4.6 Article

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Terrestrial Animals in Southern Nigeria: Potential Cases of Reverse Zoonosis

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v15051187

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; domestic animals; non-domestic animals; reverse zoonosis; surveillance; Nigeria

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in various animals in Nigeria and found that the virus can infect multiple animal species, including poultry, pigs, domestic ruminants, and lizards. This highlights the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to spread among animals and emphasizes the importance of continuous monitoring and intervention.
Since SARS-CoV-2 caused the COVID-19 pandemic, records have suggested the occurrence of reverse zoonosis of pets and farm animals in contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive humans in the Occident. However, there is little information on the spread of the virus among animals in contact with humans in Africa. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in various animals in Nigeria. Overall, 791 animals from Ebonyi, Ogun, Ondo, and Oyo States, Nigeria were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-qPCR (n = 364) and IgG ELISA (n = 654). SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates were 45.9% (RT-qPCR) and 1.4% (ELISA). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in almost all animal taxa and sampling locations except Oyo State. SARS-CoV-2 IgGs were detected only in goats from Ebonyi and pigs from Ogun States. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infectivity rates were higher in 2021 than in 2022. Our study highlights the ability of the virus to infect various animals. It presents the first report of natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in poultry, pigs, domestic ruminants, and lizards. The close human-animal interactions in these settings suggest ongoing reverse zoonosis, highlighting the role of behavioral factors of transmission and the potential for SARS-CoV-2 to spread among animals. These underscore the importance of continuous monitoring to detect and intervene in any eventual upsurge.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据