Sarbecoviruses of British Horseshoe Bats; Sequence Variation and Epidemiology

Horseshoe bats are the natural hosts of the Sarbecovirus subgenus that includes SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV- 2. Despite the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still little known about the underlying epidemiology and virology of sarbecoviruses in their natural hosts, leaving large gaps in our pandemic preparedness. Here we describe the results of PCR testing for sarbecoviruses in the two horseshoe bat species (Rhinolophus hipposideros and R. ferrumequinum) present in Great Britain, collected in 2021–22 during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic. One hundred and ninety seven R. hipposideros samples from 33 roost sites and 277 R. ferrumequinum samples from 20 roost sites were tested. No coronaviruses were detected in any samples from R. ferrumequinum whereas 44 and 56 % of individual and pooled (respectively) faecal samples from R. hipposideros across multiple roost sites tested positive in a sarbecovirus-specific qPCR. Full genome sequences were generated from three of the positive samples (and partial genomes from two more) using Illumina RNAseq on unenriched samples. Phylogenetic analyses showed that the obtained sequences belong to the same monophyletic clade, with >95 % similarity to previously-reported European isolates from R. hipposideros. The sequences differed in the presence or absence of accessory genes ORF 7b, 9b and 10. All lacked the furin cleavage site of SARS-CoV-2 spike gene and are therefore unlikely to be infective for humans. These results demonstrate a lack, or at least low incidence, of SARS-CoV-2 spill over from humans to susceptible GB bats, and confirm that sarbecovirus infection is widespread in R. hipposideros. Despite frequently sharing roost sites with R. ferrumequinum, no evidence of cross-species transmission was found

Assessing personality in San Joaquin kit fox in situ: efficacy of field-based experimental methods and implications for conservation management

Utilisation of animal personality has potential benefit for conservation management. Due to logistics of robust behavioural evaluation in situ, the majority of studies on wild animals involve taking animals into captivity for testing, potentially compromising results. Three in situ tests for evaluation of boldness in San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) were developed (ENOT: extended novel object test; RNOT: rapid novel object test; TH: trap/handling test). Each test successfully identified variation in boldness within its target age class(es). The TH test was suitable for use across all age classes. Tests were assessed for in situ suitability and for quantity/quality of data yielded. ENOT was rated as requiring high levels of time, cost and labour with greater likelihood of failure. However, it was rated highly for data quantity/quality. The TH test was rated as requiring little time, labour and cost, but yielding lower quality data. RNOT was rated in the middle. Each test had merit and could be adapted to suit project or species constraints. We recommend field-based evaluation of personality, reducing removal of animals from the wild and facilitating routine incorporation of personality assessment into conservation projects

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Stakeholder Perceptions of Success in Human-Carnivore Coexistence Interventions

Human-carnivore coexistence (HCC) on agricultural lands affects wildlife and human communities around the world, whereby a lack of HCC is a central concern for conservation and farmer livelihoods alike. For intervention strategies aimed at facilitating HCC to achieve their desired goals it is essential to understand how interventions and their success are perceived by different stakeholders. Using a grounded theory approach, interviews (n=31) were conducted with key stakeholders (commercial livestock farmers, conservationists and protected area managers) involved in HCC scenarios in Limpopo, South Africa. Interviews explored perceptions of successful intervention strategies (aimed at increasing HCC), factors that contribute to perceptions of strategy effectiveness and whether coexistence was a concept that stakeholders considered achievable. The use of grounded theory emphasised the individual nature and previously unexplored facets to HCC experiences. The majority of stakeholders based their measures of success on changes in livestock loss. Concern has been raised over the subjectivity and reliance on recall that this measure involves, potentially reducing its reliability as an indicator of functional effectiveness. However, it was relied on heavily by users of HCC interventions in our study and is therefore likely influential in subsequent behaviour and decision-making regarding the intervention. Nonetheless, perceptions of success were not just shaped by livestock loss but influenced by various social, cultural, economic and political factors emphasising the challenges of defining and achieving HCC goals. Perceptions of coexistence varied; some stakeholders considered farmer-carnivore coexistence to be impossible, but most indicated it was feasible with certain caveats. An important element of inter-stakeholder misunderstanding became apparent, especially regarding the respective perceptions of coexistence and responsibility for its achievement. Without fully understanding these perceptions and their underpinning factors, interventions may be restricted in their capacity to meet the expectations of all interested parties. The study highlights the need to understand and explore the perceptions of all stakeholders when implementing intervention strategies in order to properly define and evaluate the achievement of HCC goals

