---
type: Conversation
title: Private channel session 301
description: "slack conversation, 16 messages, 2020-08-15."
tags:
  - conversation
  - slack
medium: slack
message_count: 16
started_at: "2020-08-15T15:39:54"
ended_at: "2020-08-15T16:28:30"
duration_seconds: 2916
sources:
  - { id: slack_pm, resource: /sources/slack-pm.md, title: Slack / Private Message Drop, author: "process:senate-hsgac-release" }
generated: { by: randpaul-corpus-pipeline/1.0, at: "2026-08-01T12:42:27Z" }
status: stable
---

A slack conversation of 16 messages spanning 0h 48m.

# Metadata

- **Started:** 2020-08-15T15:39:54
- **Ended:** 2020-08-15T16:28:30
- **Duration:** 0h 48m
- **Participants:** 3
- **Source:** [slack_pm](/sources/slack-pm.md)
- **Pages:** 137-138

# Participants

* [Andrew Rambaut](/people/andrew-rambaut.md)
* [Edward C. Holmes](/people/edward-c-holmes.md)
* [Kristian G. Andersen](/people/kristian-g-andersen.md)
* [Robert F. Garry](/people/robert-f-garry.md)

# Transcript

**[2020-08-15T15:39:54] Kristian G. Andersen:** So interesting: https://virological.org/t/two-ebola-virus-variants-circulating-during-the-2020-equateur-province-outbreak/538 Man, Ebola evolution has gotten so weird since 2014. It used to be such a well-behaved virus with a logical clock, but that's certainly changed. How interesting.

**[2020-08-15T15:59:56] Andrew Rambaut:** Yeah. The MBK67 has areas of low coverage suggesting a difficult sample. But it has to be survivor relapse/latentinfection, surely?

**[2020-08-15T16:00:55] Andrew Rambaut:** Perhaps which ever bat colony produced the 2018 outbreak had some latently infected bats but seems less likely.

**[2020-08-15T16:01:39] Andrew Rambaut:** Probability of it happening in the middle of another outbreak in the same region? Weird

**[2020-08-15T16:05:32] Kristian G. Andersen:** Yeah, MBK67 is super weird, but I talked to Mike earlier in the week and it sounds like it's basal on the clade - I can't quite suss it out from the tree as it's displayed. If that is the case, then it might not actually be a survivor relapse, but rather a new spill-over from the very same reservoir. Very interesting indeed - let's touch base on it with Mike next week too.

**[2020-08-15T16:06:48] Kristian G. Andersen:** And yes, from a probability standpoint - two separate outbreaks starting essentially at the same time? Clearly not impossible, but definitely seems risk overall is just up for Ebola - people encroaching on animal habitat I guess.

**[2020-08-15T16:07:45] Andrew Rambaut:** I wouldn't trust the basal thing - it has lots of low coverage areas including over quite a few SNPS internal to the outbreak.

**[2020-08-15T16:08:23] Andrew Rambaut:** Strong ascertainment bias - EVD will be noticed in that area.

**[2020-08-15T16:08:54] Kristian G. Andersen:** Ah, okay - I asked Mike if that sequence had any of the human diversity from the previous outbreak and he said no.But if it's a low coverage sample, who knows. Very very interesting (and so messed up...)

**[2020-08-15T16:09:30] Andrew Rambaut:** I will take another look before our chat.

**[2020-08-15T16:10:04] Kristian G. Andersen:** Also, interestingly - more cases of vaccinees getting primary Ebola, only to relapse later on after having receivedmAbs... This definitely needs some further looking into.

**[2020-08-15T16:15:56] Andrew Rambaut:** Yeah, not coming out basal for me... [shared file(s): image.png]

**[2020-08-15T16:17:28] Andrew Rambaut:** Don't have all the 2018 genomes there for some reason.

**[2020-08-15T16:26:00] Edward C. Holmes:** Very weird indeed. Can we rule out a fuck-up?

**[2020-08-15T16:27:28] Andrew Rambaut:** The genome has a lot of low coverage bits. Are we sure they weren't doing some retrospective sequencing of 2018 samples and contaminated?

**[2020-08-15T16:28:30] Andrew Rambaut:** But then there are 11 nuc differences.