies on material
derived from infected patients and provide a highly sensitive method to visualise viral
RNA in these samples.
Having established smFISH for
the detection of SARS-CoV-2 gRNA, we used this technique to assess both the quantity and
distribution of gRNA during infection. Vero E6 cells were inoculated with virus at a
multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 1 for 2 hr and non-internalised viruses were removed by
trypsin digestion to synchronise the infection. At 2 hr post infection (hpi), most
fluorescent spots correspond to single gRNAs along with a small number of foci harbouring
several gRNA copies (Figure 1F), consistent with early RNA
replication events. By 8 hpi, we noted an expansion in the number of bright multi-gRNA
foci, and at 24 hpi there was a further increase in the number of multi-RNA foci that
localised to the perinuclear region (Figure 1F); consistent with the reported
association of viral replication factories with membranous structures derived from the
endoplasmic reticulum 85V’kovski et al.2021.
Interestingly, our observation of individual gRNA molecules at the periphery of cells (Figure 1F) is also
consistent with individual viral particles observed at the same location by electron
microscopy 19Cortese et
al.202047Klein et
al.2020. We conclude that detection of
SARS-CoV-2 + gRNA by smFISH identifies changes in viral RNA abundance and cellular
distribution during early replication. Our method detected +gRNA molecules in all the
expected subcellular locations, namely in virions, free in the cytoplasm and in clusters
at the periphery of the nucleus, reflecting different steps of the viral life cycle 19Cortese
et al.202035Hackstadt et
al.202158Mendonça
et al.2021.
Quantification of SARS-CoV-2
genomic and subgenomic RNAs
SARS-CoV-2 produces both gRNA
and subgenomic (sg)RNAs which are both critical to express the full scope of viral
proteins in the right time and stoichiometry. However, quantitation of sgRNAs is
challenging due to their sequence overlap with the 3′ end of the gRNA. To estimate the
abundance of sgRNAs, we designed two additional probe sets labelled with different
fluorochromes; a +ORFN set that hybridises to all canonical positive sense viral RNAs, and
a +ORFS set that detects only sgRNA encoding S (S-sgRNA) and gRNA (Figure 2A; 44Kim et
al.2020). Therefore, spots showing fluorescence only
for +ORFN or +ORFS probe sets will represent sgRNAs, whereas spots positive for both +ORFN
or+ORFS and +ORF1a will correspond to gRNA molecules. We applied this approach to
visualise SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in infected Vero E6 cells (6 hpi) and observed a high abundance
of sgRNAs compared to gRNAs (Figure 2B), in agreement with RNA sequencing
studies 1Alexandersen et
al.202044Kim et
al.2020. Further analysis revealed that the
+ORFN single-labelled sgRNAs were more uniformly dispersed throughout the cytoplasm than
dual-labelled gRNA, consistent with their predominant role as mRNAs to direct protein
synthesis (Figure
2—figure supplement 1). However, gRNAs were enriched near the periphery of the
nucleus in a clustered fashion. Association of gRNA with nucleocapsid (N) is essential for
the assembly of coronavirus particles 13Carlson
et al.202024Dinesh
et al.202041Iserman
et al.2020. To monitor this process in
SARS-CoV-2, we combined smFISH using the +ORF1a and +ORFN probe sets with
immunofluorescence detection of the viral nucleocapsid (N). Our findings show that N
protein primarily co-localises with gRNA, while displaying a limited overlap with sgRNAs
(Figure 2C, Figure 2—figure
supplement 2). Together, these data demonstrate the specificity of our probes to
accurately discriminate between the gRNA and sgRNAs.
Negative sense gRNA and sgRNAs
are the templates for the synthesis of positive sense RNAs and are expected to localise to
viral replication factories. However, their detection by RT-qPCR or sequencing is hampered
by cDNA library protocols that employ oligo(dT) selection and by primer binding to dsRNA
structures 65Ramanan et
al.201673Sethna
et al.1991. To detect negative sense viral
RNAs, we denatured dsRNA complexes through either formamide, DMSO, or sodium hydroxide
treatment 76Singer et
al.202190Wilcox
et al.2019. The combination of DMSO with
heat treatment resulted in a loss of anti-dsRNA J2 signal, while maintaining cell
integrity, suggesting a disruption of dsRNA hybrids (Figure 2—figure supplement 3A). We designed
an smFISH probe set specific for the ORF1b antisense sequence that targets the negative
sense gRNA (-gRNA) and resulted in intense diffraction-limited spots in DMSO and
heat-treated cells (Figure 2D). The -gRNA spots were detected at
a significantly lower level than their +gRNA counterparts, with substantial overlap
observed between the two strands at multi-RNA spots, consistent with these foci
representing active sites of viral replication. To determine if these multi-RNA foci
contain dsRNA, the permeabilised infected cells were treated with RNaseT1 or RNaseIII,
which are nucleases specific for single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) and dsRNA, respectively (Figure 2—figure
supplement 3B). RNaseT1 digestion diminished the +ORF1a probe signal, while RNaseIII
treatment abolished the anti-dsRNA J2 signal. A cocktail of RNaseT1 and RNaseIII ablated
both +ORF1a probe binding and anti-dsRNA J2 signals, demonstrating that the +ORF1a probe
set hybridises to both single and duplex RNA under our experimental conditions.
Furthermore, treating cells with DMSO prior to RNaseT1 fully ablated the smFISH signal (Figure 2—figure
supplement 3C), demonstrating that denaturation makes dsRNA accessible for RNaseT1
degradation. In summary, our data show that probe binding to negative strand gRNA requires
chemical denaturation, suggesting that this replication intermediate is rich in dsRNA
structures.
The establishment of
replication factories is a critical phase of the virus life cycle. Previous reports have
identified these viral factories using the J2 dsRNA antibody 8Burgess
and Mohr201519Cortese
et al.202080Targett-Adams et
al.200889Weber et
al.2006. However, this approach depends on
high levels of viral dsRNA as cells naturally express endogenous low levels of dsRNA
(22Dhir et al.2018;
45Kimura et al.2018;
Figure 2E). To
evaluate the ability of J2 antibody to quantify SARS-CoV-2 replication sites, we
co-stained infected cells at 2 and 6 hpi with both J2 and +ORF1a smFISH probes. No
viral-specific J2 signal was detected at 2 hpi, and only 10% of infected cells stained
positive at 6 hpi, in agreement with previous observations (19Cortese et
al.2020; 27Eymieux et
al.2021; Figure 2E). In contrast, more than 85% of
the cells showed diffraction-limited smFISH signals at both timepoints (Figure 2F). Furthermore, the
average J2 signal detected in the SARS-CoV-2-infected cells at both timepoints was
comparable to uninfected cells (Figure 2F). These data clearly show that the
J2 antibody, although broadly used, underestimates the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
In contrast, smFISH detected gRNA as early as 2 hpi, with a significant increase in copy
number by 6 hpi, highlighting its utility to detect and quantify viral replication
factories.
SARS-CoV-2 replication at
single-molecule resolution
The efficiency and sensitivity
of smFISH to detect single molecules of SARS-CoV-2 RNA allowed us to investigate the
dynamics of viral replication in Vero E6 cells during the first 10 hr of infection (Figure 3A). At 2
hpi, the +ORF1a probe set detected predominantly single molecules of +gRNA with a median
value of ~30 molecules per cell (Figure 3B and C). Interestingly, at 2 hpi
RDV treatment did not affect the number of gRNA copies per cell, suggesting that these
RNAs derive from incoming viral particles (Figure 3C). In contrast, the increase in
gRNA copies per cell at 4 and 6 hpi was inhibited by RDV, indicating active viral
replication. The infected cell population showed varying gRNA levels that we classified
into three groups; (i) ‘partially resistant’ cells with <102 gRNA copies that showed no
increase in gRNA burden between 2 and 8 hpi (60% of the population); (ii) ‘permissive’
cells with ~102–105 copies per cell showing a
modest increase over time (~30%); and (iii) ‘super-permissive’ cells with >105 copies per cell showing a
sharp increase in gRNA copies (~10%). Given the high gRNA density in super-permissive
cells, RNA counts were estimated by correlating the integrated fluorescence intensity of
reference single molecules to the total fluorescence of the 3D cell volume (see Materials
and methods), which follows a linear relationship (Figure 3—figure supplement 1). Analysing the
total cellular gRNA content showed that ‘super-permissive’ cells are the dominant source
of gRNA across the culture (Figure 3D). This suggests that bulk RNA
analyses such as RT-qPCR are biased towards this high gRNA burden group. Importantly, we
found that cellular heterogeneity persists beyond the initial hours of infection. Even at
24 hpi, 40% of the cells did not reach the super-permissive state, and they formed a
distinct population with approximately 10-fold less gRNA (Figure 3C and E). Similar heterogeneous cell
populations were observed between 24 and 48 hpi, although the overall levels of gRNA
started to decline after 32 hpi, reflecting cytotoxic effects and virus egress (Figure 3—figure
supplement 2A–C). Therefore, these results highlight a wide variation in cell
susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 replication, which persisted throughout the infection.
Notably, the high level of gRNA content in super-permissive cells (~107 counts/cell) was similar
throughout the time course, suggesting the existence of an upper limit of gRNA copies in
Vero E6 cells (Figure
3C).
Viral RNA stability is an
important determinant for the virus’ ability to initiate and maintain a productive
infection. In an effort to determine the stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, we added RDV
simultaneously to SARS-CoV-2 infection and followed gRNA persistence in a time course.
