Association between Zika virus infection and microcephaly in Brazil, January to May, 2016: preliminary report of a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The microcephaly epidemic, which started in Brazil in 2015, was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by WHO in 2016. We report the preliminary results of a case-control study investigating the association between microcephaly and Zika virus infection during pregnancy. METHODS: We did this case-control study in eight public hospitals in Recife, Brazil. Cases were neonates with microcephaly. Two controls (neonates without microcephaly), matched by expected date of delivery and area of residence, were selected for each case. Serum samples of cases and controls and cerebrospinal fluid samples of cases were tested for Zika virus-specific IgM and by quantitative RT-PCR. Laboratory-confirmed Zika virus infection during pregnancy was defined as detection of Zika virus-specific IgM or a positive RT-PCR result in neonates. Maternal serum samples were tested by plaque reduction neutralisation assay for Zika virus and dengue virus. We estimated crude odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs using a median unbiased estimator for binary data in an unconditional logistic regression model. We estimated ORs separately for cases with and without radiological evidence of brain abnormalities. FINDINGS: Between Jan 15, 2016, and May 2, 2016, we prospectively recruited 32 cases and 62 controls. 24 (80%) of 30 mothers of cases had Zika virus infection compared with 39 (64%) of 61 mothers of controls (p=0·12). 13 (41%) of 32 cases and none of 62 controls had laboratory-confirmed Zika virus infection; crude overall OR 55·5 (95% CI 8·6-∞); OR 113·3 (95% CI 14·5-∞) for seven cases with brain abnormalities; and OR 24·7 (95% CI 2·9-∞) for four cases without brain abnormalities. INTERPRETATION: Our data suggest that the microcephaly epidemic is a result of congenital Zika virus infection. We await further data from this ongoing study to assess other potential risk factors and to confirm the strength of association in a larger sample size. FUNDING: Brazilian Ministry of Health, Pan American Health Organization, and Enhancing Research Activity in Epidemic Situations

Association between microcephaly, Zika virus infection, and other risk factors in Brazil: final report of a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: A Zika virus epidemic emerged in northeast Brazil in 2015 and was followed by a striking increase in congenital microcephaly cases, triggering a declaration of an international public health emergency. This is the final report of the first case-control study evaluating the potential causes of microcephaly: congenital Zika virus infection, vaccines, and larvicides. The published preliminary report suggested a strong association between microcephaly and congenital Zika virus infection. METHODS: We did a case-control study in eight public maternity hospitals in Recife, Brazil. Cases were neonates born with microcephaly, defined as a head circumference of 2 SD below the mean. Two controls without microcephaly were matched to each case by expected date of delivery and area of residence. We tested the serum of cases and controls and the CSF of cases for detection of Zika virus genomes with quantitative RT-PCR and for detection of IgM antibodies with capture-IgM ELISA. We also tested maternal serum with plaque reduction neutralisation assays for Zika and dengue viruses. We estimated matched crude and adjusted odds ratios with exact conditional logistic regression to determine the association between microcephaly and Zika virus infection. FINDINGS: We screened neonates born between Jan 15 and Nov 30, 2016, and prospectively recruited 91 cases and 173 controls. In 32 (35%) cases, congenital Zika virus infection was confirmed by laboratory tests and no controls had confirmed Zika virus infections. 69 (83%) of 83 cases with known birthweight were small for gestational age, compared with eight (5%) of 173 controls. The overall matched odds ratio was 73·1 (95% CI 13·0-∞) for microcephaly and Zika virus infection after adjustments. Neither vaccination during pregnancy or use of the larvicide pyriproxyfen was associated with microcephaly. Results of laboratory tests for Zika virus and brain imaging results were available for 79 (87%) cases; within these cases, ten were positive for Zika virus and had cerebral abnormalities, 13 were positive for Zika infection but had no cerebral abnormalities, and 11 were negative for Zika virus but had cerebral abnormalities. INTERPRETATION: The association between microcephaly and congenital Zika virus infection was confirmed. We provide evidence of the absence of an effect of other potential factors, such as exposure to pyriproxyfen or vaccines (tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis, measles and rubella, or measles, mumps, and rubella) during pregnancy, confirming the findings of an ecological study of pyriproxyfen in Pernambuco and previous studies on the safety of Tdap vaccine administration during pregnancy. FUNDING: Brazilian Ministry of Health, Pan American Health Organization, and Enhancing Research Activity in Epidemic Situations

Zika-related adverse outcomes in a cohort of pregnant women with rash in Pernambuco, Brazil.

