Shaking the Ebola Tree

Genetic analysis offers insights into the workings of a notorious virus















Share on Tumblr

If one were to rank the world's most gruesome ways to die, Ebola infection would surely sit near the top of the list. It begins with a sudden fever and then kills by liquefying peoples' insides. Fifty to 90 percent of those who become ill, die, making Ebola among the most lethal viruses known. Other diseases kill far larger numbers of people, but Ebola's mystery and ferocity has come to symbolize the growing risk from emerging and re-emerging pathogens.

The two worst Ebola outbreaks occurred in Zaire in 1976 and 1995, with almost no cases reported in between. (Some reserchers have even speculated that the "Plague of Athens" that ended in 425 B.C. was an isolated Ebola epidemic.) No one knows where the virus hides during its respites.

In the April 16, issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., Anthony Sanchez and his colleagues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta report some notable progress in uncovering the genetic mechanisms that make this microscopic monster tick.

Virologists have classified the four known variants of the Ebola virus (the Zaire, Sudan, Ivory Coast and Reston strains) along with Marburg, a genetically related monkey virus, into the genus Filovirus. Sanchez's team analyzed certain key viral genes; using that information, the researchers placed the filoviruses along a phylogenetic tree, a branching diagram that shows the evolutionary relationship between organisms. Each of the five viruses occupies its own, genetically distinct branch. Sprouting from these are evolutionary "twigs"--mini-strains into which the Ebola variants are further divided.

Such minor divergences are an inevitable result of mutations, natural errors in the replication process. The big surprise revealed in the Sanchez paper is just how tiny those twigs are. Scientists had expected to see far more genetic heterogeneity in each of the Ebola strains, given the way that the viruses reproduce.

In most higher organisms, the genetic material (DNA) proofreads each replica to ensure that the genetic material in daughter cells is exactly the same as in the parents. The story is somewhat different for viruses. Take for example HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. HIV is a retrovirus: the genetic material within the virus is RNA, a simpler molecule that lacks the double-helix structure of DNA. Once inside a host cell, HIV's RNA is converted into DNA before the virus reproduces. In this way, retroviruses too have proofreading abilities, but not as effective as those in higher organisms.

Filoviruses, however, reproduce as RNA; unlike HIV, they do not have the ability to check each copy. Consequently, "the error rate is one million fold greater than that of DNA based systems," says Timothy Nichol, one of Sanchez's co-authors. To find out how Ebola's penchant for mutation plays out in the real world, the CDC researchers compared the Ebola strain captured from the 1976 outbreak in Kikwit, Zaire, to one taken from the 1995 outbreak in Yambuku, Zaire. Even though, the two epidemics occurred more than 1,000 kilometers apart, and the virus had 18 years to mutate, the genetic sequences of the two isolates of Ebola-Zaire are virtually identical. In addition, Bernard LeGuenno at the Pasteur Institute found that the recent 1996 outbreak of the Ebola-Zaire strain in Gabon is also nearly identical to the 1976 isolate. Something seems to be restraining the natural tendency of filoviruses toward genetic divergence.

Sanchez and his colleagues posit that, for the past 20 years, Ebola-Zaire has essentially been most comfortable in its original form--in other words, natural selection pressures have favored the survival of the original strain over any mutants. This penchant for the status quo lies in marked contrast to the behavior of HIV. HIV also mutates as it reproduces (proofreading is not foolproof), though not as readily as do filoviruses. But because humans apply a selective force by attacking HIV with drugs, the mutants that are, by chance, resistant will proliferate.



2 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. Murray 07:50 AM 1/7/08

    Good article on the Ebola Epidemic. I was wondering whether you could discuss the relationship between Ebola Epidemic and Envirornmental plaqnning and management. Can we blame its occurance on failed envirornmental planning and management of an affected country?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. heyram 09:15 AM 8/4/08

    the information provided by this site is very very useful for talented minds to become genius and to ordinary minds to become talented..

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Shaking the Ebola Tree

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X