Breathless: The Scientific Race to Defeat a Deadly Virus

by David Quammen

The sample in which Shi’s team found one of those nine, especially notable in light of its later history, was given the number 4991. The sample number is distinct from the label assigned to any genomic sequence that may come from that sample, just as gazpacho is distinct from a cucumber; and the genomic sequence of a virus is distinct from any live virus that is grown, just as the genomic sequence of a lion is distinct from a live lion that might walk into your laboratory—but those distinctions got lost amid later criticisms of Zhengli Shi’s work. Sample 4991, which came from an intermediate horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus affinis), contained just enough material for Shi’s group, two years later, when they had better equipment, to pull out and sequence a near-complete genome. They named that genome RaTG13, from Ra as in Rhinolophus affinis, TG as in Tongguan the town, and 13 as in 2013, the year the sample was collected. Why should you care? Because these relatively simple facts of variant naming would later bring accusations of sinister obfuscation against Zhengli Shi, and RaTG13 would become the single most important, and most poorly understood, piece of data amid the controversy over the origin of the virus.