Notably, the average number of gRNA copies per cell was stable in RDV-treated cells (Figure 3C),
suggesting that the incoming gRNA is long-lived. To assess if gRNA is also stable at later
times post infection, we treated cells with RDV at 24 hpi and measured gRNA abundance at
different times post treatment (Figure 3—figure supplement 2A–C). As
expected, RDV treatment led to a reduced proportion of super-permissive cells and
non-viable cells at 48 hpi, indicating an inhibition of viral replication and,
consequently, viral-induced cell death (Figure 3—figure supplement 2D). However,
considerable levels of gRNA persisted in these cells even after 24 hr of RDV treatment,
suggesting that gRNA is also relatively stable at late times post infection. To estimate
the half-life of gRNA in late infection, we fitted a decay curve and calculated the
half-life of gRNA within a range of 6–8 hr (Figure 3—figure supplement 2C). This
half-life might be underestimated as gRNA loss is not only due to decay but also to virus
egress. Moreover, while we used an RDV dose that exceeded the 90% inhibitory concentration
(IC90) (Figure 3—figure supplement 3),
we cannot rule out that incomplete inhibition by RDV could affect our half-life estimates
(Figure 3C).
Simultaneous analysis of +ORF1a
and +ORFN revealed similar expression kinetics for sgRNA, with 11 copies/cell of sgRNA
detected in 63% of infected cells at 2 hpi (Figure 3C and F). Since +sgRNA requires
-sgRNA template for its production, our results imply that multiple rounds of
transcription occur rapidly following virus internalisation that are RDV insensitive. By 6
hpi, most cells contain sgRNA (Figure 3F), with the super-permissive cells
supporting high levels of sgRNA transcription. We examined the vRNA replication dynamics
and found the ratio of sgRNA/gRNA ranged from 0.5 to 8 over time (Figure 3G), consistent with a
recent report in diagnostic samples 1Alexandersen
et al.2020. Notably, the sgRNA/gRNA ratio increased
between 2 and 10 hpi, followed by a decline at 24 hpi, indicating a shift in preference to
produce gRNA over sgRNA in later stages of infection. A similar trend was observed in
RDV-treated cells, with a reduced sgRNA/gRNA peak at 8–10 hpi. We estimated the sgRNA/gRNA
ratio for individual cells and found that sgRNA synthesis is favoured in the ‘partially
resistant’ and ‘permissive’ cells, whereas the ‘super-permissive’ cells had a reduced
ratio of sgRNA/gRNA (Figure 3H). In summary, these results
indicate that gRNA synthesis is favoured in the late phase of infection, which may reflect
the requirement of gRNA to assemble new viral particles.
Positive sense RNA viruses,
including coronaviruses, utilise host membranes to generate viral factories, which are
sites of active replication and/or virus assembly 92Wolff et
al.2020. Our current knowledge on the genesis and
dynamics of these factories in SARS-CoV-2 infection is limited. We exploited the spatial
resolution of smFISH to study these structures, which we define as spatially extended foci
containing multiple gRNA molecule clusters. These clusters are compatible in size with the
double membrane vesicles (DMVs) employed by SARS-CoV-2 to replicate and assemble new
virions, as previously identified by EM (see Materials and methods; 19Cortese et
al.2020; 58Mendonça
et al.2021). We refer to these gRNA clusters as
‘factories’. We observed 1–2 factories per cell at 2 hpi, which increased to ~30
factories/cell by 10 hpi (Figure 3I). In addition, the average number
of gRNA molecules within these factories, although variable, increased over time (Figure 3J). RDV
treatment reduced both the number of viral factories per cell and their RNA content.
Together these data show the capability of smFISH to localise and quantify active sites of
SARS-CoV-2 replication and to measure changes in gRNA and sgRNA at a single-cell level
over the course of the infection.
Super-permissive cells are randomly
distributed
Our earlier kinetic analysis of
infected Vero E6 cells identified a minor population of ‘super-permissive’ cells
containing high gRNA copies at 8 hpi. A random selection of ~300 cells allowed us to
further characterise the infected cell population (Figure 4A and B). To extend these
observations, we examined the vRNAs in two human lung epithelial cell lines, A549-ACE2 and
Calu-3, that are widely used to study SARS-CoV-2 infection 17Chu et
al.202037Hoffmann
et al.2020. In agreement with our earlier
observations with Vero E6, 3–5% of A549-ACE2 and Calu-3 cells showed a ‘super-permissive’
phenotype (Figure 4C
and D). An important question is how these ‘super-permissive’ cells are distributed
in the population as the pattern could highlight potential drivers for susceptibility
36Healy et al.2020.
Infection can induce innate signalling that can lead to the expression and secretion of
soluble factors such as interferons that induce an antiviral state in the local cellular
environment 4Belkowski and
Sen198772Schoggins and
Rice2011. Regulation can be widespread
through paracrine signalling or affect only proximal cells. We considered three scenarios
where ‘super-permissive’ cells are randomly distributed, evenly separated or clustered
together. We compared the average nearest-neighbour distance between ‘super-permissive’
cells and simulated points that were distributed either randomly, evenly, or in clusters
(Figure 4—figure
supplement 1). In summary, our results show conclusively that the ‘super-permissive’
infected Vero E6, A549-ACE2, and Calu-3 cells were randomly distributed (Figure 4E and F, Figure 4—figure
supplement 1). We interpret these data as being consistent with an intrinsic
property of the cell that defines susceptibility to virus infection. The data also argue
against cell-to-cell signalling mechanisms that would either lead to clustering (if
increasing susceptibility) or to an even distribution (if inhibiting) of infected cells.
Differential
replication kinetics of the B.1.1.7 and VIC strains
The recent emergence of
SARS-CoV-2 VOCs, which display differential transmission, pathogenesis, and infectivity,
has changed the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent studies have focused on mutations
in the Spike protein and whether these alter particle uptake into cells and resistance to
vaccine or naturally acquired antibodies 18Collier
et al.202123Dicken
et al.202162Planas
et al.2021. The B.1.1.7 variant is
associated with higher transmission 20Davies
et al.202131Galloway
et al.202184Volz et
al.2021 and has 17 coding changes mapping to
both non-structural (ORF1a/b, ORF3a, ORF8) and structural (Spike and N) proteins.
Mutations within the non-structural genes could affect virus replication, independent of
Spike-mediated entry, thus we used smFISH to compare the replication kinetics of the
B.1.1.7 and VIC strains (Figure 5A). We discovered that the number of
gRNA molecules at 2 hpi was similar for both viruses, reflecting similar cell uptake of
viral particles (Figure 5B–E). However, the quantities of
intracellular gRNA and sgRNA were lower in B.1.1.7-infected cells compared to VIC at 6 and
8 hpi (Figure
5E). We also found that while the amount of gRNA per cell was reduced in the B.1.1.7
variant, there were an equal number of +ORF1a and +ORFN-positive cells (Figure 5D), suggesting that the
reduced B.1.1.7 RNA burden is due to a differential replication efficiency rather than
infection rate. The B.1.1.7 variant also showed a reduced number of replication factories
per cell (Figure
5F), with each focus containing on average a lower number of gRNA molecules compared
to the VIC strain (Figure 5G). RDV treatment ablated the
differences between the viral strains, demonstrating that the observed phenotype is
replication-dependent (Figure 5B,E-I). Nevertheless, the lower
level of individual gRNA that we detected in RDV-treated cells persisted for at least 8
hpi in both the VIC and B.1.1.7 strains. We conclude that individual gRNA molecules of
both the strains are highly stable in the cytoplasm of infected cells.
Consistent with the delay in
replication, we observed a shallower growth of the sgRNA/gRNA ratio in B.1.1.7-infected
cells between 2 and 8 hpi compared to the VIC strain (Figure 5H). These differences between the
strains were apparent in all three classifications of cells from our earlier gRNA burden
criteria. We noted that B.1.1.7-infected ‘partially resistant’ and ‘permissive’ cells show
lower sgRNA/gRNA ratio while ‘super-permissive’ cells displayed 1.5-fold higher ratio
compared to VIC (Figure 5—figure supplement 1A). The
frequency of super-permissive cells was lower for B.1.1.7 at 6 and 8 hpi (Figure 5I, Figure 5—figure supplement 1B and
C). In agreement with our results with VIC (Figure 4E and F), the distribution of
super-permissive cells with B.1.1.7 was random at 8 hpi; however, this changed to a
non-random pattern at 24 hpi. In contrast, the distribution of VIC super-permissive cells
remained random at all timepoints (Figure 5—figure supplement 2). We interpret
these results as demonstrating differences in the infection kinetics of the variants, with
B.1.1.7 displaying a potentially higher capacity to spread locally between adjacent cells
than VIC.
To test whether our findings
using B.1.1.7 are applicable to other cell types, we assessed the replication of both
variants in A549-ACE2 cells that were recently reported to be immunocompetent 53Li et al.2021. Both
VIC and B.1.1.7 infections resulted in comparable numbers of infected cells and similar
numbers of gRNA molecules per cell at 2 hpi, demonstrating a similar degree of viral
particle entry into cells (Figure 6—figure supplement 1A). However,
infection with the B.1.1.7 variant led to a reduced gRNA and sgRNA burden at 8 and 24 hpi
(Figure 6A and B,
Figure 6—figure
supplement 1B and C). Moreover, fewer ‘super-permissive’ cells were detected at
these timepoints (Figure 6C). To evaluate whether the slower
replication kinetics of B.1.1.7 was attributable to a reduction in the secretion of new
particles, we measured the level of infectious virus (Figure 6—figure supplement 1D). We found a
modest but significant reduction in the infectious titre of B.1.1.7 compared to VIC at 8
and 24 hpi, consistent with the reduced cellular RNA burden of B.1.1.7. Considering these
results together, we conclude that the replication and secretion rates of B.1.1.7 are
slower than VIC in contrast to its more rapid spread in the human population.
