ArticlePloS one2025
Infectious potential and circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in wild rats.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Viral pathogens in urban rats: A one health systematic review of global surveillance evidence.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- The coronaviral landscape across diverse mammalian species in the Northeastern United States.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Lung infection in orally inoculated SARS-CoV-2 hamsters.PloS one · 2025Article
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
Since the beginning of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, a wide range of animal species (pets, mink…) have been naturally infected with this betacoronavirus. The emergence of new variants has increased the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to infect species that were not susceptible to the "original" SARS-CoV-2, such as mice and rats. This work attempted to evaluate the role of urban rats in the SARS-CoV-2 transmission by combining surveillance studies of rat populations in urban environments, in vivo experimental inoculation of SARS-CoV-2 and comparative viral-receptor interaction in silico analyses. We studied the circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in wild Rattus norvegicus (n = 401) captured in urban areas and sewage systems of several French cities. Except for 3 inconclusive samples (2/75 from Bordeaux and 1/261 from Lyon) none of the 353 sera tested showed anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by microsphere immunoassay. However, the 3 inconclusive sera samples were negative by virus neutralisation assay. No SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was detected in all lungs collected from the 401 captured urban brown rats. In complement, four rat groups (two wild-type colonies, Rattus norvegicus and Rattus rattus, and two laboratory strains, Sprague-Dawley and Wistar) were inoculated with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5. At 4 days post-inoculation, no infectious viral particles were detected in the lungs and upper respiratory tract (URT) while viral RNA was detected at a low level only in the URT of all groups. In addition, seroconversion was observed 14 days after inoculation in the four groups. By molecular modelling, the Omicron BA.5 receptor binding domain (RBD) had lower affinities for Rattus norvegicus and Rattus rattus ACE2 than Homo sapiens ACE2. Based on these results the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 was unable to infect laboratory and wild type rats. In addition, Rattus norvegicus collected for this study in different areas of France were not infected with SARS-CoV-2.
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.