Explore the vast range of titles available.

Wildlife is reservoir of emerging viruses. Here we identified 27 families of mammalian viruses from 1981 wild animals and 194 zoo animals collected from south China between 2015 and 2022, isolated and characterized the pathogenicity of eight viruses. Bats harbor high diversity of coronaviruses, picornaviruses and astroviruses, and a potentially novel genus of Bornaviridae . In addition to the reported SARSr-CoV-2 and HKU4-CoV-like viruses, picornavirus and respiroviruses also likely circulate between bats and pangolins. Pikas harbor a new clade of Embecovirus and a new genus of arenaviruses. Further, the potential cross-species transmission of RNA viruses (paramyxovirus and astrovirus) and DNA viruses (pseudorabies virus, porcine circovirus 2, porcine circovirus 3 and parvovirus) between wildlife and domestic animals was identified, complicating wildlife protection and the prevention and control of these diseases in domestic animals. This study provides a nuanced view of the frequency of host-jumping events, as well as assessments of zoonotic risk. Monitoring the diversity of viruses infecting animals is important for assessing zoonotic risk. Here, the authors use metatranscriptomics to characterise the viromes of small mammals, pangolins, and zoo animals in China to identify potentially zoonotic viruses.

Animals such as raccoon dogs, mink and muskrats are farmed for fur and are sometimes used as food or medicinal products 1 , 2 , yet they are also potential reservoirs of emerging pathogens 3 . Here we performed single-sample metatranscriptomic sequencing of internal tissues from 461 individual fur animals that were found dead due to disease. We characterized 125 virus species, including 36 that were novel and 39 at potentially high risk of cross-species transmission, including zoonotic spillover. Notably, we identified seven species of coronaviruses, expanding their known host range, and documented the cross-species transmission of a novel canine respiratory coronavirus to raccoon dogs and of bat HKU5-like coronaviruses to mink, present at a high abundance in lung tissues. Three subtypes of influenza A virus—H1N2, H5N6 and H6N2—were detected in the lungs of guinea pig, mink and muskrat, respectively. Multiple known zoonotic viruses, such as Japanese encephalitis virus and mammalian orthoreovirus 4 , 5 , were detected in guinea pigs. Raccoon dogs and mink carried the highest number of potentially high-risk viruses, while viruses from the Coronaviridae , Paramyxoviridae and Sedoreoviridae families commonly infected multiple hosts. These data also reveal potential virus transmission between farmed animals and wild animals, and from humans to farmed animals, indicating that fur farming represents an important transmission hub for viral zoonoses. Fur farming represents an important hub of cross-species transmission for viral zoonoses.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 activity has intensified globally since 2021, increasingly causing mass mortality in wild birds and poultry and incidental infections in mammals 1 – 3 . However, the ecological and virological properties that underscore future mitigation strategies still remain unclear. Using epidemiological, spatial and genomic approaches, we demonstrate changes in the origins of resurgent HPAI H5 and reveal significant shifts in virus ecology and evolution. Outbreak data show key resurgent events in 2016–2017 and 2020–2021, contributing to the emergence and panzootic spread of H5N1 in 2021–2022. Genomic analysis reveals that the 2016–2017 epizootics originated in Asia, where HPAI H5 reservoirs are endemic. In 2020–2021, 2.3.4.4b H5N8 viruses emerged in African poultry, featuring mutations altering HA structure and receptor binding. In 2021–2022, a new H5N1 virus evolved through reassortment in wild birds in Europe, undergoing further reassortment with low-pathogenic avian influenza in wild and domestic birds during global dissemination. These results highlight a shift in the HPAI H5 epicentre beyond Asia and indicate that increasing persistence of HPAI H5 in wild birds is facilitating geographic and host range expansion, accelerating dispersion velocity and increasing reassortment potential. As earlier outbreaks of H5N1 and H5N8 were caused by more stable genomic constellations, these recent changes reflect adaptation across the domestic-bird–wild-bird interface. Elimination strategies in domestic birds therefore remain a high priority to limit future epizootics. Recent resurgences of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5 viruses have different origins and virus ecologies as their epicentres shift and viruses evolve, with changes indicating increased adaptation among domestic birds.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the substantial public health, economic, and societal consequences of virus spillover from a wildlife reservoir. Widespread human transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) also presents a new set of challenges when considering viral spillover from people to naïve wildlife and other animal populations. The establishment of new wildlife reservoirs for SARS-CoV-2 would further complicate public health control measures and could lead to wildlife health and conservation impacts. Given the likely bat origin of SARS-CoV-2 and related beta-coronaviruses (β-CoVs), free-ranging bats are a key group of concern for spillover from humans back to wildlife. Here, we review the diversity and natural host range of β-CoVs in bats and examine the risk of humans inadvertently infecting free-ranging bats with SARS-CoV-2. Our review of the global distribution and host range of β-CoV evolutionary lineages suggests that 40+ species of temperate-zone North American bats could be immunologically naïve and susceptible to infection by SARS-CoV-2. We highlight an urgent need to proactively connect the wellbeing of human and wildlife health during the current pandemic and to implement new tools to continue wildlife research while avoiding potentially severe health and conservation impacts of SARS-CoV-2 \"spilling back\" into free-ranging bat populations.

