Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.298 [SLACK_000512] · slack_pm:msg:03110

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

Question is do we consider that WA1 (or more likely a Chinese genome such as hCoV-19/Fujian/8/2020) is basal to WH04?

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2020-12-06 10:54 Andrew Rambaut open

Doh. I was thinking of RmYN02
2020-12-06 10:55 Kristian G. Andersen open

I think it's fair to say that the lineage that led to WA1 > WH04 is probably older than the lineage that led to Hu-1.And yeah - RmYN02.. :wink: That one is ancestral in those positions too
2020-12-06 10:56 Andrew Rambaut open

We have always used WH04 as the root -
2020-12-06 10:57 Kristian G. Andersen open

WA1 may be a more appropriate one - firmly placing the start of the pandemic in the United States :wink:
2020-12-06 10:58 Andrew Rambaut

Question is do we consider that WA1 (or more likely a Chinese genome such as hCoV-19/Fujian/8/2020) is basal to WH04?
2020-12-06 10:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

Out of curiosity, I also checked WH1-4 since they had those super funky ENA entries (still do.... SAMEA6507890 -SAMEA6507893) - WA1/WH04 basal to those as well. [shared file(s): 2020.12.06_early-genomes.geneious]
2020-12-06 10:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

I think considering WA1 basal to WH04 is appropriate based on that single difference
2020-12-06 10:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

(and I'd say ancestral here, since we have all the other genomes we can compare to)
2020-12-06 11:00 Andrew Rambaut open

I think we know that WA1 travelled from Hubei (need to check) so that places the WA1 haplotype in Hubei