Source author record

Adrian Jones

Adrian Jones appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Analysis of pangolin metagenomic datasets reveals significant contamination, raising concerns for pangolin CoV host attribution

Metagenomic datasets from pangolin tissue specimens have previously yielded SARS-related coronaviruses which show high homology in their receptor binding domain to SARS-CoV-2, suggesting a potential zoonotic source for this feature of the human virus, possibly via recombination (Liu et al. 2019, Lam et al. 2020, Xiao et al. 2020, Liu et al. 2020). Here we re-examine these published datasets. We report that only a few pangolin samples were found to contain coronavirus reads, and even then in low abundance, while other non-pangolin hosted viruses were present in higher abundance. We also discovered extensive contamination with human, rodent, and other mammalian gene sequences, which was a surprising finding. Furthermore, we uncovered a number of pangolin CoV sequences embedded in standard laboratory cloning vectors, which suggests the pangolin specimens could have been contaminated with sequences derived from synthetic biology experiments. Finally, we discover a third pangolin dataset (He et al. 2022) with low levels of SARSr-CoV sequences and unambiguous extensive contamination of several pangolin samples. For these reasons, we find it unlikely that the pangolins in question had a coronavirus infection while alive, and all current versions of the cited papers claiming a zoonotic infection of pangolins with a SARS-r CoV require substantial corrections and should be retracted until such corrections are made.

preprint2022arXiv

Further analysis of metagenomic datasets containing GD and GX pangolin CoVs indicates widespread contamination, undermining pangolin host attribution

The only animals other than bats reported to have been infected with SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses (SARS2r-CoVs) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic are pangolins. In early 2020 multiple papers reported the identification of two clades of SARS2r-CoVs, GD and GX, infecting pangolins. However the RNA-Seq datasets supporting pangolin genome assembly were widely contaminated, contained synthetic vectors or were heavily enriched or filtered with little but coronavirus sequences left in the datasets. Here we investigate two pangolin fecal samples sequenced by Li et al. (2021) provided in support of GD PCoV infection of pangolins in Guangdong and find the read distribution consistent with PCR amplicon contamination and SARS-CoV-2 contamination, and further identify the presence of synthetic plasmid sequences. We also build upon our previous work to further analyze the dataset GX/P3B by Lam et al. (2020), which is the only non enriched/heavily filtered pangolin tissue dataset sequenced by Lam et al. (2020). We identify synthetic vectors and confirm human genomic origin samples in the dataset. Finally, we find human mitochondrial sequences in all pangolin organ datasets and mouse and tiger mitochondrial sequences in selected pangolin organ datasets sequenced by Liu et al. (2019). We infer that human and mouse genomic origin sequences were probably sourced from contamination prior to sequencing, while tiger origin sequence contamination may have occurred due to index hopping during sequencing. These observations are problematic for attributing pangolins as SARS2r-CoV hosts in the datasets examined. The forensic methods developed and used here can be applied to examine any third party SRA data sets.

preprint2021arXiv

An open debate on SARS-CoV-2's proximal origin is long overdue

There is a near consensus view that SARS-CoV-2 has a natural zoonotic origin; however, several characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 taken together are not easily explained by a natural zoonotic origin hypothesis. These include: a low rate of evolution in the early phase of transmission; the lack of evidence of recombination events; a high pre-existing binding to human ACE2; a novel furin cleavage site insert; a flat glycan binding domain of the spike protein which conflicts with host evasion survival patterns exhibited by other coronaviruses, and high human and mouse peptide mimicry. Initial assumptions against a laboratory origin, by contrast, have remained unsubstantiated. Furthermore, over a year after the initial outbreak in Wuhan, there is still no clear evidence of zoonotic transfer from a bat or intermediate species. Given the immense social and economic impact of this pandemic, identifying the true origin of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to preventing future outbreaks. The search for SARS-CoV-2's origin should include an open and unbiased inquiry into a possible laboratory origin.