ArticleMolecular ecology2026
Validating Wing Biopsies for Blood-Borne Pathogen Characterization in Bats.
Article in Molecular ecology, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wildlife surveillance is critical for tracking disease emergence, characterizing pathogen diversity, and assessing spillover risks. Blood-borne pathogens are of particular interest for such efforts due to their global distribution, broad host taxa, and zoonotic potential. Despite the need to monitor blood-borne pathogens, blood collection is costly for biologists and sampled wildlife (i.e., time-consuming and stressful), hindering our ability to expand surveillance efforts. Using vascular tissues to detect infections can minimize sampling effort and stress on wildlife, but it is unclear how pathogen detection and characterization from these tissues compared to blood. To evaluate the reliability of using vascular tissues for detecting blood-borne pathogens in wildlife, we collected paired samples of blood and wing biopsies from common vampire bats (Desmodus rotundus) and molecularly screened for bartonellae, hemotropic mycoplasmas (hemoplasmas), and trypanosomes. Probabilities of detection were lower in wing tissues than in blood for all pathogens, possibly due to blood vessel avoidance when collecting the former. However, we detected infection in wing tissues of at least two individual bats for each pathogen. Paired-positive individuals mostly showed high sequence concordance between tissues, and sample sizes needed to detect a single infection and observed prevalences were similar (i.e., n = 10-39). Due to lower probabilities of infection in wing tissues compared to blood, we suggest that using these samples to estimate infection prevalence of blood-borne pathogens is not ideal. However, our results demonstrate that vascular tissues can be used for initial pathogen assessment and discovery to help target surveillance efforts in the future.
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.