Changes in the epidemiology and ecology of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza are devastating wild bird and poultry populations, farms and communities, and wild mammals worldwide. Having originated in farmed poultry, H5N1 viruses are now spread globally by wild birds, with transmission to many mammal and avian species, resulting in 2024 in transmission among dairy cattle with associated human cases. These ecological changes pose challenges to mitigating the impacts of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza on wildlife, ecosystems, domestic animals, food security, and humans. H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza highlights the need for One Health approaches to pandemic prevention and preparedness, emphasising multisectoral collaborations among animal, environmental, and public health sectors. Action is needed to reduce future pandemic risks by preventing transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza among domestic and wild animals and people, focusing on upstream drivers of outbreaks, and ensuring rapid responses and risk assessments for zoonotic outbreaks. Political commitment and sustainable funding are crucial to implementing and maintaining prevention programmes, surveillance, and outbreak responses.

Humans have infected a wide range of animals with SARS-CoV-2 1 – 5 , but the establishment of a new natural animal reservoir has not been observed. Here we document that free-ranging white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) are highly susceptible to infection with SARS-CoV-2, are exposed to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants from humans and are capable of sustaining transmission in nature. Using real-time PCR with reverse transcription, we detected SARS-CoV-2 in more than one-third (129 out of 360, 35.8%) of nasal swabs obtained from O. virginianus in northeast Ohio in the USA during January to March 2021. Deer in six locations were infected with three SARS-CoV-2 lineages (B.1.2, B.1.582 and B.1.596). The B.1.2 viruses, dominant in humans in Ohio at the time, infected deer in four locations. We detected probable deer-to-deer transmission of B.1.2, B.1.582 and B.1.596 viruses, enabling the virus to acquire amino acid substitutions in the spike protein (including the receptor-binding domain) and ORF1 that are observed infrequently in humans. No spillback to humans was observed, but these findings demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 viruses have been transmitted in wildlife in the USA, potentially opening new pathways for evolution. There is an urgent need to establish comprehensive ‘One Health’ programmes to monitor the environment, deer and other wildlife hosts globally. More than one-third of wild deer tested in northeast Ohio showed evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection of human origin.