To evaluate our observation on
B.1.1.7 replication kinetics with an independent method, we sequenced ribo-depleted total
RNA libraries of A549-ACE2 cells infected with B.1.1.7 or VIC for 2, 8, and 24 hr (Figure 6A, Figure 6—figure
supplement 2A). As expected, the number of reads mapping to SARS-CoV-2 genome
increased over time, reflecting active replication and transcription (Figure 6D). Reads mapping to
the 3′ end of the genome increased relative to the 5′ end, reflecting the synthesis of
sgRNAs. In agreement with our smFISH analysis, we detected similar levels of vRNA at 2 hpi
within B.1.1.7 or VIC-infected cells, consistent with similar internalisation rates in
A549-ACE2 cells (Figure 6E). However, the abundance of vRNAs
in B.1.1.7-infected cells at 8 and 24 hpi was notably lower than with VIC-infected cells
(Figure 6E).
Furthermore, the level of B.1.1.7 RNA was almost unaltered between 2 and 8 hpi, and then
increased dramatically at 24 hpi (Figure 6E, Figure 6—figure supplement 2B), contrasting
with VIC-infected cells, which showed a continuous increase in vRNA over time. Together,
these RNA sequencing data confirm that the B.1.1.7 variant exhibits delayed replication
kinetics complementing our smFISH results.
Transcriptomic changes in
B.1.1.7 and VIC-infected cells
To further explore the
differences in gene expression between the B.1.1.7 and VIC strains, we assessed the
abundance of the different vRNAs in infected A549-ACE2 cells. Negative sense viral RNAs
represent a small fraction of the vRNA present in the cell, as assayed by smFISH (Figure 6G). These
negative sense transcripts are detectable as early as 2 hpi, adding further support to our
earlier conclusion that primary viral replication events can occur rapidly post-infection,
particularly in ‘super-permissive’ cells (Figures 3C and 6G). The ratio between negative and positive
sense vRNAs increased throughout the infection for the VIC strain, but for B.1.1.7 we
observed a modest reduction in the ratio at 24 hpi (Figure 6G). To assess the expression of
sgRNAs, we quantified the reads mapping to the split junctions derived from RNA-dependent
RNA polymerase discontinuous replication (Figure 6—figure supplement 2C; 44Kim et al.2020;
85V’kovski et
al.2021). In agreement with smFISH data, sgRNAs were
detected in low quantities at 2 hpi (Figure 6D and G). For VIC, the sgRNA/gRNA
ratio peaks at 8 hpi, followed by a significant drop at 24 hpi (Figure 6G). For B.1.1.7, we
observed a significantly lower sgRNA/gRNA ratio at 8 hpi when compared to VIC (Figure 5H).
However, the sgRNA/gRNA ratio of B.1.1.7 remained stable between 8 and 24 hpi, surpassing
VIC (Figure 6H).
These results suggest that both VIC and B.1.1.7 have a different kinetics of gRNA and
sgRNA expression, complementing our earlier observations with smFISH (Figure 3C and G).
Next, we assessed the relative
abundance of each individual sgRNA. We found that S-sgRNA was the dominant species at 2
hpi, while the sgRNA encoding N (N-sgRNA) become prevalent at 8–24 hpi (Figure 6—figure supplement 2D).
We interpret this early S-to-N sgRNA switch upon infection as indicating a transition to
the assembly of viral particles requiring large numbers of N molecules. At 2 hpi, B.1.1.7
produced more S-sgRNA but less N-sgRNA than VIC, which is consistent with a delayed
B.1.1.7 replication kinetic and S-to-N transition. Furthermore, we found upregulation of
sgRNAs encoding ORF9b (~0.13%) and N* (~1%) in B.1.1.7-infected cells (Figure 6I), in agreement with
recent studies reporting altered sgRNA landscapes for B.1.1.7 60Parker
et al.202182Thorne
et al.2021. Upregulation of these
transcripts is likely to result from advantageous mutations that create novel
transcriptional regulatory sequences (TRS-B) in B.1.1.7 60Parker
et al.202187Wang et
al.2021. When we scanned for the TRS motifs
in other VOCs and variants of interests (VOIs), we found mutations in TRS-B near N* were
also found in P.1 (Gamma) and P.2 (Zeta) variants while mutations in TRS-B near ORF9b were
unique to B.1.1.7 (see Supplementary file 1). However, multiple
sequence alignment of VOCs and VOIs revealed that mutations accumulate frequently at or
near the TRS motif sequences, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 utilises these regulatory motif
and surrounding sequences as evolutionary hotspots to modulate sgRNA expression and viral
fitness. These transcriptomic results reveal that B.1.1.7 does not only exhibit delayed
replication kinetics, but also produces a differential pool of sgRNAs likely due to
mutations within the TRS. Altogether, the novel combination of smFISH and ‘in-bulk’ RNA
sequencing that we have described provides a powerful and holistic way to characterise the
replication dynamics of SARS-CoV-2. Our pipeline can now be expanded to other VOC,
viruses, functional analyses, and characterisation of antivirals.
Discussion
Our spatial quantitation of
SARS-CoV-2 replication dynamics at the single-molecule and single-cell level provides
important new insights into the early rate-limiting steps of infection. Typically,
analyses of viral replication are carried out using ‘in-bulk’ approaches such as RT-qPCR
and conventional RNA-seq. While very informative, these approaches lack spatial
information and do not allow single-cell analyses. Although single-cell RNA-seq analyses
can overcome some of these issues 29Fiege et
al.202166Ravindra
et al.2021, their low coverage and lack of
information regarding the spatial location of cells remain a significant limitation. In
this study, we show that smFISH is a sensitive approach that allows the absolute
quantification of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs at single-molecule resolution. Our experiments show the
detection of individual gRNA molecules within the first 2 hr of infection, which most
likely reflect incoming viral particles. However, we also observed small numbers of foci
comprising several gRNAs sensitive to RDV treatment, demonstrating early replication
events. We believe that these foci represent ‘replication factories’ as they co-stain with
FISH probes specific for negative sense viral RNA and sgRNA. These data provide the first
evidence that SARS-CoV-2 replication occurs within the first 2 hr of infection and
increases over time. This contrasts to our observations with the J2 anti-dsRNA antibody
where viral-dependent signals were apparent at 6 hpi 19Cortese
et al.202027Eymieux
et al.2021. We noted that co-staining
SARS-CoV-2-infected cells with J2 antibody and +ORF1a with an smFISH probe set showed a
partial overlap, suggesting that infection may induce changes in cellular dsRNA. These
findings highlight the utility of smFISH to uncover new aspects of SARS-CoV-2 replication
that are worthy of further study.
We found that SARS-CoV-2 gRNA
persisted in the presence of RDV, suggesting a long half-life that may reflect the high
secondary structure of the RNA genome that could render it refractory to the action of
nucleases 39Huston et
al.202175Simmonds
et al.2021. smFISH revealed complex dynamics
of gRNA and sgRNA expression that resulted in a rapid expansion of sgRNA (peaking at 8
hpi), followed by a shift towards the production of gRNA (24 hpi), results that were
confirmed by RNA-seq. Since a viral particle is composed of thousands of proteins and a
single RNA molecule, we interpret the high synthesis of sgRNAs as aiming to fulfil the
high demand for structural proteins in the viral particles. Once the structural proteins
are available in sufficient quantities, the late shift towards gRNA synthesis may ensure
the presence of sufficient gRNA to generate the viral progeny.
Our study shows that cells vary
in their susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection, where most cells had low vRNA levels
(<102 copies/cell), but a minor
population (4–10% depending on the cell line) had much higher vRNA burden (>105 copies/cell) at 10 hpi. In
contrast, the number of intracellular vRNA copies at 2 hpi was similar across the culture,
suggesting that this phenotype is not explained by differences in virus entry. These
‘super-permissive’ cells account for the majority of vRNA within the culture and mask the
dominant cell population. Similar results were obtained with Vero E6, Calu-3, and
A549-ACE2, suggesting that this is a common feature of SARS-CoV-2 infection. As both
Calu-3 and A549-ACE2 have intact innate sensing pathways 12Cao et
al.202153Li et
al.2021 unlike Vero cells 21Desmyter
et al.1968, this variable susceptibility is unlikely
to reflect differential immune cell signalling and is consistent with their random
distribution within the culture. The reason for the differential infection fitness may
rely on the intrinsic properties of each cell, including the stage of the cell cycle, the
expression of individual antiviral sensors or the metabolic state. Recent single-cell RNA
sequencing studies of SARS-CoV-2-infected bronchial cultures identified ciliated cells as
the primary target. However, only a minority of these cells contained vRNA that may either
reflect low sequencing depth or cell-to-cell variation in susceptibility 29Fiege et
al.202166Ravindra
et al.2021, and indeed, our smFISH results
on experimentally infected hamster lungs showed variable RNA levels across the tissue (Figure 1E). The
human respiratory tract encompasses the nasal passage, large and small airways and
bronchioles, and our knowledge on how specific cell types and SARS-CoV-2 RNA burden relate
is still limited. Applying smFISH in concert with cell-type-specific labels to clinical
biopsies and experimentally infected animal samples 71Salguero
et al.2021 will allow us to address this important
question.
Given the current status of the
pandemic, there has been a global effort to understand the biology of emergent VOC with
high transmission rates and possible resistance to neutralising antibodies. Most studies
have focused on mutations mapping to the Spike glycoprotein as they can alter virus
attachment, entry, and sensitivity to vaccine-induced or naturally acquired neutralising
antibodies. However, many of the mutations map to other viral proteins, including
components of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase complex that could impact RNA replication,
and non-coding regulatory regions as the TRSs, which can affect sgRNA expression. Our
smFISH analysis revealed that the B.1.1.7 variant shows slower replication kinetics
compared to the VIC strain, resulting in lower gRNA and sgRNA copies per cell, fewer viral
replication factories and a reduced frequency of ‘super-permissive’ cells. This delay in
B.1.1.7 replication was observed in Vero and A549-ACE2 cells and was confirmed by RNA-seq
as an orthogonal method.
