This paper (in press, Journal of Medical Virology) — provides a very succinct accurate analysis of the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 virus’ mRNA-encoded gene products. Without going overboard with political accusations, authors give several types of evidence for the likelihood that the proximal origin of this virus is not from any animal vector. Follow-up independent analyses of these, and related, data should be interesting to follow closely. 😊
From the URL below, one can download the manuscript.
DwN
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Open Access
Questions concerning the proximal origin of SARS‐CoV‐2
Murat Seyran et al. (Total of 18 authors)
First published: 03 September 2020
https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.26478
This article has been accepted for publication and has undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/jmv.26478
Abstract
There is a consensus that Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) originated naturally from bat coronaviruses (CoVs), in particular, RaTG13. However, the SARS‐CoV‐2 host tropism/adaptation pattern has significant discrepancies compared to other CoVs, raising questions concerning the proximal origin of SARS‐CoV‐2.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmv.26478
COMMENT:
I am no virologist, but it seems clear that studies of the evolutionary origins of any organism must focus on nucleic acid sequences, not protein topology. Protein topology might explain WHY a DNA or RNA sequence variant might prove favorable or not, but such studies say little about evolutionary origins.
The bat virus origin of SARS-CoV-2 is strongly supported by sequence similarities with bat and other coronaviruses. The suggestion of a laboratory origin is beguiling to those who favor conspiracy theories, but the SARS-CoV-2 sequence shows no signs of genetic manipulation. Like most ‘conspiracy theories’, these are actually ‘conspiracy hypothesies’, as they never are backed by sufficient data to rise to the level of a true scientific theory (such as evolution or gravity).