Sarbecoviruses of British Horseshoe Bats; sequence variation and epidemiology

Horseshoe bats are the natural hosts of the Sarbecovirus subgenus that includes SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV- 2. Despite the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still little known about the underlying epidemiology and virology of sarbecoviruses in their natural hosts, leaving large gaps in our pandemic preparedness. Here we describe the results of PCR testing for sarbecoviruses in the two horseshoe bat species (Rhinolophus hipposideros and R. ferrumequinum) present in Great Britain, collected in 2021–22 during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic. One hundred and ninety seven R. hipposideros samples from 33 roost sites and 277 R. ferrumequinum samples from 20 roost sites were tested. No coronaviruses were detected in any samples from R. ferrumequinum whereas 44 and 56 % of individual and pooled (respectively) faecal samples from R. hipposideros across multiple roost sites tested positive in a sarbecovirus-specific qPCR. Full genome sequences were generated from three of the positive samples (and partial genomes from two more) using Illumina RNAseq on unenriched samples. Phylogenetic analyses showed that the obtained sequences belong to the same monophyletic clade, with >95 % similarity to previously-reported European isolates from R. hipposideros. The sequences differed in the presence or absence of accessory genes ORF 7b, 9b and 10. All lacked the furin cleavage site of SARS-CoV-2 spike gene and are therefore unlikely to be infective for humans. These results demonstrate a lack, or at least low incidence, of SARS-CoV-2 spill over from humans to susceptible GB bats, and confirm that sarbecovirus infection is widespread in R. hipposideros. Despite frequently sharing roost sites with R. ferrumequinum, no evidence of cross-species transmission was found

Lack of detection of SARS-CoV-2 in British wildlife 2020-21 and first description of a stoat (Mustela erminea) Minacovirus

Repeat spillover of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) into new hosts has highlighted the critical role of cross-species transmission of coronaviruses and establishment of new reservoirs of virus in pandemic and epizootic spread of coronaviruses. Species particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 spillover include Mustelidae (mink, ferrets and related animals), cricetid rodents (hamsters and related animals), felids (domestic cats and related animals) and white-tailed deer. These predispositions led us to screen British wildlife with sarbecovirus-specific quantitative PCR and pan coronavirus PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 using samples collected during the human pandemic to establish if widespread spillover was occurring. Fourteen wildlife species (n=402) were tested, including: two red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), 101 badgers (Meles meles), two wild American mink (Neogale vison), 41 pine marten (Martes martes), two weasels (Mustela nivalis), seven stoats (Mustela erminea), 108 water voles (Arvicola amphibius), 39 bank voles (Myodes glareolous), 10 field voles (Microtus agrestis), 15 wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus), one common shrew (Sorex aranaeus), two pygmy shrews (Sorex minutus), two hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) and 75 Eurasian otters (Lutra lutra). No cases of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in any animals, but a novel minacovirus related to mink and ferret alphacoronaviruses was detected in stoats recently introduced to the Orkney Islands. This group of viruses is of interest due to pathogenicity in ferrets. The impact of this virus on the health of stoat populations remains to be established

Multiple novel Caliciviruses identified from stoats (Mustela erminea) in the United Kingdom

The Caliciviridae family, comprising positive-sense RNA viruses, is characterised by its non-enveloped, small virions, broad host range, and notable tendency for host switching. These viruses are primarily associated with gastroenteric disease, though they can lead to haemorrhagic or respiratory infections. Our study employed a metagenomics analysis of faecal samples from Stoats (Mustela erminea), identifying two novel Calicivirus species, tentatively named Stoat vesivirus and Stoat valovirus. Stoat vesivirus was identified in three samples (ST008, ST006, ST004), exhibiting a genome wide nucleotide identity of approximately 92%. The complete coding sequences of these samples were 8471 (ST004) and 8322 (ST006) nucleotides in length, respectively. Each comprised three open reading frames (ORF), closely resembling the Vesivirus mink calicivirus (China/2/2016), with 70-72% similarity in ORF1, 61-62% in ORF2 and 71% in ORF3. Phylogenetic analysis robustly supported Stoat vesivirus as belonging within the Vesivirus genus. The second Calivicirus (Stoat valovirus), detected solely in sample ST008, was 6527 nucleotides in length and with complete coding sequences present. It shared highest similarity with St-Valerien swine virus and Marmot norovirus HT16, showing 39.5% and 38.8% protein identity with ORF1 and 43.3% and 42.9% for VP1. Phylogenetic analysis suggested that while Stoat valovirus is borderline for new genus demarcation criteria, with greater than 60% divergence at ORF1, it clusters basally within the Valovirus genus, supporting its inclusion in this genus

Lack of detection of SARS-CoV-2 in British wildlife 2020–21 and first description of a stoat (Mustela erminea) Minacovirus

Repeat spillover of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) into new hosts has highlighted the critical role of cross-species transmission of coronaviruses and establishment of new reservoirs of virus in pandemic and epizootic spread of coronaviruses. Species particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 spillover include Mustelidae (mink, ferrets and related animals), cricetid rodents (hamsters and related animals), felids (domestic cats and related animals) and white-tailed deer. These predispositions led us to screen British wildlife with sarbecovirus-specific quantitative PCR and pan coronavirus PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 using samples collected during the human pandemic to establish if widespread spillover was occurring. Fourteen wildlife species (n=402) were tested, including: two red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), 101 badgers (Meles meles), two wild American mink (Neogale vison), 41 pine marten (Martes martes), two weasels (Mustela nivalis), seven stoats (Mustela erminea), 108 water voles (Arvicola amphibius), 39 bank voles (Myodes glareolous), 10 field voles (Microtus agrestis), 15 wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus), one common shrew (Sorex aranaeus), two pygmy shrews (Sorex minutus), two hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) and 75 Eurasian otters (Lutra lutra). No cases of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in any animals, but a novel minacovirus related to mink and ferret alphacoronaviruses was detected in stoats recently introduced to the Orkney Islands. This group of viruses is of interest due to pathogenicity in ferrets. The impact of this virus on the health of stoat populations remains to be established.</p