Joanne M Santini1, Sarah J L Edwards2. 1. Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK. 2. Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
The emergence of the current global COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is zoonotic, probably originating from bats, with the intermediate species as yet unidentified despite initial pointers to pangolins. Concern is growing over possible anthroponosis of SARS-CoV-2, especially in light of its recent discovery and spread on mink farms in the Netherlands and in Spain, with the suggestion that there was transmission back to humans (ie, reverse anthroponosis). This cycle of transmission on a larger scale does not bode well for the prospect of re-emergence in humans if left unchecked, unlike severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV).We evaluated evidence from widely reported real-world cases and peer-reviewed articles of experimental studies premised on infection requiring interactions between the SARS-CoV-2 spike and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor proteins. Six in vivo studies (all with small sample sizes) involved direct animal inoculation experiments and one was an in vitro study (appendix pp 1–2). Three additional studies presented structural models to provide the groundwork for urgent critical appraisal of possible future chains of transmission (appendix p 3).In addition to the first reports of anthroponotic infection of cats (domestic and wild) and dogs, the experimental evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection of animals has been shown for a variety of mammals, including monkeys, ferrets, cats, and hamsters (appendix pp 1–2).1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Because the main purpose of these studies is to find suitable animal models of human disease or the identification of the intermediate hosts, they do not clearly distinguish between infection, disease, and transmission; one study reported implausibly negative results across all species, in contrast to all the other studies. Conflicting experimental studies were reported for pigs, where a SARS-CoV-2 inoculation showed no infection, whereas the virus was found to infect HeLa cells expressing the pig ACE2 receptor. The latter study is supported by all three computational model predictions of infectivity in wild boar and pigs.9, 10Where experimental data do not exist, or where they conflict, modelling the spike–ACE2 interactions, especially at the protein–protein interface, provides further evidence for the potential of infection. The results of these computational studies suggest attention should be paid to rabbits, sheep, goats, cattle, and horses because of the implications of infection (appendix p 3). These cases are further supported by data that show spike–ACE2 receptor interactions. Another important case is the absence of experimental infection of mice (and presumably rats; appendix p 1), which is also supported by computational data (appendix p 3). Although these results were negative, additional data have shown successful infection of mice by SARS-CoV-2 and clinical manifestations of COVID-19, where a selection of experiments resulted in a SARS-CoV-2 variant, which had a single amino acid substitution in the spike protein (appendix p 3). Neither experimental nor computational studies alone will confirm that a species is unable to be infected by SARS-CoV-2. The difference between infection and clinical manifestations of disease, as well as the possibility of asymptomatic cases in animals, highlights the need for a combination of approaches, including real-word epidemiology and diagnostics, requiring the sampling of large numbers of animals to determine infection.Once SARS-CoV-2 circulates more widely beyond humans, it will be challenging to trace natural transmission between species because the viral genome is essentially identical in humans, and existing epidemiological methods of contact tracing are equipped to identify transmission between humans to interrupt it. The aforementioned studies thus prematurely categorise the risks as low, medium, or high when based on early probability estimates of simple infection. A low probability of a high-impact outcome, such as a new reservoir species also needs to be considered. Assessing these risks includes reviewing our ability to isolate, protect, or contain animals in domestic, agricultural, and wildlife settings. Domestic species whose population numbers are sufficient to act as a reservoir include cats and dogs, which is consistent with the case reports noted earlier, and studies showing or predicting infectivity. Farmed wildlife such as mink and pigs could also become reservoir species. In addition to wild bats, rodents could potentially act as a reservoir species because they have sufficient numbers and densities for continuous transmission; this possibility is supported by a modelling study that predicted squirrels to be infected, yet other studies showed a probable low or no risk of infection for mice and rats. These considerations should lead to strategies for implementing early surveillance and precautionary mitigation measures on different species.
Authors: Sin Fun Sia; Li-Meng Yan; Alex W H Chin; Kevin Fung; Ka-Tim Choy; Alvina Y L Wong; Prathanporn Kaewpreedee; Ranawaka A P M Perera; Leo L M Poon; John M Nicholls; Malik Peiris; Hui-Ling Yen Journal: Nature Date: 2020-05-14 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Vincent J Munster; Friederike Feldmann; Brandi N Williamson; Neeltje van Doremalen; Lizzette Pérez-Pérez; Jonathan Schulz; Kimberly Meade-White; Atsushi Okumura; Julie Callison; Beniah Brumbaugh; Victoria A Avanzato; Rebecca Rosenke; Patrick W Hanley; Greg Saturday; Dana Scott; Elizabeth R Fischer; Emmie de Wit Journal: Nature Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Barry Rockx; Thijs Kuiken; Sander Herfst; Theo Bestebroer; Mart M Lamers; Bas B Oude Munnink; Dennis de Meulder; Geert van Amerongen; Judith van den Brand; Nisreen M A Okba; Debby Schipper; Peter van Run; Lonneke Leijten; Reina Sikkema; Ernst Verschoor; Babs Verstrepen; Willy Bogers; Jan Langermans; Christian Drosten; Martje Fentener van Vlissingen; Ron Fouchier; Rik de Swart; Marion Koopmans; Bart L Haagmans Journal: Science Date: 2020-04-17 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Helen E Everett; Fabian Z X Lean; Alexander M P Byrne; Pauline M van Diemen; Shelley Rhodes; Joe James; Benjamin Mollett; Vivien J Coward; Paul Skinner; Caroline J Warren; Kevin R Bewley; Samantha Watson; Shellene Hurley; Kathryn A Ryan; Yper Hall; Hugh Simmons; Alejandro Núñez; Miles W Carroll; Ian H Brown; Sharon M Brookes Journal: Viruses Date: 2021-01-15 Impact factor: 5.048
Authors: Najmul Haider; Peregrine Rothman-Ostrow; Abdinasir Yusuf Osman; Liã Bárbara Arruda; Laura Macfarlane-Berry; Linzy Elton; Margaret J Thomason; Dorothy Yeboah-Manu; Rashid Ansumana; Nathan Kapata; Leonard Mboera; Jonathan Rushton; Timothy D McHugh; David L Heymann; Alimuddin Zumla; Richard A Kock Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2020-11-26