Metagenomic Analysis of Viral Diversity and a Novel Astroviruse of Forest Rodent

Background: Rodents are important virus reservoirs and natural hosts for multiple viruses. They are one of the wild animals that are extremely threatening to the spread of human viruses. Therefore, research on rodents carrying viruses and identifying new viruses that rodents carry is of great significance for preventing and controlling viral diseases.Methods: In this study, fecal samples from six species of forest rodents in Northeast China were sequenced using metagenomics, and an abundance of virome information was acquired.Results: Among the top 10 most abundant viral families, RNA virus include Orthomyxoviridae, Picornaviridae, Bunyaviridae and Arenaviridae, DNA virus include Herpesviridae, Insect virus include Nodaviridae and Baculoviridae, Plant virus Tombusviridae and Phage (Myoriviridae). Except for Myoviridae, there was no significant difference in the abundance of virus families in the feces of each rodent species. In addition, a new strain of astrovirus was discovered, with an ORF and genome arrangement comparable to other rodent astroviruses.The newly identified astrovirus had the highest similarity with the rodent astrovirus isolate, CHN/100.Conclusions: The data obtained in this study provided an overview of the viral community present in these rodent fecal samples, revealing some rodent-associated viruses closely related to known human or animal pathogens. Strengthening our understanding of unclassified viruses harbored by rodents present in the natural environment could provide scientific guidance for preventing and controlling new viral outbreaks that can spread via rodents.

Long-Term Monitoring the Number of Forest Rodents in the Ilmeny Reserve

In the birch-pine forests of the Ilmeny Reserve the bank vole is predominated by numbers, the pygmy wood mice being in the second place. The results of our monitoring of the numbers of these rodents for 27 years (1991–2018) are presented. 1,610 rodents were caught,of which the bank vole accounted for 52.6%, the pygmy wood mouse for 32%, and other species for 15.4%. The autumn abundance of the bank vole was 4.6±1.8 and 18.9±2.6 ind./100 trap-days for 1991–1999 and 2000 – 2018, respectively; that of the pygmy wood mouse was 2.1±1.9 and 18.9±2.6 ind./100 trap-days, respectively. Since 2000, the peak amplitude of the bank vole number has increased by 1.1– 2.5 times, that of the pygmy wood mouse has increased by 2.5–4.2 times. Since 2006, the number peaks of these rodents began to repeat after 2–3 years. Over eighteen years (2000–2018), the autumn abundance of the bank vole twice (2008 and 2017) reached its peak values, at which the reproduction of voles ceased in July or early August. The correlation coefficient of the autumn abundance of the bank vole and pygmy wood mouse for 1996–2018 was 0.64±0.1. The spring abundance of the pygmy wood mouse has begun to more often exceed the spring abundance of the bank vole. Changes in the population cycles of the bank vole and pygmy wood mouse were obviously associated with some climatic features of the recent decades.

A comparison between risk assessments methods: assessing five species of cloud forest rodents in Mexico

Background. Red Lists have been traditionally used as the instruments to guide conservation strategies to avoid extinctions. There is little objection to the idea that categorizing species according to their risk of extinction is a good way to prioritize and implement conservation actions; however, there is little consensus in the best way to do this categorization, and different countries have developed different methods according to their specific needs. The scope of this paper is to contrast the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method (MER) and the one used by the IUCN Red List, and test how simple, objective and transparent are them. Methods. In order to compare the we performed a search within IUCN´s data base to find species ranked as critically endangered which have not been assessed by the MER. We picked 5 species from the rodent genus Habromys and performed a literature review to assess them through the MER guidelines; we then compared the outcomes with UICN Red List. Results. The five assessed species of cloud forest rodents yield equivalent results through both the MER and IUCN assessments; however, the information asked for by the MER was scant for all the species, and we argue that the results of the assessments are thus not entirely objectives. Moreover, we found that the MER is not a simple method to use due to ambiguities of the criteria. Discussion. The aim of risk assessments is to clearly define the conservation status of a given species, displayed in a simple, transparent, objective, way, which can be relevant in terms of scope and impact on conservation actions. Unfortunately the MER does not fulfil all these requirements, potentially compromising conservation actions. As a result, we propose that it is time reevaluate the current version of the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method.

A comparison between risk assessments methods: assessing five species of cloud forest rodents in Mexico

Background. Red Lists have been traditionally used as the instruments to guide conservation strategies to avoid extinctions. There is little objection to the idea that categorizing species according to their risk of extinction is a good way to prioritize and implement conservation actions; however, there is little consensus in the best way to do this categorization, and different countries have developed different methods according to their specific needs. The scope of this paper is to contrast the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method (MER) and the one used by the IUCN Red List, and test how simple, objective and transparent are them. Methods. In order to compare the we performed a search within IUCN´s data base to find species ranked as critically endangered which have not been assessed by the MER. We picked 5 species from the rodent genus Habromys and performed a literature review to assess them through the MER guidelines; we then compared the outcomes with UICN Red List. Results. The five assessed species of cloud forest rodents yield equivalent results through both the MER and IUCN assessments; however, the information asked for by the MER was scant for all the species, and we argue that the results of the assessments are thus not entirely objectives. Moreover, we found that the MER is not a simple method to use due to ambiguities of the criteria. Discussion. The aim of risk assessments is to clearly define the conservation status of a given species, displayed in a simple, transparent, objective, way, which can be relevant in terms of scope and impact on conservation actions. Unfortunately the MER does not fulfil all these requirements, potentially compromising conservation actions. As a result, we propose that it is time reevaluate the current version of the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method.

A comparison between risk assessments methods: assessing five species of cloud forest rodents in Mexico

Background. Red Lists have been traditionally used as the instruments to guide conservation strategies to avoid extinctions. There is little objection to the idea that categorizing species according to their risk of extinction is a good way to prioritize and implement conservation actions; however, there is little consensus in the best way to do this categorization, and different countries have developed different methods according to their specific needs. The scope of this paper is to contrast the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method (MER) and the one used by the IUCN Red List, and test how simple, objective and transparent are them. Methods. In order to compare the we performed a search within IUCN´s data base to find species ranked as critically endangered which have not been assessed by the MER. We picked 5 species from the rodent genus Habromys and performed a literature review to assess them through the MER guidelines; we then compared the outcomes with UICN Red List. Results. The five assessed species of cloud forest rodents yield equivalent results through both the MER and IUCN assessments; however, the information asked for by the MER was scant for all the species, and we argue that the results of the assessments are thus not entirely objectives. Moreover, we found that the MER is not a simple method to use due to ambiguities of the criteria. Discussion. The aim of risk assessments is to clearly define the conservation status of a given species, displayed in a simple, transparent, objective, way, which can be relevant in terms of scope and impact on conservation actions. Unfortunately the MER does not fulfil all these requirements, potentially compromising conservation actions. As a result, we propose that it is time reevaluate the current version of the Mexican Risk of Extinction Assessment Method.