Back

Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in Ohio's wildlife, companion, and agricultural animals

Ehrlich, M.; Madden, C.; McBride, D.; Nolting, J. M.; Huey, D.; Kenney, S.; Wang, Q.; Saif, L.; Vlasova, A.; Dennis, P.; Lombardi, D.; Gibson, S.; McLaine, A.; Lauterbach, S.; Yaxley, P.; Winston, J.; Diaz-Campos, D.; Pesapane, R.; Flint, M.; Flint, J.; Junge, R.; Faith, S. A.; Bowman, A. S.; Hale, V. L.

2022-12-30 microbiology
10.1101/2022.12.30.522311 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in humans in late 2019 and spread rapidly to become a global pandemic. A zoonotic spillover event from animal to human was identified as the presumed origin. Subsequently, reports began emerging regarding spillback events resulting in SARS-CoV-2 infections in multiple animal species. These events highlighted critical links between animal and human health while also raising concerns about the development of new reservoir hosts and potential viral mutations that could alter virulence and transmission or evade immune responses. Characterizing susceptibility, prevalence, and transmission between animal species became a priority to help protect animal and human health. In this study, we coalesced a large team of investigators and community partners to surveil for SARS-CoV-2 in domestic and free-ranging animals around Ohio between May 2020 and August 2021. We focused on species with known or predicted susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection, highly congregated or medically compromised animals (e.g. shelters, barns, veterinary hospitals), and animals that had frequent contact with humans (e.g. pets, agricultural animals, zoo animals, or animals in wildlife hospitals). This included free-ranging deer (n=76), mink (n=57), multiple species of bats (n=65), and other wildlife in addition to domestic cats (n=275) and pigs (n= 184). In total, we tested 800 animals (34 species) via rRT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was not detected in any of the tested animals despite a major peak in human SARS-CoV-2 cases that occurred in Ohio subsequent to the peak of animal samplings. Importantly, due to lack of validated tests for animals, we did not test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in this study, which limited our ability to assess exposure. While the results of this study were negative, the surveillance effort was critical and remains key to understanding, predicting, and preventing re-emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in humans or animals.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.6%
2
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.5%
3
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
6.8%
50% of probability mass above
4
Emerging Microbes & Infections
74 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
5
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
6
Journal of Virology
456 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
7
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.6%
8
PLOS Pathogens
721 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.9%
9
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
10
Preventive Veterinary Medicine
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
11
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 32%
1.7%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
30 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
14
Animals
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
15
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.2%
16
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
17
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
19
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.7%
21
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
22
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.6%
23
Frontiers in Virology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%