Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23378666›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2013

A comparison of bats and rodents as reservoirs of zoonotic viruses: are bats special?

Angela D Luis, David T S Hayman, Thomas J O'Shea, Paul M Cryan, Amy T Gilbert, Juliet R C Pulliam, James N Mills, Mary E Timonin, Craig K R Willis, Andrew A Cunningham and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 389 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
389citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

389 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The microbiome of bat guano: for what is this knowledge important?Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Changing landscapes, shifting reservoirs: land-use change andApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. A systematic review and meta-analysis ofOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

329 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Angela D LuisDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA. angela.d.luis@gmail.com
David T S Hayman
Thomas J O'Shea
Paul M Cryan
Amy T Gilbert
Juliet R C Pulliam
James N Mills
Mary E Timonin
Craig K R Willis
Andrew A Cunningham
Anthony R Fooks
Charles E Rupprecht
James L N Wood
Colleen T Webb

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bats are the natural reservoirs of a number of high-impact viral zoonoses. We present a quantitative analysis to address the hypothesis that bats are unique in their propensity to host zoonotic viruses based on a comparison with rodents, another important host order. We found that bats indeed host more zoonotic viruses per species than rodents, and we identified life-history and ecological factors that promote zoonotic viral richness. More zoonotic viruses are hosted by species whose distributions overlap with a greater number of other species in the same taxonomic order (sympatry). Specifically in bats, there was evidence for increased zoonotic viral richness in species with smaller litters (one young), greater longevity and more litters per year. Furthermore, our results point to a new hypothesis to explain in part why bats host more zoonotic viruses per species: the stronger effect of sympatry in bats and more viruses shared between bat species suggests that interspecific transmission is more prevalent among bats than among rodents. Although bats host more zoonotic viruses per species, the total number of zoonotic viruses identified in bats (61) was lower than in rodents (68), a result of there being approximately twice the number of rodent species as bat species. Therefore, rodents should still be a serious concern as reservoirs of emerging viruses. These findings shed light on disease emergence and perpetuation mechanisms and may help lead to a predictive framework for identifying future emerging infectious virus reservoirs.

Indexed as

AnimalsChiropteraDisease ReservoirsGenome, ViralHost-Pathogen InteractionsRodentiaSympatryVirus DiseasesZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID23378666
PMCPMC3574368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.