Emerging VOCs, such as B.1.1.7,
have been reported to have a fitness advantage in terms of their ability to transmit
compared to the VIC isolate 11Caly et
al.202020Davies
et al.202143Kidd et
al.202184Volz et
al.2021. However, the mechanisms underlying
increased transmission are not well understood. Interestingly, a recent study reported
that B.1.1.7 leads to higher levels of intracellular vRNA and N protein than VIC at 24 and
48 hpi using ‘in-bulk’ RT-qPCR and immunofluorescence, respectively 82Thorne et
al.2021. We observed that while B.1.1.7 still
produces lower level of vRNA than VIC at 24 hpi (Figure 6E), it exhibits a clear recovery
compared to 8 hpi. It is thus plausible that both variants yield similar total amounts of
viral RNA and proteins but within a different time frame. The potential differences in
replication dynamics between the two variants are also reflected in distinct sgRNA/gRNA
ratios throughout the infection (Figure 6H). That said, ‘in-bulk’ RT-qPCR
analysis does not provide absolute quantification and individual cell assessment and,
therefore, should likely be biased towards the super-susceptible cells that account for
most of the RNA burden. Thorne and colleagues also reported an elevated expression of the
sgRNA encoding the innate agonist ORF9b 82Thorne et
al.2021, which is also supported by our results. We
noticed that the increase of ORF9b sgRNA expression may be due to mutations in non-coding
regulatory sequences involved in discontinuous replication (TRS), and that such mutations
are common across VOCs possibly mediating differential sgRNA expression. Enhanced ORF9b
expression, together with the lower intracellular vRNA levels present in B.1.1.7-infected
cells, may grant this variant with an advantage to evade the antiviral response. This
advantage, combined with mutations in the Spike that are proposed to improve cell entry,
could provide the B.1.1.7 with a replicative advantage over the early lineage VIC strain
enabling its rapid dissemination across the human population 11Caly et
al.202020Davies
et al.202143Kidd et
al.202184Volz et
al.2021. A recent longitudinal study of
nasopharyngeal swabs showed that the B.1.1.7 variant was associated with longer infection
times and yet showed similar peak viral loads to non-B.1.1.7 variants 46Kissler et
al.2021. The authors conclude that this extended
duration of virus shedding may contribute to increased transmissibility and is consistent
with our data showing reduced replication of B.1.1.7 at the single-cell level. An
independent study reported a significantly longer duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in
nasopharyngeal swabs from persons infected with B.1.1.7 (16 days) compared to those
infected with other lineages (14 days) 10Calistri
et al.2021. Replication fitness will be defined by
the relationship of the virus with its host cell, and aggressive replication is expected
to trigger cellular antiviral sensors. In contrast, lower replication may allow the virus
to replicate and persist for longer periods before host antiviral sensors are triggered.
Such differences, and their impact on host antiviral responses, are likely to be of key
importance for our understanding of the success of viral variants to spread through the
population.
Vero E6, A549-ACE2 (kind gift
from the Bartenschlager lab) 47Klein et al.2020,
and Huh-7.5 cells were maintained in standard DMEM, Calu-3 cells in Advanced DMEM both
supplemented with 10% foetal bovine serum, 2 mM L-glutamine, 100 U/ml penicillin, and 10
μg/ml streptomycin and non-essential amino acids. All cell lines tested free of mycoplasma
were maintained at 37°C and 5% CO2 in a standard culture
incubator.
Virus propagation and
infection of cell culture models
SARS-CoV-2 strains: VIC 01/20 (BVIC01)
11Caly et al.2020
(provided by PHE Porton Down after supply from the Doherty Centre Melbourne, Australia)
and B.1.1.7 81Tegally et al.2020
(20I/501Y.V1.HMPP1) (provided by PHE Porton Down). Viral strains were propagated in Vero
E6 cells as described 91Wing et al.2021.
Briefly, naïve Vero E6 cells were infected with SARS-CoV-2 at an MOI of 0.003 and
incubated for 48–72 hr until visible cytopathic effect was observed. At this point,
cultures were harvested, clarified by centrifugation to remove residual cell debris and
stored at –80°C. To determine the viral titre, fresh Vero E6 cells were inoculated with
serial dilutions of SARS-CoV-2 viral stocks for 2 hr followed by addition of a semi-solid
overlay consisting of 1.5% carboxymethyl cellulose (Sigma). Cells were incubated for 72 hr
and visible plaques enumerated by fixing cells using amido black stain to calculate
PFU/ml. Similarly, HCoV-229E (Andrew Davidson lab [Bristol] and Peter Simmmonds lab
[Oxford]) virus was propagated in Vero E6 cells and TCID50 was performed in Huh-7.5 cells.
For smFISH experiments with the
SARS-CoV-2 stains, cells were infected at an MOI of 1 for 2 hr followed by extensive
washing in PBS. Residual cell surface-associated virus was removed by trypsin treatment of
the cell monolayer for 2 min followed by neutralisation of the trypsin using
serum-containing media. Infected cells were then maintained for defined periods up to 24
hr. For the HCoV-229E, cells were infected at an MOI of 1 and were maintained for 24 and
48 hr.
Hamster infection and tissues preparation
Golden Syrian hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus)
(males and females) aged 7 weeks old, weighing 96–116 g, were obtained from Envigo,
London, UK. Hamsters were housed in individual cages with access to food and water ad
libitum. Hamsters were briefly anaesthetised with 5% isoflurane (Zoetis, Leatherhead, UK)
and 4 l/m O2 and inoculated by the
intranasal route with 5 × 104 PFU/animal of SARS-CoV-2
BVIC01 delivered in 100 μl per nostril (200 μl in total). Hamsters were monitored
post-infection for weight, clinical signs and temperature (via implanted temperature
chip). On day 4, the hamsters were euthanised by overdose (sodium pentobarbitone
[Dolelethal, Vetquinol UK Ltd]) via the intraperitoneal route. At necropsy, lung samples
were fixed in 10% buffered formalin at room temperature and embedded in paraffin wax. 4 µm
tissue sections were cut.
RT-qPCR
Infected cells were harvested
in RLT buffer and RNA extracted using the QIAGEN RNeasy kit. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was quantified
using a one-step reverse transcriptase qPCR (RT-qPCR) kit (Takyon) in a multiplexed
reaction containing primer probes directed against the SARS-CoV-2 N gene (FAM) and
ß–2-microglobulin (VIC) as an internal control. All qPCR reactions were carried out using
a Roche 96 Light cycler (Roche) (SARS primer probe IDT CAT:100006770, B2M primer probe
Applied Biosystems 4325797).
Single-molecule
fluorescence in situ hybridisation (smFISH)
smFISH was carried out as
previously reported 83Titlow et
al.201893Yang et
al.2017 with minor modifications. Briefly,
cells were grown on #1.5 round-glass coverslips in 24-well plate or in µ-slides 8-well
glass bottom (IBIDI) and fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde (Thermo Fisher) for 30 min at room
temperature. Coverslips were cleaned in 80% ethanol with lint-free tissue and kept in 100%
ethanol to maintain sterility and cleanliness. Cells were permeabilised in PBS/0.1% Triton
X-100 for 10 min at room temperature followed by washes in PBS and 2× SSC. Cells were
pre-hybridised in pre-warmed (37°C) wash solution (2× SSC, 10% formamide) twice for 20 min
each at 37°C. Hybridisation was carried out in hybridisation solution (2× SSC, 10%
formamide, 10% dextran sulphate) containing 500 nM smFISH probes overnight at 37°C. For
infection timepoints beyond 24 hr, smFISH probes were added at 1 µM. After the overnight
hybridisation, cells were washed for 20 min in pre-warmed wash solution at 37°C followed
by counterstain with DAPI (1 µg/ml), phalloidin-Alexa Fluor 488 conjugate (264 nM) and/or
CellMask Green (1:1,000,000) diluted in wash solution. Cells were then washed once with
wash solution for 20 min at 37°C and twice with 2× SSC for 10 min each at room
temperature. Cells were mounted using Vectashield, IBIDI mounting media or 2× SSC.
For RNase digestion
experiments, RNaseT1 (Thermo Fisher, EN0541, 100 U/ml) or RNaseIII (M0245S, NEB, 20 U/ml)
was used to degrade ssRNA and dsRNA, respectively. Permeabilised cells were treated with
RNases in PBS supplemented with 5 mM MgCl2 and incubated at 37°C for 1 hr
and washed three times with PBS.
In the experiment to detect
viral negative strands, dsRNA was denatured using DMSO, formamide, or NaOH 76Singer
et al.202190Wilcox
et al.2019. After the permeabilisation step,
cells were rinsed in distilled water and were treated with 50mM NaOH for 30s at room
temperature, 70% formamide at 70°C for 1hr, or 90% DMSO at 70°C for 1hr. Following the
treatments, cells were quickly cooled on ice, washed in ice-cold PBS and subjected to
standard smFISH protocol. The smFISH experiments in Figures 3 and !number(5) were performed with DMSO and heat
denaturation.
For smFISH on FFPE hamster
lungs, the tissue sections were pre-treated as described in 3Annaratone
et al.2017 and the probes were hybridised based on
the protocol described in 70Rouhanifard et
al.2018 with minor modifications. Briefly, tissues
were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin and sectioned to 5µm slices. Tissue sections
were deparaffinised in xylene (2 × 10min), washed in 100% ethanol (2 × 5min) and
post-fixed in methanol-acetic acid (3:1v/v) for 5min. Tissues were re-hydrated in an
ethanol gradient for 3min each (100%, 85%, 70%, nuclease-free water), heated at 80°C for
1hr in antigen retrieval solution (10mM sodium citrate, pH 6 supplemented with 1:50 RVC),
permeabilised in 70% ethanol overnight at 4°C. Then, sections were incubated in 100%
ethanol for 5min, air-dried for 5min and tissue-cleared with 8% SDS made up in 2× SSC.
