Interesting paper. I haven't dug into the methods/data in depth. But the gist of their interpretation is:<p>- Out of the initial 41 cases, 27 were linked to the seafood market. The first identified cases + 12 others had no link to the market.<p>- Phylogenetic analysis suggests two potential ancestral haplotypes. None of the seafood market haplotypes were the two potential ancestral.<p>- The very first initial cases (family from Shenzhen) was one of the two potential ancestral haplotype.<p>I am a bioinformatics phd and know enough about phylogenetic analysis to say that it can sometimes be ambiguous and have some elements of subjectivity, especially with low sample sizes. So I wouldn't be too fast to jump on these results. However, I haven't gone through the data in detail to really give a good opinion.