BACKGROUND: While Zika virus (ZIKV) is now widely recognized as a teratogen, the frequency and full spectrum of adverse outcomes of congenital ZIKV infection remains incompletely understood. METHODS: Participants in the MERG cohort of pregnant women with rash, recruited from the surveillance system from December/2015-June/2017. Exposure definition was based on a combination of longitudinal data from molecular, serologic (IgM and IgG3) and plaque reduction neutralization tests for ZIKV. Children were evaluated by a team of clinical specialists and by transfontanelle ultrasound and were classified as having microcephaly and/or other signs/symptoms consistent with congenital Zika syndrome (CZS). Risks of adverse outcomes were quantified according to the relative evidence of a ZIKV infection in pregnancy. FINDINGS: 376 women had confirmed and suspected exposure to ZIKV. Among evaluable children born to these mothers, 20% presented with an adverse outcome compatible with exposure to ZIKV during pregnancy. The absolute risk of microcephaly was 2.9% (11/376), of calcifications and/or ventriculomegaly was 7.2% (13/180), of additional neurologic alterations was 5.3% (13/245), of ophthalmologic abnormalities was 7% (15/214), and of dysphagia was 1.8% (4/226). Less than 1% of the children experienced abnormalities across all of the domains simultaneously. Interpretation: Although approximately one-fifth of children with confirmed and suspected exposure to ZIKV in pregnancy presented with at least one abnormality compatible with CZS, the manifestations presented more frequently in isolation than in combination. Due to the rare nature of some outcomes and the possibility of later manifestations, large scale individual participant data meta-analysis and the long-term evaluation of children are imperative to identify the full spectrum of this syndrome and to plan actions to reduce damages

Bradykinin enhances Sindbis virus infection in human brain microvascular endothelial cells

Submitted by Nuzia Santos ([email protected]) on 2014-12-04T15:11:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Bradykinin enhances Sindbis virus infection in human brain microvascular endothelial cells.pdf: 1158448 bytes, checksum: 5c208b59273623f263acf5a38adfebf2 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Nuzia Santos ([email protected]) on 2014-12-04T15:16:21Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Bradykinin enhances Sindbis virus infection in human brain microvascular endothelial cells.pdf: 1158448 bytes, checksum: 5c208b59273623f263acf5a38adfebf2 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-04T15:16:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Bradykinin enhances Sindbis virus infection in human brain microvascular endothelial cells.pdf: 1158448 bytes, checksum: 5c208b59273623f263acf5a38adfebf2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Microbiologia Prof. Paulo de Góes. Departamento de Virologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. BrasilUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Microbiologia Prof. Paulo de Góes. Departamento de Virologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. BrasilUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Biofísica Carlos Chagas Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. BrasilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Aggeu Magalhães. Laboratório de Virologia e Terapia Experimental. Recife, PE, BrasilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas René Rachou. Laboratório de Imunologia Celular e Molecular. Belo Horizonte, MG, BrasilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Aggeu Magalhães. Laboratório de Virologia e Terapia Experimental. Recife, PE, BrasilUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Microbiologia Prof. Paulo de Góes. Departamento de Imunologia Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrasilUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Biofísica Carlos Chagas Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. BrasilUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Microbiologia Prof. Paulo de Góes. Departamento de Virologia. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. BrasilSindbis virus (SINV) induces inflammatory and vasoactive responses that are associated with rash and arthritis in human infections. The mechanisms underlying infection-associated microvasculopathy are still unknown. We investigated whether endothelial cells infected by SINV are differentially responsive to bradykinin (BK), a potent inducer of inflammatory edema in a broad range of infectious diseases. Human endothelial cells (HBMECs) infected with SINV presented an upregulation of bradykinin B2 receptors (BK2R) expression. Also, BK reduced SINV-induced apoptosis and enhanced virus replication in HBMECs in a way dependent on BK2R, PI3 kinase and ERK signaling. Strikingly, intracerebral infection of mice in the presence of a BK2R antagonist reduced the local viral load. Our data suggest that SINV infection renders human endothelial cells hypersensitive to BK, which increases host cell survival and viral replication. Ongoing studies may clarify if the deregulation of the kinin pathway contributes to infection-associated vasculopathies in life-threatening arbovirus infection