Afterwards, standard smFISH procedures were followed.
smFISH probe design and specificity
analysis
Candidate smFISH probe
sequences were acquired using Stellaris Probe Designer version 4.2 (https://www.biosearchtech.com/stellaris-designer)
with the following parameters: organism, human; masking level, 5; oligo length, 20 nt;
minimum spacing length, 3 nt. Appropriate region of the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-Hu-1
(NC_045512.2) reference sequence was used as target sequence. We BLAST screened candidate
probe sequences against custom human transcriptome and intron database to score number of
off-target basepair matches, then 35–48 sequences with the least match scores were chosen
per probe set. Oligonucleotides were singly labelled with ATTO633, ATTO565, Cy3, or
ATTO488 at 3′ ends according to a published protocol 33Gaspar et
al.2017 and were concentration normalised to 25µM.
All probe sets used in this study had degree of labelling>0.94.
We developed a bespoke pipeline
to analysed the sequence specificity of oligonucleotide probe sequences against ORF-1a and
ORF-N by alignment against SARS-CoV-1 (NC_004718), SARS-CoV-2 (NC_045512), MERS-CoV
(NC_019843), HCoV-229E (NC_002645), HCoV-NL63 (NC_005831), HCoV-OC43 (NC_006213),
HCoV-HKU1 (NC_006577), human (GCF_000001405.39), and African green monkey
(GCF_015252025.1) RefSeq genome or transcriptome assembly using ‘bowtie2’ (2.4.4) 49Langmead and
Salzberg2012. Following bowtie2 arguments were used
to find minimum edit distance of oligonucleotide sequences to target genome/transcriptome:
--end-to-end --no-unal --align-seed-mm 0, --align-seed-length 5, --align-seed-interval
1–1.15, --effort-extend 15, --effort-repeat 2. Melting temperatures were obtained using
‘rmelting’ (1.8.0) R package at 300mM Na concentration (2× SSC). smFISH probe sequences
used in this study are available in Supplementary file 2.
Immunofluorescence
After permeabilisation, cells
were blocked in blocking solution (50% LI-COR Odyssey blocking solution, pretreated with
RNASecure for 30 min and supplemented with 2 mM ribonucleoside vanadyl complex and 0.1%
Tween-20) for 30 min at room temperature. Then, cells were incubated with J2 primary
antibody (Scicons 10010200) at 2 µg/ml or human anti-N primary antibody (Ey2A clone
1:2000) 38Huang et al.2020 for
2 hr at room temperature. Cells were washed three times in PBS/0.1% Tween-20 (PBSTw) for
10 min each at room temperature and incubated with fluorescent secondary antibodies
(1:500) diluted in blocking solution for 1 hr at room temperature. After further three
washes in PBSTw, cells were mounted using Vectashield or IBIDI mounting media. For
combined smFISH and immunofluorescence, antibody staining was carried out sequentially
after the smFISH protocol.
Microscopy and image handling
Cells were imaged on an Olympus
SpinSR10 spinning disk confocal system equipped with Prime BSI and Prime 95B sCMOS
cameras. Objectives used were ×20 dry (0.8 NA, UPLXAPO20X), ×60 silicone oil (1.3 NA,
UPLSAPO60XS2), ×60 oil (1.5 NA, UPLAPOHR60X), or ×100 oil (1.45 NA, UPLXAPO100XO). Image
voxel sizes were 0.55 × 0.55 × 2 µm (x:y:z) with the ×20 objective and 0.11 × 0.11 × 0.2
µm (x:y:z) with the ×60 and ×100 objectives. Automatic and manual image acquisition and
image stitching were performed with Olympus cellSens Dimension software. Images were
uploaded and stored in the University of Oxford OMERO server 2Allan et
al.2012, and OMERO.figure (3.2.0) was used to
generate presented image visualisations.
Image
analysis
Cell segmentation and counting
Cell segmentation was performed
either manually in ImageJ (National Institute of Health) or automatically with Cellpose
(0.6.1) 78Stringer et al.2021
using 2D maximum intensity projected images of phalloidin or CellMask stains. Cellpose
parameters for ×60 and ×100 magnification images were model_type = cyto, diameter = 375,
flow_threshold = 0.9, cellprob_threshold=-3. For 20× stitched images, CellMask channel was
deconvolved with constrained iterative module using cellSens (five iterations, default
spinning disk PSF, Olympus), then the following Cellpose parameters were used: model_type
= cyto, diameter = 55, flow_threshold = 0, cellprob_threshold=-6. Total number of cells
per image was counted using a custom ImageJ macro script or from the Cellpose segmentation
output on DAPI channel images (model_type = nuclei, diameter = 20, default threshold).
Infected cells were counted using ImageJ ‘3D object counter’ or manually.
Quantification of smFISH images
Single-molecule-level
quantification of smFISH images was performed either with FISH-quant 59Mueller et
al.2013 or Bigfish 40Imbert et
al.2021. For FISH-quant, ImageJ region of interest
(ROI) files were converted to FQ outline file using a custom Python script. Then, smFISH
channels were Laplacian of Gaussian filtered (sigma = 7, 3 px) and pre-detected using
local maximum mode with ‘allow smaller z region for analysis’ option enabled. Pre-detected
diffraction limited spots were fitted with 3D Gaussian and thresholded in batch mode based
on filtered intensity, amplitude, and σz. Thresholds were defined by uninfected ‘Mock’
condition samples. The filtering also removed non-specific autofluorescence and rare dust
particles because these contaminants usually show lower fluorescence intensity and are
highly variable in shapes.
Large smFISH datasets were
processed with a custom Python pipeline using Bigfish, skimage, and numpy libraries
(available in the GitHub repository). Tif files were converted to a numpy array, and
individual cells were segmented from the image using the Cellpose library as described
above. Images where cells were labelled with the CellMask stain were pre-processed with a
median filter, radius = 50. Background signal in the smFISH channel was subtracted with
the skimage.white_tophat algorithm (radius = 5, individual z frames were processed in 2D
due to memory constraints, results were indistinguishable from 3D-processed images).
Threshold setting for smFISH spot detection was set specifically for each set of images
collected in each session.
Cells with high viral RNA
(>105-6 RNA
counts) were quantified by integrating smFISH channel intensities within entire cellular
volumes and comparing to the reference integrated intensity of single molecules derived
from cells with lower infection density. Reference single-molecule images were obtained
using ‘Average spots’ in TxSite mode of FISH-quant or ‘build_reference_spot()’ function in
Bigfish.
Viral factories were defined as
gRNA smFISH signals with spatially extended foci that exceed the point-spread function of
the microscope and intensity of the reference single molecules. In FISH-quant, the foci
were quantified using the TxSite quantification mode (xy:z = 500:1200 nm crop per factory)
with normal-sampled averaged single-molecule image (xy:z = 15:12 px) from the batch mode
output. Then, ‘Integrated intensity in 3D’ method was used to compare integrated intensity
of the viral factory to that of averaged single-molecule RNA. In Bigfish, the factories
were resolved using ‘decompose_cluster()’ function to find a reference single-molecule
spot in a less signal-dense region of the image, which was used to simulate fitting of
reference single-molecule spots into viral factories until the local signal intensities
are matched. The candidate factories were filtered based on the previously reported radii
of DMVs measured by electron microscopy (150 nm pre-8 hpi and 200 nm post-8 hpi) 19Cortese et al.2020.
In addition, we applied a threshold of 3–7 RNA molecules per factory as a technical
cut-off to prevent overestimation or over-cluster of viral factories at later infection
timepoints.
Dual-colour smFISH spot detection analysis
The same viral RNA target was
detected using two smFISH probes labelled with alternating (ODD and EVEN) red and far-red
fluorochromes. Resulting images were processed in FISH-quant to obtain 3D coordinates of
each spots. Percentage co-localisation analysis was performed with a custom script using
an R package ‘FNN’ (1.1.3). Briefly, we calculated 3D distance of nearest neighbour for
each spot in the red channel to the closest detected spot in the other channel and
repeated the analysis starting from the far-red channel. We then used a value of 300 nm to
define co-localised spots corresponding to the same viral RNA molecule. The presented
visuals report percentage co-localisations calculated from the red channel to the far-red
channel and vice versa. The analysis was performed per field of view.
Quantification of
fluorescence intensity and signal co-localisation
Immunofluorescence images were
background subtracted using rolling ball subtraction method (radius = 150 px) in ImageJ.
Anti-dsRNA (J2) stain was quantified by integrating fluorescence signal across the
z-stacks of cellular ROI divided by the cell volume to obtain signal density. Signal
density was normalised to the average signal density of uninfected ‘Mock’ condition cells.
Fluorescence intensity profiles were obtained using ImageJ ‘plot profile’ tool across 3 µm
region on 1 µm maximum intensity projected images. To assess co-localisation of N protein
with SARS-CoV-2 RNA, ellipsoid mask centred around centroid xyz coordinates of smFISH
spots was generated with the size of the point-spread function (xy radius = 65 nm, z
radius = 150 nm) using ImageJ 3D suite. Integrated density of N protein channel
(background subtracted, radius = 5 px) fluorescence within the ellipsoid mask was measured
and compared to the equivalent signal in the uninfected condition or randomly distributed
ellipsoids.
Calculation of RNA spatial dispersion
index
Subcellular spatial
distribution metrics of SARS-CoV-2 RNA species were quantified using the RNA Distribution
Index (RDI) calculator 79Stueland et al.2019.
Nuclei and cell boundaries were pre-segmented in ImageJ using the ‘Auto Threshold’
function on DAPI (‘method = Huang’) or CellMask green (‘method = MaxEntropy’) channels.
Resulting images were maximum intensity projected and passed into the RDI calculator
MATLAB script. Standard RDI calculator graphical user interface was used without
background intensity removals.
