Chat message

In context

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

1. 2021-05-29 18:32 Edward C. Holmes open
   Might not be much but it is at least consistent.
2. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Ahhh, I see what you're saying - this tree contains *everything* relevant they have, including RaTG13, which is very very close if you only consider RdRp. If she was concerned about similarity because it came from the lab, she would have taken out 4991 - it's very very close in the tree, but once you have the full sequence, you know it ain't it, but you don't from just the RdRp fragment.
3. 2021-05-29 18:32 Edward C. Holmes open
   Yes, that's it.
4. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Is there anywhere to confirm the sequences are internal and not just from NCBI?
5. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen
   If the former, this is the 'effing SMOKING GUN of NOT lab escape.
6. 2021-05-29 18:32 Edward C. Holmes open
   Let me check with i
7. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen open
   SLACK_001110 That'd be great. If I looked at that tree and I was Shi, my first thought would be - FUCK, did 4991 get out? Yet, she/they decided not to hide the similarity (of course, it would have been noticed anyway because 4991 was ina public database, but there's just no way they'd be thinking that way).
8. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen open
   The sequences all have NCBI accession numbers, so probably from NCBI.
9. 2021-05-29 18:32 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Is it possible to confirm the tree is from Shi's lab?

Full conversation →