4.6 Article

Shedding of a Low Pathogenic Avian Influenza Virus in a Common Synanthropic Mammal - The Cottontail Rabbit

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102513

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. United States Department of Agriculture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cottontails (Sylvilagus spp.) are common mammals throughout much of the U. S. and are often found in peridomestic settings, potentially interacting with livestock and poultry operations. If these animals are susceptible to avian influenza virus (AIV) infections and shed the virus in sufficient quantities they may pose a risk for movement of avian influenza viruses between wildlife and domestic animals in certain situations. Methodology/Principal Findings: To assess the viral shedding potential of AIV in cottontails, we nasally inoculated fourteen cottontails with a low pathogenic AIV (H4N6). All inoculated cottontails shed relatively large quantities of viral RNA both nasally (<= 10(6.94) PCR EID50 equivalents/mL) and orally (<= 10(5.09) PCR EID50 equivalents/mL). However, oral shedding tended to decline more quickly than did nasal shedding. No animals showed any obvious signs of disease throughout the study. Evidence of a serological response was found in all infected rabbits at 22 days post infection in convalescent sera. Conclusions/Significance: To our knowledge, cottontails have not been previously assessed for AIV shedding. However, it was obvious that they shed AIV RNA extensively via the nasal and oral routes. This is significant, as cottontails are widely distributed throughout the U. S. and elsewhere. These mammals are often found in highly peridomestic situations, such as farms, parks, and suburban neighborhoods, often becoming habituated to human activities. Thus, if infected these mammals could easily transport AIVs short distances.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available