Lack of Evidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Spillover in Free-Living Neotropical Non-Human Primates, Brazil

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is responsible for the worst pandemic of the 21st century. Like all human coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 originated in a wildlife reservoir, most likely from bats. As SARS-CoV-2 has spread across the globe in humans, it has spilled over to infect a variety of non-human animal species in domestic, farm, and zoo settings. Additionally, a broad range of species, including one neotropical monkey, have proven to be susceptible to experimental infection with SARS-CoV-2. Together, these findings raise the specter of establishment of novel enzootic cycles of SARS-COV-2. To assess the potential exposure of free-living non-human primates to SARS-COV-2, we sampled 60 neotropical monkeys living in proximity to Manaus and São José do Rio Preto, two hotspots for COVID-19 in Brazil. Our molecular and serological tests detected no evidence of SAR-CoV-2 infection among these populations. While this result is reassuring, sustained surveillance efforts of wildlife living in close association with human populations is warranted, given the stochastic nature of spillover events and the enormous implications of SARS-CoV-2 spillover for human health.

Zoonotic Risk: One More Good Reason Why Cats Should Be Kept Away from Bats

Bats are often unfairly depicted as the direct culprit in the current COVID-19 pandemic, yet the real causes of this and other zoonotic spillover events should be sought in the human impact on the environment, including the spread of domestic animals. Here, we discuss bat predation by cats as a phenomenon bringing about zoonotic risks and illustrate cases of observed, suspected or hypothesized pathogen transmission from bats to cats, certainly or likely following predation episodes. In addition to well-known cases of bat rabies, we review other diseases that affect humans and might eventually reach them through cats that prey on bats. We also examine the potential transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of COVID-19, from domestic cats to bats, which, although unlikely, might generate a novel wildlife reservoir in these mammals, and identify research and management directions to achieve more effective risk assessment, mitigation or prevention. Overall, not only does bat killing by cats represent a potentially serious threat to biodiversity conservation, but it also bears zoonotic implications that can no longer be neglected.

Risk of Human-to-Wildlife Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

It has been a long time since the world has experienced a pandemic with such a rapid devastating impact as the current COVID-19 pandemic. The causative agent, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is further unusual in that it appears capable of infecting many different mammal species. As a significant proportion of people worldwide are infected with SARS-CoV-2 and may spread the infection unknowingly before symptoms occur or without any symptoms ever occurring, there is a non-negligible risk of humans spreading SARS-CoV-2 to wildlife, in particular mammals. Because of SARS-CoV-2’s evolutionary origins in bats and reports of humans transmitting the virus to pets and zoo animals, regulations for prevention of human-to-animal transmission have so far focused mostly on these animal groups. Here, we summarize recent studies and reports that show that a wide range of distantly related mammals are likely susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 and that susceptibility or resistance to the virus is in general not predictable, or only to some extent, by phylogenetic proximity to known susceptible or resistant hosts. In the absence of solid evidence on the SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility/resistance for each of the >5,500 mammal species, we argue that sanitary precautions should be taken when interacting with any mammal species in the wild. Preventing human-to-wildlife SARS-CoV-2 transmission is important for protecting these (sometimes endangered) animals from disease, but also to avoid establishment of novel SARS-CoV-2 reservoirs in wild animals. The risk of repeated re-infection of humans from such a wildlife reservoir could severely hamper SARS-CoV-2 control efforts. For wildlife fieldworkers interacting directly or indirectly with mammals, we recommend sanitary precautions such as physical distancing, wearing face masks and gloves, and frequent decontamination, which are very similar to regulations currently imposed to prevent transmission among humans.

Wildlife and Bait Density Monitoring to Describe the Effectiveness of a Rabies Vaccination Program in Foxes

Fox rabies has been eliminated from vast areas of West and Central Europe, but cases still occur in the Balkans. Oral vaccination is an effective method for reducing the incidence of the disease in wildlife, but it requires monitoring if bait density is adequate for the density of the wildlife reservoir. We developed a methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of aerial vaccination campaigns conducted in Montenegro during autumn 2011 and spring 2012. The effectiveness of the vaccination campaign was assessed by (i) estimating the density of baits, (ii) estimating the distribution of the red fox, (iii) identifying critical areas of insufficient bait density by combining both variables. Although the two vaccination campaigns resulted in 45% and 47% of the country’s total area not reaching recommended density of 20 baits/km2, the consecutive delivery of both campaigns reduced these “gaps” to 6%. By combining bait and reservoir density data, we were able to show that bait density was lower than fox density in only 5% of Montenegro’s territory. The methodology described can be used for real-time evaluation of aerial vaccine delivery campaigns, to identify areas with insufficient bait densities.

Ecological interventions to prevent and manage zoonotic pathogen spillover

Spillover of a pathogen from a wildlife reservoir into a human or livestock host requires the pathogen to overcome a hierarchical series of barriers. Interventions aimed at one or more of these barriers may be able to prevent the occurrence of spillover. Here, we demonstrate how interventions that target the ecological context in which spillover occurs (i.e. ecological interventions) can complement conventional approaches like vaccination, treatment, disinfection and chemical control. Accelerating spillover owing to environmental change requires effective, affordable, durable and scalable solutions that fully harness the complex processes involved in cross-species pathogen spillover. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Dynamic and integrative approaches to understanding pathogen spillover’.

Characterization of Anaplasma marginale subsp. centrale Strains by Use ofmsp1aSGenotyping Reveals a Wildlife Reservoir

Bovine anaplasmosis caused by the intraerythrocytic rickettsial pathogenAnaplasma marginaleis endemic in South Africa.Anaplasma marginalesubspeciescentralealso infects cattle; however, it causes a milder form of anaplasmosis and is used as a live vaccine againstA. marginale. There has been less interest in the epidemiology ofA. marginalesubsp.centrale, and, as a result, there are few reports detecting natural infections of this organism. When detected in cattle, it is often assumed that it is due to vaccination, and in most cases, it is reported as coinfection withA. marginalewithout characterization of the strain. A total of 380 blood samples from wild ruminant species and cattle collected from biobanks, national parks, and other regions of South Africa were used in duplex real-time PCR assays to simultaneously detectA. marginaleandA. marginalesubsp.centrale.PCR results indicated high occurrence ofA. marginalesubsp.centraleinfections, ranging from 25 to 100% in national parks. Samples positive forA. marginalesubsp.centralewere further characterized using themsp1aSgene, a homolog ofmsp1α ofA. marginale, which contains repeats at the 5′ ends that are useful for genotyping strains. A total of 47 Msp1aS repeats were identified, which corresponded to 32A. marginalesubsp.centralegenotypes detected in cattle, buffalo, and wildebeest. RepeatAnalyzer was used to examine strain diversity. Our results demonstrate a diversity ofA. marginalesubsp.centralestrains from cattle and wildlife hosts from South Africa and indicate the utility ofmsp1aSas a genotypic marker forA. marginalesubsp.centralestrain diversity.