A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
I'll get some of this started later today - it's important to get the insights irrespective of what it's going to end upshowing.
-
Would there be any reason to pick the SARS2 backbone for doing these? Assuming they had the genome sequence way back at the start?
-
Well, in the grant they specifically talk about *new* viruses - so a SC2 precursor could have been one of those "low risk" viruses they talk about and then they started fiddling with it.
-
They would have selected it from candidates by genome sequencing it. I guess they would have seen an ACE-2 binding RBD and thought that is the one to try an FCS in?
-
2021-09-21 08:37
Andrew Rambaut
Or they just were selecting viruses by seeing if they could get any to culture and then worry about genome sequencing?
-
The former - which is the approach they describe in the grant.
-
Culture is very challenging so I don't think that approach makes sense.
-
Here's what I suggest we do: • Make (spike) alignments with SC1, SARSr-CoVs, RaTG13(+close friends), Pangos, BANAL, SHC014, rs4237, SC2 • Mark 'key' sites based on what's in the grant - @Robert Garry, can you please help highlight the N-linked glycans based on Wuhan Hu-1 coordinates• Check to see if there's anything odd between SC2, basal viruses, and SC1• Look at e.g., codon usage at those sites if anything stands out• Cross-check with how those sites have evolved during the pandemic
-
And stay off email