Literature detail

SARS-CoV-2 in fruit bats, ferrets, pigs, and chickens: an experimental transmission study.

Kore Schlottau1 Melanie Rissmann2 Annika Graaf1 Jacob Schön1 Julia Sehl3 Claudia Wylezich1 Dirk Höper1 Thomas C Mettenleiter4 Anne Balkema-Buschmann2 Timm Harder1 Christian Grund1 Donata Hoffmann1 Angele Breithaupt3 Martin Beer1
Affiliations 4 institutions
  1. Institute of Diagnostic Virology, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
  2. Institute of Novel and Emerging Infectious Diseases, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
  3. Department of Experimental Animal Facilities and Biorisk Management, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
  4. Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
PMID 32838346 2020 Lancet Microbe eng ppublish
PubMed DOI Browse context

Article

Publication summary

In December, 2019, a novel zoonotic severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus emerged in China. The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) became pandemic within weeks and the number of human infections and severe cases is increasing. We aimed to investigate the susceptibilty of potential animal hosts and the risk of anthropozoonotic spill-over infections. We intranasally inoculated nine fruit bats (<i>Rousettus aegyptiacus</i>), ferrets (<i>Mustela putorius</i>), pigs (<i>Sus scrofa domesticus</i>), and 17 chickens (<i>Gallus gallus domesticus</i>) with 10<sup>5</sup> TCID<sub>50</sub> of a SARS-CoV-2 isolate per animal. Direct contact animals (n=3) were included 24 h after inoculation to test viral transmission. Animals were monitored for clinical signs and for virus shedding by nucleic acid extraction from nasal washes and rectal swabs (ferrets), oral swabs and pooled faeces samples (fruit bats), nasal and rectal swabs (pigs), or oropharyngeal and cloacal swabs (chickens) on days 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 21 after infection by quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR). On days 4, 8, and 12, two inoculated animals (or three in the case of chickens) of each species were euthanised, and all remaining animals, including the contacts, were euthanised at day 21. All animals were subjected to autopsy and various tissues were collected for virus detection by RT-qPCR, histopathology immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridisation. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 reactive antibodies was tested by indirect immunofluorescence assay and virus neutralisation test in samples collected before inoculation and at autopsy. Pigs and chickens were not susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. All swabs, organ samples, and contact animals were negative for viral RNA, and none of the pigs or chickens seroconverted. Seven (78%) of nine fruit bats had a transient infection, with virus detectable by RT-qPCR, immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridisation in the nasal cavity, associated with rhinitis. Viral RNA was also identified in the trachea, lung, and lung-associated lymphatic tissue in two animals euthanised at day 4. One of three contact bats became infected. More efficient virus replication but no clinical signs were observed in ferrets, with transmission to all three direct contact animals. Mild rhinitis was associated with viral antigen detection in the respiratory and olfactory epithelium. Prominent viral RNA loads of 0-10<sup>4</sup> viral genome copies per mL were detected in the upper respiratory tract of fruit bats and ferrets, and both species developed SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies reaching neutralising titres of up to 1/1024 after 21 days. Pigs and chickens could not be infected intranasally by SARS-CoV-2, whereas fruit bats showed characteristics of a reservoir host. Virus replication in ferrets resembled a subclinical human infection with efficient spread. Ferrets might serve as a useful model for further studies-eg, testing vaccines or antivirals. German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture.

Chiroptera COVID-19 Rhinitis Animals Antibodies, Viral Chickens Ferrets RNA, Viral SARS-CoV-2

Structured evidence records

Evidence records

8 total
4 records
Extraction confidence 1.00
Key finding

Fruit bats exhibited transient SARS-CoV-2 infection with nasal and respiratory tissue replication and contact transmission.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

We intranasally inoculated nine fruit bats (Rousettus aegyptiacus) with 10^5 TCID50 of a SARS-CoV-2 isolate per animal. Seven (78%) of nine fruit bats had a transient infection, with virus detectable by RT-qPCR, immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridisation in the nasal cavity, associated with rhinitis. Viral RNA was also identified in the trachea, lung, and lung-associated lymphatic tissue. One of three contact bats became infected.

Method
experimental infection; RT-qPCR; immunohistochemistry; in situ hybridisation
Sample type
nasal cavity; trachea; lung; lung-associated lymphatic tissue
Experimental system
in vivo animal experiment
Extraction confidence 1.00
Key finding

Ferrets supported efficient SARS-CoV-2 replication and transmitted virus to contacts without clinical signs.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

More efficient virus replication but no clinical signs were observed in ferrets (Mustela putorius), with transmission to all three direct contact animals. Viral antigen detection was associated with mild rhinitis in the respiratory and olfactory epithelium.

Method
experimental infection; viral transmission assay; immunohistochemistry; RT-qPCR
Sample type
upper respiratory tract; respiratory epithelium; olfactory epithelium
Experimental system
in vivo animal experiment
Extraction confidence 1.00
Key finding

Pigs could not be infected intranasally with SARS-CoV-2, showing no viral RNA or antibody response.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus) were intranasally inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 but were not susceptible; all swabs, organ samples, and contact animals were negative for viral RNA, and none of the pigs seroconverted.

Method
experimental infection; RT-qPCR; serology
Sample type
nasal swabs; rectal swabs; organ samples
Experimental system
in vivo animal experiment
Extraction confidence 1.00
Key finding

Chickens were refractory to SARS-CoV-2 infection, showing no viral RNA or antibody response.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) were intranasally inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 but were not susceptible; all swabs, organ samples, and contact animals were negative for viral RNA, and none of the chickens seroconverted.

Method
experimental infection; RT-qPCR; serology
Sample type
oropharyngeal swabs; cloacal swabs; organ samples
Experimental system
in vivo animal experiment
4 records
Extraction confidence 0.95
Key finding

Fruit bats developed SARS-CoV-2-reactive and neutralizing antibodies after experimental infection.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Presence of SARS-CoV-2 reactive antibodies was tested by indirect immunofluorescence assay and virus neutralisation test in samples collected before inoculation and at autopsy. Prominent viral RNA loads... both species developed SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies reaching neutralising titres of up to 1/1024 after 21 days.

Method
indirect immunofluorescence assay; virus neutralisation test
Sample type
samples; serum
Extraction confidence 0.95
Key finding

Ferrets developed SARS-CoV-2-reactive and neutralizing antibodies after experimental infection.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Presence of SARS-CoV-2 reactive antibodies was tested by indirect immunofluorescence assay and virus neutralisation test in samples collected before inoculation and at autopsy. Prominent viral RNA loads... both species developed SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies reaching neutralising titres of up to 1/1024 after 21 days.

Method
indirect immunofluorescence assay; virus neutralisation test
Sample type
samples; serum
Extraction confidence 0.95
Key finding

Pigs showed no seroconversion after experimental SARS-CoV-2 inoculation.

Virus
Host
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Pigs and chickens were not susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. All swabs, organ samples, and contact animals were negative for viral RNA, and none of the pigs or chickens seroconverted.

Sample type
samples; serum
Extraction confidence 0.95
Key finding

Chickens showed no seroconversion after experimental SARS-CoV-2 inoculation.

Virus
Location
Not specified
Supporting text

Pigs and chickens were not susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. All swabs, organ samples, and contact animals were negative for viral RNA, and none of the pigs or chickens seroconverted.

Sample type
samples; serum