Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26469523›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Routes of Hendra Virus Excretion in Naturally-Infected Flying-Foxes: Implications for Viral Transmission and Spillover Risk.

Daniel Edson, Hume Field, Lee McMichael, Miranda Vidgen, Lauren Goldspink, Alice Broos, Deb Melville, Joanna Kristoffersen, Carol de Jong, Amanda McLaughlin and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Molecular determinants of cross-species transmission in emerging viral infections.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Viruses · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

5 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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel EdsonQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Hume FieldQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia; EcoHealth Alliance, New York, New York, United States of America.
Lee McMichaelQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Miranda VidgenQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Lauren GoldspinkQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Alice BroosQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Deb MelvilleQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Joanna KristoffersenQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Carol de JongQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Amanda McLaughlinQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
Rodney DavisElizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, NSW, Australia.
Nina KungQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
David JordanWollongbar Primary Industries Institute, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Wollongbar, NSW, Australia.
Peter KirklandElizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, NSW, Australia.
Craig SmithQueensland Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Coopers Plains, Queensland, Australia.
New South Wales Department of Primary Industries · AUEcoHealth Alliance · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pteropid bats or flying-foxes (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae) are the natural host of Hendra virus (HeV) which sporadically causes fatal disease in horses and humans in eastern Australia. While there is strong evidence that urine is an important infectious medium that likely drives bat to bat transmission and bat to horse transmission, there is uncertainty about the relative importance of alternative routes of excretion such as nasal and oral secretions, and faeces. Identifying the potential routes of HeV excretion in flying-foxes is important to effectively mitigate equine exposure risk at the bat-horse interface, and in determining transmission rates in host-pathogen models. The aim of this study was to identify the major routes of HeV excretion in naturally infected flying-foxes, and secondarily, to identify between-species variation in excretion prevalence. A total of 2840 flying-foxes from three of the four Australian mainland species (Pteropus alecto, P. poliocephalus and P. scapulatus) were captured and sampled at multiple roost locations in the eastern states of Queensland and New South Wales between 2012 and 2014. A range of biological samples (urine and serum, and urogenital, nasal, oral and rectal swabs) were collected from anaesthetized bats, and tested for HeV RNA using a qRT-PCR assay targeting the M gene. Forty-two P. alecto (n = 1410) had HeV RNA detected in at least one sample, and yielded a total of 78 positive samples, at an overall detection rate of 1.76% across all samples tested in this species (78/4436). The rate of detection, and the amount of viral RNA, was highest in urine samples (>serum, packed haemocytes >faecal >nasal >oral), identifying urine as the most plausible source of infection for flying-foxes and for horses. Detection in a urine sample was more efficient than detection in urogenital swabs, identifying the former as the preferred diagnostic sample. The detection of HeV RNA in serum is consistent with haematogenous spread, and with hypothesised latency and recrudesence in flying-foxes. There were no detections in P. poliocephalus (n = 1168 animals; n = 2958 samples) or P. scapulatus (n = 262 animals; n = 985 samples), suggesting (consistent with other recent studies) that these species are epidemiologically less important than P. alecto in HeV infection dynamics. The study is unprecedented in terms of the individual animal approach, the large sample size, and the use of a molecular assay to directly determine infection status. These features provide a high level of confidence in the veracity of our findings, and a sound basis from which to more precisely target equine risk mitigation strategies.

Indexed as

AnimalsAustraliaChiropteraFecesFemaleHendra VirusHenipavirus InfectionsHorse DiseasesHorsesMaleMouthNoseRectumSerumSpecies SpecificityUrine

Identifiers

PMID26469523
PMCPMC4607162
OpenAlexW2272444501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.