trailPekar et al.'s two-spillover phylodynamic inference is robust to model assumptions
Lineage distribution patterns indicate two independent spillover events at the Huanan Market
Two basal SARS-CoV-2 lineages are statistically improbable under a single spillover event
Authors' sensitivity analyses and correction· for
Pekar et al.'s corrected analysis retained the two-spillover conclusion after the 2023 erratum
atomic
Sensitivity to genome inclusion and rooting· against
Pekar et al.'s two-spillover conclusion depends on the phylogenetic rooting of early SARS-CoV-2 sequences
Pekar et al. concluded SARS-CoV-2 arose from at least two separate zoonotic spillover events
The correct rooting of the early SARS-CoV-2 phylogenetic tree is uncertain
Intermediate A-B SARS-CoV-2 genomes existed among early human cases
Reported intermediate A-B SARS-CoV-2 genomes are genuine biological intermediates, not sequencing artifacts
+1 more
claim · empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →claim page ↗︎
Pekar et al.'s two-spillover phylodynamic inference is robust to model assumptions
⇄ContestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →
2depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitution →✓verifiedThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitution →↑supportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →⇄contestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →○unsupportedNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitution →✕contradictedAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment — the Steward prioritises higher-importance claims, so this one is likely still queued.constitution →verified factopen questionvalue premisesupportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →Fig. — detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.