Simulation of super-permissive cell
distribution
Simulations were performed to
determine if the appearance of SARS-CoV-2 super-permissive cells follows a random
distribution. The general strategy was to test the complete spatial randomness hypothesis
by comparing the average nearest-neighbour distance of superinfected cells to an equal
number of randomly selected coordinates 69Ripley1979. 2D
spatial coordinates of superinfected cells were obtained from the 3D object counter
(ImageJ) as described above. Cell nuclei were segmented with the DAPI channel, and
placement of random coordinates was confined to pixels that fell within the DAPI
segmentation mask. Nearest-neighbour distances were calculated using the KDtree algorithm
57Maneewongvatana and
Mount1999 implemented in Python
(scipy.spatial.KDTree). Pseudo-random distributions were simulated by randomly placing the
first coordinate, then constraining the placement of subsequent coordinates to within a
defined number of pixels. Rn nearest-neighbour statics 61Pinder and
Witherick1972 were calculated according to the
following equation, where D(obs) is the average nearest-neighbour distance (µm), a is the
total imaged area (µm), and n is the number of super-permissive cells. Rn value of 1 suggests a random
distribution, whereas Rn
< 1 indicates clusteredness and Rn > 1 indicates regular
distributions.
Rn=D(obs)0.5√an
RNA-sequencing library preparation
RNA from infected cells were
extracted as described above. Sequencing libraries were prepared using the Illumina Total
RNA Prep with Ribo-Zero Plus library kit (Cat# 20040525) according to the manufacturer’s
guidelines. Briefly, 100 ng of total RNA was first depleted of the abundant ribosomal RNA
present in the samples by rRNA-targeted DNA probe capture followed by enzymatic digestion.
Samples were then purified by Beckman Coulter RNAClean XP beads (Cat# A63987). Obtained
rRNA-depleted RNA was fragmented, reverse transcribed, converted to dsDNA, end repaired,
and A-tailed. The A-tailed DNA fragments were ligated to anchors allowing for PCR
amplification with Illumina unique dual indexing primers (Cat# 20040553). Libraries were
pooled in equimolar concentrations and sequenced on Illumina NextSeq 500 and NextSeq 550
sequencers using high-output cartridges (Cat# 20024907), generating single 150-nt-long
reads.
RNA-sequencing analysis
Genomes
We downloaded the human genome
primary assembly and annotation from Ensembl (GRCh38.99) and the SARS-CoV-2 RefSeq
reference genome from NCBI (NC_045512.2). We combined the human and viral genome and
annotation files into one composite genome and annotation file for downstream analyses.
Alignment and gene counts
We performed a
splice-site-aware mapping of the sequencing reads to the combined human and SARS-CoV-2
genome and annotation using STAR aligner (2.7.3a) 25Dobin et
al.2013. We also used STAR to assign uniquely mapping
reads in strand-specific fashion to the Ensembl human gene annotation and the two
SARS-CoV-2 strains.
Principal component analysis
To assess if SARS2 infection is
the main driver of differences in the RNA-seq samples, we performed a principal component
analysis (PCA). First, we performed library size correction and variance stabilisation
with regularised-logarithm transformation implemented in DESeq2 (1.28.1) 55Love et al.2014.
This corrects for the fact that in RNA-seq data variance grows with the mean, and
therefore, without suitable correction, only the most highly expressed genes drive the
clustering. We then used the 500 genes showing the highest variance to perform PCA using
the prcomp function implemented in the base R package stats (4.0.2).
Differential expression analysis
We performed differential
expression analysis using the R package DESeq2 (1.28.1) 55Love et
al.2014. DESeq2 estimates variance-mean dependence in
count data from high-throughput sequencing data and tests for differential expression
based on a model using the negative binomial distribution. Full output of DESeq2 analysis
is available in Supplementary file 3.
SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNA expression
To assess relative levels of
viral subgenomic and genomic RNA expression, we tallied the alignments (using
GenomicRanges and GenomicAlignments R packages; 51Lawrence
et al.2013) mapping to the region unique to the
genomic RNA and the shared region and normalised for their respective lengths. Unique
contribution of sgRNA region was then estimated by subtracting the contribution of the
genomic RNA from the shared region. In order to assess expression of individual SARS-CoV-2
subgenomic RNAs, we extracted split (junction) reads mapping to the viral genome with the
GenomicAlignments R package (1.24.0) 51Lawrence
et al.2013. The subgenomic transcripts fully overlap
the full genomic RNA and partially with each other. While the molecular process generating
these subgenomic RNAs is distinct from RNA splicing, from the point of view of short read
mapping they are equivalent. We determined the relative expression level of each sgRNA
generated by transcriptional skipping by calculating the number of reads supporting
skipping into a region upstream of each annotated viral ORF. To avoid spurious mappings,
we filtered for skip sites that were present in all three replicates and constituted at
least 0.1% of all skipped viral reads.
Statistics, data wrangling, and
visualisation
Statistical analyses were
performed in R (3.6.3) and RStudio (1.4) environment using an R package ‘rstatix’ (0.7.0).
p-Values were adjusted using the Bonferroni method for multiple comparisons. The
‘tidyverse suite’ (1.3.0) was used in R, and ‘Numpy’ and ‘Pandas’ Python packages were
used in Jupyter notebook for data wrangling. The following R packages were used to create
the presented visualisation: ‘ggplot2’ (3.3.2), ‘ggbeeswarm’ (0.6.0), ‘hrbrthemes’
(0.8.0), ‘scales’ (1.1.1), and ‘patchwork’ (1.1.1). Further visual annotations were made
in the Affinity Designer (Serif).
References
SAlexandersen
AChamings
TRBhatta
SARS-CoV-2 genomic and subgenomic RNAs in diagnostic samples are
not an indicator of active replication11Nature Communications
CAllan
JMBurel
JMoore
CBlackburn
MLinkert
SLoynton
DMacdonald
WJMoore
CNeves
APatterson
OMERO: flexible, model-driven data management for experimental
biology9Nature Methods245253
LAnnaratone
MSimonetti
EWernersson
CMarchiò
SGarnerone
MSScalzo
MBienko
RChiarle
ASapino
NCrosetto
Quantification
of HER2 and estrogen receptor heterogeneity in breast cancer by single-molecule RNA
fluorescence in situ hybridization8Oncotarget1868018698
LSBelkowski
GCSen
Inhibition of vesicular stomatitis viral mRNA synthesis by
interferons61Journal of Virology653660
ABest Rocha
EStroberg
LMBarton
EJDuval
SMukhopadhyay
NYarid
TCaza
JDWilson
DJKenan
MKuperman
SGSharma
CPLarsen
Detection
of SARS-CoV-2 in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections using commercially
available reagents100Laboratory Investigation14851489
MRBillman
DRueda
CRMBangham
Single-cell heterogeneity and cell-cycle-related viral gene
bursts in the human leukaemia virus HTLV-12Wellcome Open Research
SBoersma
HHRabouw
LJMBruurs
TPavlovič
ALWVliet
JBeumer
HClevers
FJMKuppeveld
METanenbaum
Translation and Replication Dynamics of Single RNA
Viruses183Cell19301945
Rapid Decay of Host Basal MRNAs during SARS-CoV-2 Infection
Perturbs Host Antiviral MRNA Biogenesis and ExportbioRxiv
PCalistri
LAmato
IPuglia
FCito
ADi
Giuseppe
MLDanzetta
DMorelli
MDi
Domenico
MCaporale
SScialabba
OPortanti
VCurini
FPerletta
CCammà
MAncora
GSavini
GMigliorati
ND’Alterio
ALorusso
Infection
sustained by lineage B.1.1.7 of SARS-CoV-2 is characterised by longer persistence
and higher viral RNA loads in nasopharyngeal swabs105International Journal of Infectious
Diseases753755
LCaly
JDruce
JRoberts
KBond
TTran
RKostecki
YYoga
WNaughton
GTaiaroa
TSeemann
MBSchultz
BPHowden
TMKorman
SRLewin
DAWilliamson
MGCatton
Isolation
and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from the first patient
diagnosed with COVID-19 in Australia212The Medical Journal of Australia459462
YCao
XXu
SKitanovski
LSong
JWang
PHao
DHoffmann
Comprehensive
Comparison of RNA-Seq Data of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV Infections:
Alternative Entry Routes and Innate Immune Responses12Frontiers in Immunology
CRCarlson
JBAsfaha
CMGhent
CJHoward
NHartooni
MSafari
ADFrankel
DOMorgan
