Slack / Private Message Drop — page 224
of 1123 pages
← p.223 p.225 → · this page in the original PDF · package
SLACK_000438
I'm looking at writing a story on how they've recently updated the RaTG13 genome in the NCBI gene bank:
https//www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/nuccore/MN996532
and Pete Doherty recommended you as a good person to contact about this.
I saw some people claiming on Twitter that this is evidence that the virus was not naturally occurring and that it was
manufactured in a lab. I don't know enough about reading genomes to parse this update, but I was wondering if you
could have a look and let me know if there's any significance you can see (apparently there's been a couple of base
pair changes).
I don't expect you to read through the whole thing! I'd just like your take on anything that jumps out at you or if you
have a possible explanation as to why the gene bank was updated. I think it would be good to address this by an
expert before rumours start picking up.
Thank you.
Thomas Crow
Science Writer_
witter
LinkedIn
[Eddie Holmes]
I've no interest in the story, but I see they updated RaTG13 on GenBank. Anything significant?
[Eddie Holmes]
Bloody good timing. Not.
[Eddie Holmes]
Only appears to be a few base changes by the look of it.
[Kristian Andersen]
They're writing about an article about a sequence being updated on Genbank? Fuck me.
There is NO significance to this and it's not worth commenting on - ANYBODY who does this type of work knows
that sequences get updated every now and again, especially when the sequences are (a) important and (b) had a
few low-coverage regions that might have had assembly errors. This changes nothing - and as you say, only a
handful of completely insignificant changes.
This is 100% business as usual - move on.
[Kristian Andersen]
FWIW, the new sequences 100% match the consensus sequence I generated and shared on Virological, which
might have been a better assembly than their own. It's possible that they just downloaded my bam files (which I
made available on Google Cloud) and then they called the consensus from those.
Again, all totally standard.
[Eddie Holmes]
Yes, that's what I just told him. The tinfoil hats have got their diapers in a twist over it.
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/slack_pm/224
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| slack_pm:msg:02317 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 223–224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02318 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02319 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02320 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02321 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02322 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |
| slack_pm:msg:02323 | 2020-10-20 | chat message | 224 |