The evolving SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Africa: Insights from rapidly expanding genomic surveillance

INTRODUCTION Investment in Africa over the past year with regard to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sequencing has led to a massive increase in the number of sequences, which, to date, exceeds 100,000 sequences generated to track the pandemic on the continent. These sequences have profoundly affected how public health officials in Africa have navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. RATIONALE We demonstrate how the first 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 sequences from Africa have helped monitor the epidemic on the continent, how genomic surveillance expanded over the course of the pandemic, and how we adapted our sequencing methods to deal with an evolving virus. Finally, we also examine how viral lineages have spread across the continent in a phylogeographic framework to gain insights into the underlying temporal and spatial transmission dynamics for several variants of concern (VOCs). RESULTS Our results indicate that the number of countries in Africa that can sequence the virus within their own borders is growing and that this is coupled with a shorter turnaround time from the time of sampling to sequence submission. Ongoing evolution necessitated the continual updating of primer sets, and, as a result, eight primer sets were designed in tandem with viral evolution and used to ensure effective sequencing of the virus. The pandemic unfolded through multiple waves of infection that were each driven by distinct genetic lineages, with B.1-like ancestral strains associated with the first pandemic wave of infections in 2020. Successive waves on the continent were fueled by different VOCs, with Alpha and Beta cocirculating in distinct spatial patterns during the second wave and Delta and Omicron affecting the whole continent during the third and fourth waves, respectively. Phylogeographic reconstruction points toward distinct differences in viral importation and exportation patterns associated with the Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants and subvariants, when considering both Africa versus the rest of the world and viral dissemination within the continent. Our epidemiological and phylogenetic inferences therefore underscore the heterogeneous nature of the pandemic on the continent and highlight key insights and challenges, for instance, recognizing the limitations of low testing proportions. We also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most recent being the characterization of various Omicron subvariants. CONCLUSION Sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa is needed as the virus continues to evolve. This is important not only to help combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent but also because it can be used as a platform to help address the many emerging and reemerging infectious disease threats in Africa. In particular, capacity building for local sequencing within countries or within the continent should be prioritized because this is generally associated with shorter turnaround times, providing the most benefit to local public health authorities tasked with pandemic response and mitigation and allowing for the fastest reaction to localized outbreaks. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century

On the phylogenetic position and systematics of extant and fossil Aclopinae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)

The Aclopinae is a small subfamily within the family Scarabaeidae. It currently comprises five extant genera with 28 species, and eight fossil genera with 25 species. The systematic position of Aclopinae within the family Scarabaeidae is uncertain, particularly because representative species of Aclopinae have been absent in previous phylogenetic studies. Here we performed phylogenetic analyses using morphological and molecular data to investigate the phylogenetic position of fossil and extant Aclopinae. For this objective, we expanded and revised a former morphological data matrix (composed of 68 characters) including all extant genera of Aclopinae. We complemented our morphological investigations with a molecular phylogenetic analysis based on four genes of several extant taxa of Aclopinae and a wide sample of diverse Scarabaeoidea. Our phylogenetic analyses show that all the type species of the fossil genera formerly included within Aclopinae do not belong within the extant Aclopinae clade and support both the exclusion of those fossil taxa and the monophyly of the extant genera of Aclopinae: Aclopus Erichson, Desertaclopus Ocampo & Mondaca, Gracilaclopus Ocampo & Mondaca, Neophanaeognatha Allsopp and Phanaeognatha Hope. Our results also show that the fossil taxa Prophaenognatha robusta Bai et al. and Ceafornotensis archratiras Woolley are closely related to Ochodaeidae, while the remaining type species of fossils formerly included in Aclopinae (Cretaclopus longipes (Ponomarenko), Holcorobeus vittatus Nikritin, Juraclopus rodhendorfi Nikolajev, Mesaclopus mongolicus (Nikolajev), and Mongolrobeus zherikhini Nikolajev) belong to a distinct lineage closely related to Diphyllostomatidae. Based on these results, the subfamily Aclopinae appears monophyletic and sister to the ?pleurostict? lineage. Consequently, we propose the following changes to the current classification of the fossil taxa: Holcorobeus monreali (Gómez-Pallerola) belongs to Carabidae (incertae sedis) as proposed by the original author, and we place Ceafornotensis Woolley, Cretaclopus Nikolajev, Holcorobeus Nikritin, Juraclopus Nikolajev, Mesaclopus Nikolajev, Mongolrobeus Nikolajev and Prophaenognatha Bai et al. in Scarabaeoidea (incertae sedis). Furthermore, we provide an identification key to, and diagnoses of, the genera, illustrations of diagnostic characters and checklists of their included species. The evolutionary perspective presented provides new insights into the evolution of the pleurostict condition in Scarabaeoidea and the biogeography of this group, which is now regarded as Gondwanan, probably evolving during the Cretaceous and not from the upper Jurassic as previously assumed.Fil: Neita Moreno, Jhon César. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; Argentina. Instituto de Investigaciones de Recursos Biológicos Alexander Von Humboldt; ColombiaFil: Agrain, Federico Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; ArgentinaFil: Eberle, Jonas. Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig; AlemaniaFil: Ahrens, Dirk. Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig; AlemaniaFil: Pereyra, Vanina Antonella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; Argentin