Phosphoregulation
of Phase Separation by the SARS-CoV-2 N Protein Suggests a Biophysical Basis for its
Dual Functions80Molecular Cell10921103
MCarossino
HSIp
JARicht
KShultz
KHarper
ATLoynachan
FDel Piero
UBRBalasuriya
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RNAscope in situ hybridization and
immunohistochemistry techniques165Archives of Virology23732377
JChen
RWang
MWang
GWWei
Mutations Strengthened SARS-CoV-2 Infectivity432Journal of Molecular Biology52125226
YYChou
TLionnet
Single-Molecule Sensitivity RNA FISH Analysis of Influenza Virus
Genome Trafficking1836Methods in Molecular Biology195211
HChu
JF-WChan
TT-TYuen
HShuai
SYuan
YWang
BHu
CC-YYip
JO-LTsang
XHuang
YChai
DYang
YHou
KK-HChik
XZhang
AY-FFung
H-WTsoi
J-PCai
W-MChan
JDIp
AW-HChu
JZhou
DCLung
K-HKok
KK-WTo
OT-YTsang
K-HChan
K-YYuen
Comparative
tropism, replication kinetics, and cell damage profiling of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV
with implications for clinical manifestations, transmissibility, and laboratory
studies of COVID-19: an observational study1The Lancet. Microbe
DACollier
ADe Marco
IATMFerreira
BMeng
RPDatir
ACWalls
SAKemp
JBassi
DPinto
CSilacci-Fregni
SBianchi
MATortorici
JBowen
KCulap
SJaconi
ECameroni
GSnell
MSPizzuto
AFPellanda
CGarzoni
ARiva
CITIID-NIHR BioResource COVID-19 Collaboration
AElmer
NKingston
BGraves
LEMcCoy
KGCSmith
JRBradley
NTemperton
LCeron-Gutierrez
GBarcenas-Morales
COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) Consortium
WHarvey
HWVirgin
ALanzavecchia
LPiccoli
RDoffinger
MWills
DVeesler
DCorti
RKGupta
Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 to mRNA vaccine-elicited
antibodies593Nature136141
Estimated transmissibility and impact of SARS-CoV-2 lineage
B.1.1.7 in England372Science
JDesmyter
JLMelnick
WERawls
Defectiveness
of interferon production and of rubella virus interference in a line of African
green monkey kidney cells (Vero)2Journal of Virology955961
ADhir
SDhir
LSBorowski
LJimenez
MTeitell
ARötig
YJCrow
GIRice
DDuffy
CTamby
TNojima
AMunnich
MSchiff
CRAlmeida
JRehwinkel
ADziembowski
RJSzczesny
NJProudfoot
Mitochondrial double-stranded RNA triggers antiviral signalling
in humans560Nature238242
SJDicken
MJMurray
LGThorne
AKReuschl
CForrest
MGaneshalingham
LMuir
MDKalemera
MPalor
LEMcCoy
Characterisation
of B.1.1.7 and Pangolin Coronavirus Spike Provides Insights on the Evolutionary
Trajectory of SARS-CoV-2bioRxiv
DCDinesh
DChalupska
JSilhan
EKoutna
RNencka
VVeverka
EBoura
Structural basis of RNA recognition by the SARS-CoV-2
nucleocapsid phosphoprotein16PLOS Pathogens
Development of a Hamster Natural Transmission Model of
SARS-CoV-2 Infection13Viruses
SEymieux
YRouillé
OTerrier
KSeron
EBlanchard
MRosa-Calatrava
JDubuisson
SBelouzard
PRoingeard
Ultrastructural
modifications induced by SARS-CoV-2 in Vero cells: a kinetic analysis of viral
factory formation, viral particle morphogenesis and virion release78Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences35653576
AMFemino
FSFay
KFogarty
RHSinger
Visualization of single RNA transcripts in situ280Science585590
JKFiege
JMThiede
HANanda
WEMatchett
PJMoore
NRMontanari
BKThielen
JDaniel
EStanley
RCHunter
VDMenachery
SSShen
TDBold
RALanglois
Single
cell resolution of SARS-CoV-2 tropism, antiviral responses, and susceptibility to
therapies in primary human airway epithelium17PLOS Pathogens
DFraser
MKaern
A chance at survival: gene expression noise and phenotypic
diversification strategies71Molecular Microbiology13331340
SEGalloway
PPaul
DRMacCannell
MAJohansson
JTBrooks
AMacNeil
RBSlayton
STong
BJSilk
GLArmstrong
Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 Lineage - United
States70MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report9599
MGarcia-Moreno
MNoerenberg
SNi
AIJärvelin
EGonzález-Almela
CELenz
MBach-Pages
VCox
RAvolio
TDavis
SHester
TJMSohier
BLi
GHeikel
GMichlewski
MASanz
LCarrasco
EPRicci
VPelechano
IDavis
BFischer
SMohammed
ACastello
System-wide Profiling of RNA-Binding Proteins Uncovers Key
Regulators of Virus Infection74Molecular Cell196211
IGaspar
FWippich
AEphrussi
Enzymatic production of single-molecule FISH and RNA capture
probes23RNA15821591
EGuerini-Rocco
SVTaormina
DVacirca
ARanghiero
ARappa
CFumagalli
FMaffini
CRampinelli
DGaletta
MTagliabue
MAnsarin
MBarberis
SARS-CoV-2
detection in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue specimens from surgical
resection of tongue squamous cell carcinoma73Journal of Clinical Pathology754757
THackstadt
AIChiramel
FHHoyt
BNWilliamson
CADooley
PABeare
EWit
SMBest
ERFischer
Disruption
of the Golgi Apparatus and Contribution of the Endoplasmic Reticulum to the
SARS-CoV-2 Replication Complex13Viruses
CPHealy
FRAdler
TLDeans
Rolling Signal-Based Ripley’s K: A New Algorithm to Identify
Spatial Patterns in Histological SpecimensbioRxiv
MHoffmann
HKleine-Weber
SSchroeder
NKrüger
THerrler
SErichsen
TSSchiergens
GHerrler
N-HWu
ANitsche
MAMüller
CDrosten
SPöhlmann
SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and Is Blocked
by a Clinically Proven Protease Inhibitor181Cell271280
KYAHuang
TKTan
THChen
CGHuang
RHarvey
SHussain
CPChen
AHarding
JGilbert-Jaramillo
XLiu
Breadth and Function of Antibody Response to Acute SARS-CoV-2
Infection in HumansbioRxiv
NCHuston
HWan
MSStrine
RCesaris Araujo
Tavares
CBWilen
AMPyle
Comprehensive
in vivo secondary structure of the SARS-CoV-2 genome reveals novel regulatory motifs
and mechanisms81Molecular Cell584598
Genomic RNA Elements Drive Phase Separation of the SARS-CoV-2
Nucleocapsid80Molecular Cell10781091
JJiao
CDuan
LXue
YLiu
WSun
YXiang
DNA nanoscaffold-based SARS-CoV-2 detection for COVID-19
diagnosis167Biosensors & Bioelectronics
MKidd
ARichter
ABest
NCumley
JMirza
BPercival
MMayhew
OMegram
FAshford
TWhite
EMoles-Garcia
LCrawford
ABosworth
SFAtabani
TPlant
AMcNally
S-Variant
SARS-CoV-2 Lineage B1.1.7 Is Associated With Significantly Higher Viral Load in
Samples Tested by TaqPath Polymerase Chain Reaction223The Journal of Infectious Diseases16661670
DKim
JYLee
JSYang
JWKim
VNKim
HChang
The Architecture of SARS-CoV-2 Transcriptome181Cell914921
SKimura
TMatsumiya
YShiba
MNakanishi
RHayakari
SKawaguchi
HYoshida
TImaizumi
The
Essential Role of Double-Stranded RNA-Dependent Antiviral Signaling in the
Degradation of Nonself Single-Stranded RNA in Nonimmune Cells201Journal of Immunology10441052
SMKissler
JRFauver
CMack
CGTai
MIBreban
AEWatkins
RMSamant
DJAnderson
DDHo
Densely
Sampled Viral Trajectories Suggest Longer Duration of Acute Infection with B.1.1.7
Variant Relative to Non-B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2medRxiv
SKlein
MCortese
SLWinter
MWachsmuth-Melm
CJNeufeldt
BCerikan
MLStanifer
SBoulant
RBartenschlager
PChlanda
SARS-CoV-2 structure and replication characterized by in situ
cryo-electron tomography11Nature Communications
IKusmartseva
WWu
FSyed
VVan Der
Heide
MJorgensen
PJoseph
XTang
ECandelario-Jalil
CYang
HNick
Expression of SARS-CoV-2 Entry Factors in the Pancreas of Normal
Organ Donors and Individuals with COVID-1932Cell Metabolism10411051
BLangmead
SLSalzberg
Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 29Nature Methods357359
MLaue
AKauter
THoffmann
LMoller
JMichel
ANitsche
Morphometry of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 particles in ultrathin
plastic sections of infected Vero cell cultures11Scientific Reports
MLawrence
WHuber
HPagès
PAboyoun
MCarlson
RGentleman
MTMorgan
VJCarey
Software for computing and annotating genomic ranges9PLOS Computational Biology
FZXLean
MMLamers
SPSmith
RShipley
DSchipper
NTemperton
BLHaagmans
ACBanyard
KRBewley
MWCarroll
SMBrookes
IBrown
ANuñez
Development
of immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridisation for the detection of SARS-CoV and
SARS-CoV-2 in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens10Scientific Reports
YLi
DMRenner
CEComar
JNWhelan
HMReyes
FLCardenas-Diaz
RTruitt
LHTan
BDong
KDAlysandratos
JHuang
JNPalmer
NDAdappa
MAKohanski
DNKotton
RHSilverman
WYang
EEMorrisey
NACohen
SRWeiss
SARS-CoV-2
induces double-stranded RNA-mediated innate immune responses in respiratory
epithelial-derived cells and cardiomyocytes118PNAS
JLiu
AMBabka
BJKearney
SRRadoshitzky
JHKuhn
XZeng
Molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 in formalin-fixed,
paraffin-embedded specimens5JCI Insight
MILove
WHuber
SAnders
Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq
data with DESeq215Genome Biology