Initial Description of the Presumed Congenital Zika Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an initial description of the congenital syndrome presumably associated with infection by Zika virus compared with other syndromes including congenital infections of established etiologies. METHODS: We provide an overview of a published case series of 35 cases, a clinical series of 104 cases, and published and unpublished reports of clinical and laboratory findings describing cases diagnosed since the beginning of the epidemic of microcephaly in Brazil. RESULTS: About 60% to 70% of mothers report rash during pregnancy; mainly in the first trimester. Principal features are microcephaly, facial disproportionality, cutis girata, hypertonia/spasticity, hyperreflexia, and irritability; abnormal neuroimages include calcifications, ventriculomegaly, and lissencephaly. Hearing and visual abnormalities may be present. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggest that severe congenital abnormalities are linked to Zika virus infection. Cases have severe abnormalities, and although sharing many characteristics with congenital abnormalities associated with other viral infections, abnormalities presumably linked to the Zika virus may have distinguishing characteristics. These severe neurologic abnormalities may result in marked mental retardation and motor disabilities for many surviving offspring. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Affected nations need to prepare to provide complex and costly multidisciplinary care that children diagnosed with this new congenital syndrome will require

Field and classroom initiatives for portable sequence-based monitoring of dengue virus in Brazil

This work was supported by Decit, SCTIE, Brazilian Ministry of Health, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico - CNPq (440685/ 2016-8, 440856/2016-7 and 421598/2018-2), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES - (88887.130716/2016-00), European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ZIKAlliance Grant Agreement (734548), STARBIOS (709517), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro – FAPERJ (E-26/2002.930/2016), International Development Research Centre (IDRC) Canada (108411-001), European Union’s Horizon 2020 under grant agreements ZIKACTION (734857) and ZIKAPLAN (734548).Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil / Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil / Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Leônidas e Maria Deane. Laboratório de Ecologia de Doenças Transmissíveis na Amazônia. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado da Bahia. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Milton Bezerra Sobral. Recife, PE, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso. Cuiabá, MT, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Distrito Federal. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Universidade Federal da Bahia. Vitória da Conquista, BA, Brazil.Laboratorio Central de Salud Pública. Asunción, Paraguay.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Bio-Manguinhos. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilMinistério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. San Lorenzo, Paraguay.Secretaria de Estado de Saúde de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Milton Bezerra Sobral. Recife, PE, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Distrito Federal. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde de Feira de Santana. Feira de Santana, Ba, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Hospital das Forças Armadas. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical. Lisboa, Portugal.University of Sydney. School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences. Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity. Sydney, NSW, Australia.University of KwaZulu-Natal. College of Health Sciences. KwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Platform. Durban, South Africa.University of Oxford. Peter Medawar Building. Department of Zoology. Oxford, UK.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Universidade de Brasília. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Salvador. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Hantaviroses e Rickettsioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Leônidas e Maria Deane. Laboratório de Ecologia de Doenças Transmissíveis na Amazônia. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Paraná. Curitiba, PR, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Rondônia. Porto Velho, RO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Amazonas. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte. Natal, RN, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso. Cuiabá, MT, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Noel Nutels. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Instituto Adolfo Lutz. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.University of Oxford. Peter Medawar Building. Department of Zoology. Oxford, UK.Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Virales Humanas Dr. Julio Maiztegui. Pergamino, Argentina.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Instituto de Salud Pública de Chile. Santiago, Chile.Instituto de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos Dr. Manuel Martínez Báez. Ciudad de México, México.Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Infecciosas Dr Carlos G Malbrán. Buenos Aires, Argentina.Ministerio de Salud Pública de Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay.Instituto Costarricense de Investigación y Enseñanza em Nutrición y Salud. Tres Ríos, Costa Rica.Instituto Nacional de Investigacion en Salud Publica Dr Leopoldo Izquieta Pérez. Guayaquil, Ecuador.Instituto Nacional de Investigacion en Salud Publica Dr Leopoldo Izquieta Pérez. Guayaquil, Ecuador.Universidade Federal de Pernambuco. Recife, PE, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte. MG, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde de Feira de Santana. Feira de Santana, BA, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Brazil experienced a large dengue virus (DENV) epidemic in 2019, highlighting a continuous struggle with effective control and public health preparedness. Using Oxford Nanopore sequencing, we led field and classroom initiatives for the monitoring of DENV in Brazil, generating 227 novel genome sequences of DENV1-2 from 85 municipalities (2015–2019). This equated to an over 50% increase in the number of DENV genomes from Brazil available in public databases. Using both phylogenetic and epidemiological models we retrospectively reconstructed the recent transmission history of DENV1-2. Phylogenetic analysis revealed complex patterns of transmission, with both lineage co-circulation and replacement. We identified two lineages within the DENV2 BR-4 clade, for which we estimated the effective reproduction number and pattern of seasonality. Overall, the surveillance outputs and training initiative described here serve as a proof-of-concept for the utility of real-time portable sequencing for research and local capacity building in the genomic surveillance of emerging viruses

ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS: a data set of bird morphological traits from the Atlantic forests of South America

Scientists have long been trying to understand why the Neotropical region holds the highest diversity of birds on Earth. Recently, there has been increased interest in morphological variation between and within species, and in how climate, topography, and anthropogenic pressures may explain and affect phenotypic variation. Because morphological data are not always available for many species at the local or regional scale, we are limited in our understanding of intra- and interspecies spatial morphological variation. Here, we present the ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS, a data set that includes measurements of up to 44 morphological traits in 67,197 bird records from 2,790 populations distributed throughout the Atlantic forests of South America. This data set comprises information, compiled over two centuries (1820–2018), for 711 bird species, which represent 80% of all known bird diversity in the Atlantic Forest. Among the most commonly reported traits are sex (n = 65,717), age (n = 63,852), body mass (n = 58,768), flight molt presence (n = 44,941), molt presence (n = 44,847), body molt presence (n = 44,606), tail length (n = 43,005), reproductive stage (n = 42,588), bill length (n = 37,409), body length (n = 28,394), right wing length (n = 21,950), tarsus length (n = 20,342), and wing length (n = 18,071). The most frequently recorded species are Chiroxiphia caudata (n = 1,837), Turdus albicollis (n = 1,658), Trichothraupis melanops (n = 1,468), Turdus leucomelas (n = 1,436), and Basileuterus culicivorus (n = 1,384). The species recorded in the greatest number of sampling localities are Basileuterus culicivorus (n = 243), Trichothraupis melanops (n = 242), Chiroxiphia caudata (n = 210), Platyrinchus mystaceus (n = 208), and Turdus rufiventris (n = 191). ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS (ABT) is the most comprehensive data set on measurements of bird morphological traits found in a biodiversity hotspot; it provides data for basic and applied research at multiple scales, from individual to community, and from the local to the macroecological perspectives. No copyright or proprietary restrictions are associated with the use of this data set. Please cite this data paper when the data are used in publications or teaching and educational activities. © 2019 The Authors. Ecology © 2019 The Ecological Society of Americ

ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS

Scientists have long been trying to understand why the Neotropical region holds the highest diversity of birds on Earth. Recently, there has been increased interest in morphological variation between and within species, and in how climate, topography, and anthropogenic pressures may explain and affect phenotypic variation. Because morphological data are not always available for many species at the local or regional scale, we are limited in our understanding of intra- and interspecies spatial morphological variation. Here, we present the ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS, a data set that includes measurements of up to 44 morphological traits in 67,197 bird records from 2,790 populations distributed throughout the Atlantic forests of South America. This data set comprises information, compiled over two centuries (1820–2018), for 711 bird species, which represent 80% of all known bird diversity in the Atlantic Forest. Among the most commonly reported traits are sex (n = 65,717), age (n = 63,852), body mass (n = 58,768), flight molt presence (n = 44,941), molt presence (n = 44,847), body molt presence (n = 44,606), tail length (n = 43,005), reproductive stage (n = 42,588), bill length (n = 37,409), body length (n = 28,394), right wing length (n = 21,950), tarsus length (n = 20,342), and wing length (n = 18,071). The most frequently recorded species are Chiroxiphia caudata (n = 1,837), Turdus albicollis (n = 1,658), Trichothraupis melanops (n = 1,468), Turdus leucomelas (n = 1,436), and Basileuterus culicivorus (n = 1,384). The species recorded in the greatest number of sampling localities are Basileuterus culicivorus (n = 243), Trichothraupis melanops (n = 242), Chiroxiphia caudata (n = 210), Platyrinchus mystaceus (n = 208), and Turdus rufiventris (n = 191). ATLANTIC BIRD TRAITS (ABT) is the most comprehensive data set on measurements of bird morphological traits found in a biodiversity hotspot; it provides data for basic and applied research at multiple scales, from individual to community, and from the local to the macroecological perspectives. No copyright or proprietary restrictions are associated with the use of this data set. Please cite this data paper when the data are used in publications or teaching and educational activities. © 2019 The Authors. Ecology © 2019 The Ecological Society of Americ