4.7 Article

Susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV in Beagle Dogs

期刊

ANIMALS
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani13040624

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; MERS-CoV; dog; susceptibility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV in beagle dogs. The results demonstrated that dogs can be infected by both viruses, with viral shedding in nasal secretions, feces, and urine. Lung tissues of dogs inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV showed pathological changes and changes in lactate dehydrogenase levels.
Simple Summary Many studies have evaluated the spread and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV in humans; however, the ability of the virus to infect pets, including dogs, has not been fully clarified. Accordingly, in this study, we evaluated the ability of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV to infect beagle dogs. Our results showed that dogs can be infected by both viruses. Viral shedding into nasal secretions, feces, and urine was observed, and the lung tissues from the dogs inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV showed pathological changes, as well as changes in their lactate dehydrogenase levels. The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome, coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in unprecedented challenges to healthcare worldwide. In particular, the anthroponotic transmission of human coronaviruses has become a common concern among pet owners. Here, we experimentally inoculated beagle dogs with SARS-CoV-2 or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS-CoV) to compare their susceptibility to and the pathogenicity of these viruses. The dogs in this study exhibited weight loss and increased body temperatures and shed the viruses in their nasal secretions, feces, and urine. Pathologic changes were observed in the lungs of the dogs inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV. Additionally, clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, such as increased lactate dehydrogenase levels, were identified in the current study.

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

4.7
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