KALythgoe
MHall
LFerretti
MCesare
GMacIntyre-Cockett
ATrebes
MAndersson
NOtecko
ELWise
NMoore
JLynch
SKidd
NCortes
MMori
RWilliams
GVernet
AJustice
AGreen
SMNicholls
MAAnsari
LAbeler-Dörner
CEMoore
TEAPeto
DWEyre
RShaw
PSimmonds
DBuck
JATodd
Oxford Virus Sequencing Analysis Group (OVSG)
TRConnor
SAshraf
ASilva
Filipe
JShepherd
ECThomson
COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) Consortium
DBonsall
CFraser
TGolubchik
SARS-CoV-2 within-host diversity and transmission372Science
SManeewongvatana
DMount
Data Structures, Near Neighbor Searches, and
Methodology105123
LMendonça
AHowe
JBGilchrist
YSheng
DSun
MLKnight
LCZanetti-Domingues
BBateman
A-SKrebs
LChen
JRadecke
VDLi
TNi
IKounatidis
MAKoronfel
MSzynkiewicz
MHarkiolaki
MLMartin-Fernandez
WJames
PZhang
Correlative multi-scale cryo-imaging unveils SARS-CoV-2 assembly
and egress12Nature Communications
FMueller
ASenecal
KTantale
HMarie-Nelly
NLy
OCollin
EBasyuk
EBertrand
XDarzacq
CZimmer
FISH-quant: automatic counting of transcripts in 3D FISH
images10Nature Methods277278
MDParker
BBLindsey
DRShah
SHsu
AJKeeley
DGPartridge
SLeary
ACope
AState
KJohnson
Altered Subgenomic RNA Expression in SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7
InfectionsbioRxiv
DAPinder
MEWitherick
The Principles, Practice and Pitfalls of Nearest-neighbour
Analysis57Geography277288
DPlanas
TBruel
LGrzelak
FGuivel-Benhassine
IStaropoli
FPorrot
CPlanchais
JBuchrieser
MMRajah
EBishop
MAlbert
FDonati
MProt
SBehillil
VEnouf
MMaquart
MSmati-Lafarge
EVaron
FSchortgen
LYahyaoui
MGonzalez
JDe Sèze
HPéré
DVeyer
ASève
ESimon-Lorière
SFafi-Kremer
KStefic
HMouquet
LHocqueloux
SWerf
TPrazuck
OSchwartz
Sensitivity of infectious SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 and B.1.351
variants to neutralizing antibodies27Nature Medicine917924
ARaj
PBogaard
SARifkin
AOudenaarden
STyagi
Imaging individual mRNA molecules using multiple singly labeled
probes5Nature Methods877879
ARaj
AOudenaarden
Single-molecule approaches to stochastic gene
expression38Annual Review of Biophysics255270
VRamanan
KTrehan
M-LOng
JMLuna
H-HHoffmann
CEspiritu
TPSheahan
HChandrasekar
RESchwartz
KSChristine
CMRice
AOudenaarden
SNBhatia
Viral
genome imaging of hepatitis C virus to probe heterogeneous viral infection and
responses to antiviral therapies494Virology236247
NGRavindra
MMAlfajaro
VGasque
NCHuston
HWan
KSzigeti-Buck
YYasumoto
AMGreaney
VHabet
RDChow
JSChen
JWei
RBFiller
BWang
GWang
LENiklason
RRMontgomery
SCEisenbarth
SChen
AWilliams
AIwasaki
TLHorvath
EFFoxman
RWPierce
AMPyle
DDijk
CBWilen
Single-cell
longitudinal analysis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in human airway epithelium identifies
target cells, alterations in gene expression, and cell state changes19PLOS Biology
CRees-Spear
LMuir
SAGriffith
JHeaney
YAldon
JLSnitselaar
PThomas
CGraham
JSeow
NLee
ARosa
CRoustan
CFHoulihan
RWSanders
RKGupta
PCherepanov
HJStauss
ENastouli
SAFER Investigators
KJDoores
MJGils
LEMcCoy
The effect of spike mutations on SARS-CoV-2
neutralization34Cell Reports
ERensen
SPietropaoli
FMueller
CWeber
SSouquere
PIsnard
MRabant
JBGibier
ESimon-Loriere
MARameix-Welti
Sensitive Visualization of SARS-CoV-2 RNA with
CoronaFISHbioRxiv
BDRipley
Tests of “Randomness” for Spatial Point Patterns41Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society368374
Comparison of rhesus and cynomolgus macaques as an infection
model for COVID-1912Nature Communications
JWSchoggins
CMRice
Interferon-stimulated genes and their antiviral effector
functions1Current Opinion in Virology519525
PBSethna
MAHofmann
DABrian
Minus-strand copies of replicating coronavirus mRNAs contain
antileaders65Journal of Virology320325
AShulla
GRandall
Spatiotemporal analysis of hepatitis C virus
infection11PLOS Pathogens
PSimmonds
SWilliams
HHarvala
Understanding the outcomes of COVID-19 - does the current model
of an acute respiratory infection really fit?102The Journal of General Virology
ZSSinger
PMAmbrose
TDanino
CMRice
Quantitative
measurements of early alphaviral replication dynamics in single cells reveals the
basis for superinfection exclusion12Cell Systems210219
ISola
FAlmazán
SZúñiga
LEnjuanes
Continuous and Discontinuous RNA Synthesis in
Coronaviruses2Annual Review of Virology265288
CStringer
TWang
MMichaelos
MPachitariu
Cellpose: a generalist algorithm for cellular
segmentation18Nature Methods100106
MStueland
TWang
HYPark
SMili
RDI Calculator: An Analysis Tool to Assess RNA Distributions in
Cells9Scientific Reports
PTargett-Adams
SBoulant
JMcLauchlan
Visualization of double-stranded RNA in cells supporting
hepatitis C virus RNA replication82Journal of Virology21822195
HTegally
EWilkinson
MGiovanetti
AIranzadeh
VFonseca
JGiandhari
DDoolabh
SPillay
EJSan
NMsomi
Emergence
and Rapid Spread of a New Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus 2
(SARS-CoV-2) Lineage with Multiple Spike Mutations in South AfricamedRxiv
LGThorne
MBouhaddou
AKReuschl
LZuliani-Alvarez
BPolacco
APelin
JBatra
MVXWhelan
MUmmadi
ARojc
JTurner
KObernier
HBraberg
MSoucheray
ARichards
KHChen
BHarjai
DMemon
MHosmillo
JHiatt
AJahun
IGGoodfellow
JMFabius
KShokat
NJura
KVerba
MNoursadeghi
PBeltrao
DLSwaney
AGarcia-Sastre
CJolly
GJTowers
NJKrogan
Evolution of Enhanced Innate Immune Evasion by the SARS-CoV-2
B.1.1.7 UK VariantbioRxiv
JSTitlow
LYang
RMParton
APalanca
IDavis
Super-Resolution Single Molecule FISH at the Drosophila
Neuromuscular Junction1649Methods in Molecular Biology163175
EVolz
SMishra
MChand
JCBarrett
RJohnson
LGeidelberg
WRHinsley
DJLaydon
GDabrera
ÁO’Toole
RAmato
MRagonnet-Cronin
IHarrison
BJackson
CVAriani
OBoyd
NJLoman
JTMcCrone
SGonçalves
DJorgensen
RMyers
VHill
DKJackson
KGaythorpe
NGroves
JSillitoe
DPKwiatkowski
COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) consortium
SFlaxman
ORatmann
SBhatt
SHopkins
AGandy
ARambaut
NMFerguson
Assessing transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in
England593Nature266269
PV’kovski
AKratzel
SSteiner
HStalder
VThiel
Coronavirus biology and replication: implications for
SARS-CoV-219Nature Reviews. Microbiology155170
YWan
JShang
RGraham
RSBaric
FLi
Receptor
Recognition by the Novel Coronavirus from Wuhan: an Analysis Based on Decade-Long
Structural Studies of SARS Coronavirus94Journal of Virology
DWang
AJiang
JFeng
GLi
DGuo
MSajid
KWu
QZhang
YPonty
SWill
FLiu
XYu
SLi
QLiu
X-LYang
MGuo
XLi
MChen
Z-LShi
KLan
YChen
YZhou
The SARS-CoV-2 subgenome landscape and its novel regulatory
features81Molecular Cell21352147
NLWashington
KGangavarapu
MZeller
ABolze
ETCirulli
KMSchiabor
Barrett
BBLarsen
CAnderson
SWhite
TCassens
SJacobs
GLevan
JNguyen
JMRamirez
CRivera-Garcia
ESandoval
XWang
DWong
ESpencer
RRobles-Sikisaka
EKurzban
LDHughes
XDeng
CWang
VServellita
HValentine
PDe Hoff
PSeaver
SSathe
KGietzen
BSickler
JAntico
KHoon
JLiu
AHarding
OBakhtar
TBasler
BAustin
DMacCannell
MIsaksson
PGFebbo
DBecker
MLaurent
EMcDonald
GWYeo
RKnight
LCLaurent
EFeo
MWorobey
CYChiu
MASuchard
JTLu
WLee
KGAndersen
Emergence and rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 in the
United States184Cell25872594
FWeber
VWagner
SBRasmussen
RHartmann
SRPaludan
Double-stranded
RNA is produced by positive-strand RNA viruses and DNA viruses but not in detectable
amounts by negative-strand RNA viruses80Journal of Virology50595064
AHWilcox
EDelwart
SLDíaz-Muñoz
Next-generation
sequencing of dsRNA is greatly improved by treatment with the inexpensive denaturing
reagent DMSO5Microbial Genomics
PACWing
TPKeeley
XZhuang
JYLee
MPrange-Barczynska
STsukuda
SBMorgan
ACHarding
ILAArgles
SKurlekar
MNoerenberg
CPThompson
KYAHuang
PBalfe
KWatashi
ACastello
TSCHinks
WJames
PJRatcliffe
IDavis
EJHodson
TBishop
JAMcKeating
Hypoxic and pharmacological activation of HIF inhibits
SARS-CoV-2 infection of lung epithelial cells35Cell Reports
GWolff
CEMelia
EJSnijder
MBárcena
Double-Membrane Vesicles as Platforms for Viral
Replication28Trends in Microbiology10221033
LYang
JTitlow
DEnnis
CSmith
JMitchell
FLYoung
SWaddell
DIsh-Horowicz
IDavis
Single
molecule fluorescence in situ hybridisation for quantitating post-transcriptional
regulation in Drosophila brains126Methods166176
MZhao
YYu
L-MSun
J-QXing
TLi
YZhu
MWang
YYu
WXue
TXia
HCai
Q-YHan
XYin
W-HLi
A-LLi
JCui
ZYuan
RZhang
TZhou
X-MZhang
TLi
GCG inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication by disrupting the liquid
phase condensation of its nucleocapsid protein12Nature Communications