02-03-2020, 06:37 AM
So the reason I asked your background was two-fold: 1. I was curious why you are so sure of yourself in this matter and 2. So I know what jargon I can use when conversing with you.
This is an awkward format and venue for conveying this kind of information so please bare with my formatting.
1. I went to NCBI and downloaded all 55 of the 2019-nCov genomes and ran a multiple sequence alignment using the Clustal Omega tool to make a consensus sequence.
2. I blasted the consensus sequence using the Betacoronavirus genus as a filter - it returned BatCoV RaTG13 as most likely.
3. I ran another multiple sequence alignment using the consensus sequence and then BatCoV RaTG13 as the reference sequence.
4. The results were very similar to the Indian paper's alignment using SARS-GZ02 as the reference, i.e. the same insertions the Indian paper mentioned.
5. 3 of the insertions represent key changes in the receptor binding motif of the N-terminal domain.
6. A simple literature search reveals the N-terminal domain in coronaviruses encodes the part of the spike glycoprotein that mediates virus entry into the host.
7. All of the insertions share 100% identity with HIV. How would a Bat virus and HIV come into contact? I'm all for the emerging theories in the field of horizontal gene transfer as a driver of evolution, but I hope we can agree that spontaneous natural recombination between BatCoV RaTG13 and HIV would be unlikely, though not impossible.
So. That's my thought process. I understand its not a proof of artificial engineering. I'll repeat myself again: it’s too soon to say for sure but it looks like 2019-nCov was engineered in a lab.
This is an awkward format and venue for conveying this kind of information so please bare with my formatting.
1. I went to NCBI and downloaded all 55 of the 2019-nCov genomes and ran a multiple sequence alignment using the Clustal Omega tool to make a consensus sequence.
2. I blasted the consensus sequence using the Betacoronavirus genus as a filter - it returned BatCoV RaTG13 as most likely.
3. I ran another multiple sequence alignment using the consensus sequence and then BatCoV RaTG13 as the reference sequence.
4. The results were very similar to the Indian paper's alignment using SARS-GZ02 as the reference, i.e. the same insertions the Indian paper mentioned.
5. 3 of the insertions represent key changes in the receptor binding motif of the N-terminal domain.
6. A simple literature search reveals the N-terminal domain in coronaviruses encodes the part of the spike glycoprotein that mediates virus entry into the host.
7. All of the insertions share 100% identity with HIV. How would a Bat virus and HIV come into contact? I'm all for the emerging theories in the field of horizontal gene transfer as a driver of evolution, but I hope we can agree that spontaneous natural recombination between BatCoV RaTG13 and HIV would be unlikely, though not impossible.
So. That's my thought process. I understand its not a proof of artificial engineering. I'll repeat myself again: it’s too soon to say for sure but it looks like 2019-nCov was engineered in a lab.