COVID-19 Records

Reading Room Production — page 317

of 496 pages · text recovered by OCR

← p.316 p.318 → · this page in the original PDF · package

November last year, the authors clarify that RATG13 sequence is the full virus sequence collected from bat sample 4991. However, the newly uncovered thesis by Ping, raises new questions on the raw data in regards to the RATG13 sequence and its relationship to the 4991 sample. In the thesis the full sequence of bat sample 4991 is shown to be 75,4% identical in the spike gene compared to SARs-CoV Tor2. Table 3.2 Comparison of ORF amino acid identities between bat SARSr-CoVs and human SARS-CoV Tor2. CoV ORFla S ORF3' E M ORF6 ORF7 ORF8 WN LYRal 1/Yunnan 95.8 90.8 97.7 97.8 WIV16/Yunnan 98.0 %.8 97.0 100.0 98.1 95.0 16.1 99.5 WIV1/Yunnan 97.9 92.1 96.7 100.0 98.1 93.6 99.7 Rs4084/Y unnan 97.9 97.0 95.9 85.9 99.5 Anlong-103/Guizhou 98.1 89.7 100.0 95.0 31.8 98.3 Rp3/Guangxi 96.5 83.5 97.8 HKU3-7/Guangdong 94.0 82.8 98.1 HKU3-I/Hong Kong 94.1 81.7 100.0 14.7 96.4 Rfl/Hubei 94.0 16.6 86.1 96.0 97.7 93.6 91.8 23.9 95.4 Jiyuan-84/Henan 94.0 76.8 86.8 96.0 97.7 92.0 25.3 96.2 Rp/Shaanxi 95.4 799.0 82.4 97.3 92.0 97.8 HeB2013/Hebei 94.1 87.2 96.0 97.7 93.6 25.3 96,2 JL2012/Jilin 93.2 86.1 97.2 90.1 NA 95.7 Ra4991_ Yunnan 80.0 94.7 90.5 Rs5725_Yunnan 98.2 97.0 100.0 100.0 31.1 NC Rs8561_Guangdong 80.4 75.2 70.5 94.7 92.8 Rsi41456 Guangxi 96.1 73.6 83.5 98.6 98.1 BM48-31/Bulgaria 80.8 4.7 69.0 92.1 NP 87.2 NA, not available; NP, not present; NC, not complete. This indicates that bat sample 4991 is not fully identical to RATG13 across the genome, as the RATG13 Spike is shown to be 76.59 percent identical to SARS-CoV Tor2 in the spike gene, thereby deviating by 1.1 percent. DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Springer Nature Limited does not accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Springer Nature Ltd or one of their agents. Please note that Springer Nature Limited and their agents and affiliates do not accept any responsibility for viruses or malware that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). Springer Nature Limited. Registered office: The Campus, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW. Registered Number: 00785998 England. Disclaimer This communication, together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or proprietary information (including without limitation copyright material and/or other intellectual property) and is intended only for the person(s) and/or entity(ies) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, or if you received it in error, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this communication and you are asked to kindly delete it and promptly notify us. Any copying, use, disclosure or distribution of any part of this communication or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this communication, unless duly authorized by or on behalf of EcoHealth Alliance, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The Committee's PDF is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned text: /api/page/reading_room/317

Records on this page

RecordDateTypePages
reading_room:exh:00087 attachment 317
A question about the addendum to your Nature paper 2021-06-23 email 316–317