ArticlePloS one2024
Amazon tropical fishes of commercial interest show human-cell contamination but no SARS-CoV-2 in a real-life scenario.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmazonas was one of the most impacted Brazilian states by the COVID-19 pandemic. Mortality rates were high, and the health systems collapsed. It is important to identify possible intermediate reservoirs to avoid animal-to-human contamination. Several tropical fish are of commercial interest and are sold in large open-air markets in the region, representing a large economic and dietary importance.
objectivesThis study aimed to verify if fish species of commercial importance, aerosols, and fish wastewater in local open-air markets, at a major capital city in the western Brazilian Amazon, are contaminated by SARS-CoV-2.
methods488 fish, 50 aerosol, and 45 wastewater samples were analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. The samples were subjected to extraction using the BIOGENE Viral DNA/RNA Extraction kit, and the molecular diagnosis was tested for SARS-CoV-2 using the Bio-Manguinhos SARS-CoV-2 (EDx) Molecular Kit.
resultsIt was not possible to detect the virus (Ct≤40, for Gene E) in these samples, however, in 181 samples of fish it was possible to detect the human RP gene (Ct≤35, for the RP Gene), indicating human contact. There was a high number of COVID-19 diagnoses in all city districts in which the samples were collected, showing that SARS-CoV-2 was circulating.
conclusionThis study indicates that fish of local commercial importance do not carry SARS-CoV-2 viral particles, despite circulation of SARS-CoV-2, and are not an important source of animal-to-human contamination. Despite these results, the human RP gene was found detectable in fish, air, and fish wastewater, showing that such places may carry human pathogens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.