Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27479900›Full record

ArticleJournal of wildlife diseases2016

SEROSURVEY OF SELECTED ARBOVIRAL PATHOGENS IN FREE-RANGING, TWO-TOED SLOTHS (CHOLOEPUS HOFFMANNI) AND THREE-TOED SLOTHS (BRADYPUS VARIEGATUS) IN COSTA RICA, 2005-07.

Scott Medlin, Eleanor R Deardorff, Christopher S Hanley, Claire Vergneau-Grosset, Asia Siudak-Campfield, Rebecca Dallwig, Amelia Travassos da Rosa, Robert B Tesh, Maria Pia Martin, Scott C Weaver and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of wildlife diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. On the move: sloths and their epibionts as model mobile ecosystems.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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 at 9 institutions in 3 countries.

Scott Medlin1   Medlin Exotic Animal Medical Services, 14361 Metropolis Ave., Suite 102, Fort Myers, Florida 33912, USA.
Eleanor R Deardorff2   Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA.
Christopher S Hanley3   Saint Louis Zoo, 1 Government Dr., Saint Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.
Claire Vergneau-Grosset4   Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, 3200 rue Sicotte, Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 2M2, Canada.
Asia Siudak-Campfield5   Caring Hands Animal Hospital, 5659 Stone Rd., Centerville, Virginia 20120, USA.
Rebecca Dallwig6   Wisconsin Veterinary Referral Center, 360 Bluemound Rd., Waukesha, Wisconsin 53188, USA.
Amelia Travassos da Rosa7   Department of Pathology Research, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, Texas 77555, USA.
Robert B Tesh8   Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, Texas 77555, USA.
Maria Pia Martin9   Kids Saving the Rainforest Rescue Center, PO Box 297, 60601 Quepos, Puntarenas, Costa Rica.
Scott C Weaver10   Institute for Human Infections and Immunity and Department of Microbiology & Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Blvd., Galveston, Texas 77555-0610, USA.
Christopher Vaughan11   Department of Forestry and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin, 1630 Linden Dr., Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA.
Oscar Ramirez13   Escuela de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica.
Kurt K Sladky14   Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin, 2015 Linden Dr. W, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA.
Joanne Paul-Murphy15   Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, One Shields Ave., Davis, California 95616, USA.
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USUniversidad Nacional · CRCarolina Veterinary Specialists · USKids Saving the Rainforest · CRSaint Louis Zoo · USUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of New Mexico · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

World Reference Center for Emerging Viruses and Arboviruses (WRCEVA)R24AI120942 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI WEAVER, SCOTT C · 2016 to 2024
$8.5M
NIAID NIH HHS R24 AI120942
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We screened for antibodies to 16 arboviruses in four populations of free-ranging sloths in Costa Rica. Blood samples were taken from 16 Hoffman's two-toed sloths (HTSs; Choloepus hoffmanni ) and 26 brown-throated sloths (BTSs; Bradypus variegatus ) over a 3-yr period. We used serologic assays to detect antibodies against 10 arboviruses previously described in sloths (St. Louis encephalitis [SLEV], Changuinola, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, Ilheus [ILHV], Oropouche, Mayaro, Utinga, Murutucu, Punta Toro, and vesicular stomatitis [VSV] viruses) and six arboviruses not described in sloths (Rio Grande, West Nile [WNV], eastern equine encephalitis, Piry, Munguba, and La Crosse viruses). Overall, 80% of sloths had detectable antibodies to SLEV, 67% had antibodies to ILHV, 32% to Punta Toro virus, 30% to Changuinola virus, 15% to WNV, 14% to VSV, 11% to Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, and 10% to Rio Grande virus. No samples had detectable antibodies to the remaining eight viruses. We found a significant increase in prevalence of antibody to VSV in HTSs between 2005 and 2007, and for WNV antibody between 2005 and 2006. We found no significant differences in the prevalences of antibodies to the sampled viruses between the two locations. Antibody prevalences were significantly higher in HTSs than in BTSs for SLEV in 2005. Antibody-positive results for ILHV were likely due to cross-reaction with SLEV. The novel finding of antibodies to Rio Grande virus in sloths could be due to cross-reaction with another phlebovirus. These findings might have implications for land management and domestic animal health. Due to the nature of the study, we could not determine whether sloths could represent amplification hosts for these viruses, or whether they were only exposed and could be used as sentinel species. Further studies are needed to fully characterize arboviral exposure in sloths.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticAntibodies, ViralArbovirusesCosta RicaSlothsAntibodies, ViralArbovirusBradypus variegatusCholoepus hoffmanniserologysloth

Identifiers

PMID27479900
PMCPMC5189659
OpenAlexW2496298073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.