Outbreaks of emerging coronaviruses in the past two decades and the current pandemic of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that emerged in China highlight the importance of this viral family as a zoonotic public health threat. To gain a better understanding of coronavirus presence and diversity in wildlife at wildlife-human interfaces in three southern provinces in Viet Nam 2013-2014, we used consensus Polymerase Chain Reactions to detect coronavirus sequences. In comparison to previous studies, we observed high proportions of positive samples among field rats (34.0%, 239/702) destined for human consumption and insectivorous bats in guano farms (74.8%, 234/313) adjacent to human dwellings. Most notably among field rats, the odds of coronavirus RNA detection significantly increased along the supply chain from field rats sold by traders (reference group; 20.7% positivity, 39/188) by a factor of 2.2 for field rats sold in large markets (32.0%, 116/363) and 10.0 for field rats sold and served in restaurants (55.6%, 84/151). Coronaviruses were also detected in rodents on the majority of wildlife farms sampled (60.7%, 17/28). These coronaviruses were found in the Malayan porcupines (6.0%, 20/331) and bamboo rats (6.3%, 6/96) that are raised on wildlife farms for human consumption as food. We identified six known coronaviruses in bats and rodents, clustered in three Coronaviridae genera, including the Alpha-, Beta-, and Gammacoronaviruses. Our analysis also suggested either mixing of animal excreta in the environment or interspecies transmission of coronaviruses, as both bat and avian coronaviruses were detected in rodent feces on wildlife farms. The mixing of multiple coronaviruses, and their apparent amplification along the wildlife supply chain into restaurants, suggests maximal risk for end consumers and likely underpins the mechanisms of zoonotic spillover to people.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) outbreaks in wild birds and poultry are no longer a rare phenomenon in Europe. In the past 15 years, HPAI outbreaks—in particular those caused by H5 viruses derived from the A/Goose/Guangdong/1/1996 lineage that emerged in southeast Asia in 1996—have been occuring with increasing frequency in Europe. Between 2005 and 2020, at least ten HPAI H5 incursions were identified in Europe resulting in mass mortalities among poultry and wild birds. Until 2009, the HPAI H5 virus outbreaks in Europe were caused by HPAI H5N1 clade 2.2 viruses, while from 2014 onwards HPAI H5 clade 2.3.4.4 viruses dominated outbreaks, with abundant genetic reassortments yielding subtypes H5N1, H5N2, H5N3, H5N4, H5N5, H5N6 and H5N8. The majority of HPAI H5 virus detections in wild and domestic birds within Europe coincide with southwest/westward fall migration and large local waterbird aggregations during wintering. In this review we provide an overview of HPAI H5 virus epidemiology, ecology and evolution at the interface between poultry and wild birds based on 15 years of avian influenza virus surveillance in Europe, and assess future directions for HPAI virus research and surveillance, including the integration of whole genome sequencing, host identification and avian ecology into risk-based surveillance and analyses.

Research regarding zoonotic diseases often focuses on infectious diseases animals have given to humans. However, an increasing number of reports indicate that humans are transmitting pathogens to animals. Recent examples include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of published literature regarding reverse zoonoses and highlight the need for future work in this area. An initial broad literature review yielded 4763 titles, of which 4704 were excluded as not meeting inclusion criteria. After careful screening, 56 articles (from 56 countries over three decades) with documented human-to-animal disease transmission were included in this report. In these publications, 21 (38%) pathogens studied were bacterial, 16 (29%) were viral, 12 (21%) were parasitic, and 7 (13%) were fungal, other, or involved multiple pathogens. Effected animals included wildlife (n = 28, 50%), livestock (n = 24, 43%), companion animals (n = 13, 23%), and various other animals or animals not explicitly mentioned (n = 2, 4%). Published reports of reverse zoonoses transmission occurred in every continent except Antarctica therefore indicating a worldwide disease threat. As we see a global increase in industrial animal production, the rapid movement of humans and animals, and the habitats of humans and wild animals intertwining with great complexity, the future promises more opportunities for humans to cause reverse zoonoses. Scientific research must be conducted in this area to provide a richer understanding of emerging and reemerging disease threats. As a result, multidisciplinary approaches such as One Health will be needed to mitigate these problems.

Most hosts, including humans, are simultaneously or sequentially infected with several parasites. A key question is whether patterns of coinfection arise because infection by one parasite species affects susceptibility to others or because of inherent differences between hosts. We used time-series data from individual hosts in natural populations to analyze patterns of infection risk for a microparasite community, detecting large positive and negative effects of other infections. Patterns remain once variations in host susceptibility and exposure are accounted for. Indeed, effects are typically of greater magnitude, and explain more variation in infection risk, than the effects associated with host and environmental factors more commonly considered in disease studies. We highlight the danger of mistaken inference when considering parasite species in isolation rather than parasite communities.