MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165196439 · doi:10.1002/bies.202100015

SARS‐CoV‐2′s claimed natural origin is undermined by issues with genome sequences of its relative strains

2021· article· en· W3165196439 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Deigin, Rossana Segreto

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomeMetagenomicsFurinSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)BiologyGeneticsPandemicVirologyComputational biologyCleavage (geology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RaTG13, MP789, and RmYN02 are the strains closest to SARS-CoV-2, and their existence came to light only after the start of the pandemic. Their genomes have been used to support a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 but after a close examination all of them exhibit several issues. We specifically address the presence in RmYN02 and closely related RacCSxxx strains of a claimed natural PAA/PVA amino acid insertion at the S1/S2 junction of their spike protein at the same position where the PRRA insertion in SARS-CoV-2 has created a polybasic furin cleavage site. We show that RmYN02/RacCSxxx instead of the claimed insertion carry a 6-nucleotide deletion in the region and that the 12-nucleotide insertion in SARS-CoV-2 remains unique among Sarbecoviruses. Also, our analysis of RaTG13 and RmYN02's metagenomic datasets found unexpected reads which could indicate possible contamination. Because of their importance to inferring SARS-CoV-2's origin, we call for a careful reevaluation of RaTG13, MP789 and RmYN02 sequencing records and assembly methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207