Email

ecohealthalliance.org>; 2°52 <{@ecohealthalliance.org> Ce: jays wh.iov.cn> Subject: Fw: RE: RE: Matters Arising regarding your Nature paper Dear Peter, I hope you are doing well. I forward a recent email from Clare Thomas. This is one of emails from Clare asked by some scientists regarding the RaTG13 sequence. I believe Jessie Bloom is the leading scientist among them. We prepared a draft to explain to Clare what Jessie Bloom has done for us. Can you please help us to edit and snapshot some of his comments on Chinese Scientist on his Twitter? Best regards, Zhengli, _ BACB --------- Bet :"Clare Thomas" EB onature.com> AIK AY [A] :2022-04-29 17:38:47 (HHA) WEA: PW own.iov.cn" Milt iovco> Pik: =E MA: RE: RE: Matters Arising regarding your Nature paper Dear Zhengli, I hope you're well. We've been contacted again by several scientists regarding some of the methodological details that you clarified at the end of last year. Some of these scientists are asking the same questions as the correspondent who submitted the Matters Arising. I think this information needs to be provided publicly. We can either do a correction to the paper to add these details, or the person who originally wrote to us has provided some helpful suggestions below for how these methods details can be added to the relevant databases (please see the suggestions below). This would be our preference. Could you please add the information, as indicated, and let me know when you've done it so that I can let them know? Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks in advance, Clare Second and most importantly, it seems that the information that was provided to me in your email and in the Word document prepared by the laboratory of Shi Zheng-Li has still not been shared publicly by the authors. For example, a few days ago I was asked by researcher Moreno Colaiacov about the RaTG13 sample that was "gone" and yet used later for 5'RACE. Unfortunately I could not answer him because you told me that this information was confidential. It would be really nice for this information that has been shared with me to be made public. For example, would it be possible for the authors to include the information as metadata in NCBI GenBank? For example: 1) Timeline information "Year 2017: Amplification of full-length RdRp gene and ORF8 gene Year 2018: NGS and gap filling of the genome sequence September 2020: RACE for determination of the 5'end sequence" and "anal swab, not a fecal pellet, they used the High Pure Viral RNA kit for the RNA extraction" "for the 5'race done in September 2020 they used the viral RNA previously extracted from that anal swab sample." could go into the category called "description" for the Biosample accession of RaTG13 sample httos://www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/biosample/?term=SAMN14082201, as in: https:/Awww.ncbi.nilm.nih.gov/biosample/SAMN02928182 2) The information about the "Method of genome sequence assembly" could go into the "Comment" section of the RaTG13 full sequence accession: https:/Awww.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/nuccore/1916859392 3) the list of primers used for amplicons and the points related to the amplicon names could go into the "Strategy" section of the SRA Experiment accession: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/SRX8357956 (see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/docs/submitmeta/ for details)