A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
The version I have of Hu-1 (MN908947) is identical - weird... Lemme check again
-
Yup, identical based on NCBI records (except the ends). Here's the Geneious alignment [shared file(s): 2020.12.06_alignment.geneious]
-
WA1 has three differences to both WH04 and Hu-1 - all three ancestral.
-
Lemme check these human sequences against the larger pango/bat alignment I have - since I have all the assemblies for those too.
-
2020-12-06 10:16
Andrew Rambaut
Not sure that is the same WH04 - there are some confusing names
-
[and I'll see if I can get the raw data for WA1 so I can check the assembly for that one too - although it's been sequenced multiple times, so I assume it's correct]
-
Lemme get WH04 from GISAID (I have been using MT291829 from NCBI as WH04)
-
Comparing to all the pango/bat sequences here is interesting - in two out of the three positions (8782 (C/T) and(18060 C/T) where WA1 is ancestral compared to RaTG13, all the other pango/bat genomes have the same asRaTG13 - so definitely ancestral. HOWEVER, RmYN01 has the same derived residues in those positions as WA1. (Ican't check the third position - RmYN01 has bad sequencing around that position). Checking SARS...
-
hCoV-19/Fujian/8/2020 I EPI_ISL_411060 -> seems to be identical to WA1 and sampled around the same time.