Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.1006 [SLACK_001220] · slack_pm:msg:10504

Date: 2021-09-24 13:27
Type: chat message · slack
mentioned: Kristian G. Andersen
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Edward C. Holmes

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

@Kristian Andersen On that glycosylation stuff the key comparison is actually without the BANAL or any of the viruses collected post-pandemic and perhaps even RaTG13. The key question is whether SC2 has glycosylation patterns that match those proposed in that grant (e.g. clade 2 stuff) in comparisons involving the viruses named inthat grant and known about in 2019.

In context

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

2021-09-24 13:27 Edward C. Holmes

@Kristian Andersen On that glycosylation stuff the key comparison is actually without the BANAL or any of the viruses collected post-pandemic and perhaps even RaTG13. The key question is whether SC2 has glycosylation patterns that match those proposed in that grant (e.g. clade 2 stuff) in comparisons involving the viruses named inthat grant and known about in 2019.
2021-09-24 13:50 Kristian G. Andersen open

Hey Eddie. I agree, although I think the comparisons should be to both - where SC2 matches BANAL, we 100% know it's natural. The question is, where SC2 is _different_ than BANAL, is any of that described in the grant? The answer to that is a clear no.BANAL has 23 (predicted...) N-linked glycans, SC2 has 22 - 21 of them are shared with BANAL, so SC1 has one unique N-Glycs (in the NTD), whereas BANAL has two unique N-Glycs (one in RBD, one in NTD). None of these are specifically described in the grant. Table with the N-Glycs attached. [shared file(s): N-Glycs.xlsx]

Full conversation →