Biosafety Practices When Working with Bats: A Guide to Field Research Considerations.

Introduction: Field work with bats is an important contribution to many areas of research in environmental biology and ecology, as well as microbiology. Work with bats poses hazards such as bites and scratches, and the potential for exposure to infectious pathogens such as rabies virus. It also exposes researchers to many other potential hazards inherent to field work, such as environmental conditions, delayed emergency responses, or challenging work conditions. Methods: This article discusses the considerations for a thorough risk assessment process around field work with bats, pre- and post-occupational health considerations, and delves into specific considerations for areas related to biosafety concerns-training, personal protective equipment, safety consideration in field methods, decontamination, and waste. It also touches on related legal and ethical issues that sit outside the realm of biosafety, but which must be addressed during the planning process. Discussion: Although the focal point of this article is bat field work located in northern and central America, the principles and practices discussed here are applicable to bat work elsewhere, as well as to field work with other animal species, and should promote careful considerations of how to safely conduct field work to protect both researchers and animals.

Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2021.

OBJECTIVE: To provide epidemiological information on the occurrence of animal and human rabies in the US during 2021 and summaries of 2021 rabies surveillance for Canada and Mexico. PROCEDURES: State and territorial public health departments and USDA Wildlife Services provided data on animals submitted for rabies testing in 2021. Data were analyzed temporally and geographically to assess trends in domestic animal and wildlife rabies cases. RESULTS: During 2021, 54 US jurisdictions reported 3,663 rabid animals, representing an 18.2% decrease from the 4,479 cases reported in 2020. Texas (n = 456 [12.4%]), Virginia (297 [8.1%]), Pennsylvania (287 [7.8%]), North Carolina (248 [6.8%]), New York (237 [6.5%]), California (220 [6.0%]), and New Jersey (201 [5.5%]) together accounted for > 50% of all animal rabies cases reported in 2021. Of the total reported rabid animals, 3,352 (91.5%) involved wildlife, with bats (n = 1,241 [33.9%]), raccoons (1,030 [28.1%]), skunks (691 [18.9%]), and foxes (314 [8.6%]) representing the primary hosts confirmed with rabies. Rabid cats (216 [5.9%]), cattle (40 [1.1%]), and dogs (36 [1.0%]) accounted for 94% of rabies cases involving domestic animals in 2021. Five human rabies deaths were reported in 2021. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The number of animal rabies cases reported in the US decreased significantly during 2021; this is thought to be due to factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To provide epidemiological information on animal and human cases of rabies in the US during 2020 and summaries of 2020 rabies surveillance for Canada and Mexico. ANIMALS: All animals submitted for laboratory diagnosis of rabies in the US during 2020. PROCEDURES: State and territorial public health departments and USDA Wildlife Services provided 2020 rabies surveillance data. Data were analyzed temporally and geographically to assess trends in domestic and wildlife rabies cases. RESULTS: During 2020, 54 jurisdictions submitted 87,895 animal samples for rabies testing, of which 85,483 (97.3%) had a conclusive (positive or negative) test result. Of these, 4,479 (5.2%) tested positive for rabies, representing a 4.5% decrease from the 4,690 cases reported in 2019. Texas (n = 580 [12.9%]), Pennsylvania (371 [8.3%]), Virginia (351 [7.8%]), New York (346 [7.7%]), North Carolina (301 [6.7%]), New Jersey (257 [5.7%]), Maryland (256 [5.7%]), and California (248 [5.5%]) together accounted for > 60% of all animal rabies cases reported in 2020. Of the total reported rabid animals, 4,090 (91.3%) involved wildlife, with raccoons (n = 1,403 [31.3%]), bats (1,400 [31.3%]), skunks (846 [18.9%]), and foxes (338 [7.5%]) representing the primary hosts confirmed with rabies. Rabid cats (288 [6.4%]), cattle (43 [1.0%]), and dogs (37 [0.8%]) accounted for 95% of rabies cases involving domestic animals in 2020. No human rabies cases were reported in 2020. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For the first time since 2006, the number of samples submitted for rabies testing in the US was < 90,000; this is thought to be due to factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as similar decreases in sample submission were also reported by Canada and Mexico.

Assessing the SARS-CoV-2 threat to wildlife: Potential risk to a broad range of mammals.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can infect animals, however, the whole range of potential hosts is still unknown. This work makes an assessment of wildlife susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 by analyzing the similarities of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) and Transmembrane Protease, Serine 2 (TMPRSS2)-both recognized as receptors and protease for coronavirus spike protein-and the genetic variation of the viral protein spike in the recognition sites. The sequences from different mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians, and the sequence from SARS-CoV-2 S protein were obtained from the GenBank. Comparisons of aligned sequences were made by selecting amino acids residues of ACE2, TMPRSS2 and S protein; phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using the same sequences. The species susceptibility was ranked by substituting the values of amino acid residues for both proteins. Our results ranked primates at the top, but surprisingly, just below are carnivores, cetaceans and wild rodents, showing a relatively high potential risk, as opposed to lab rodents that are typically mammals at lower risk. Most of the sequences from birds, reptiles and amphibians occupied the lowest ranges in the analyses. Models and phylogenetic trees outputs showed the species that are more prone to getting infected with SARS-CoV-2. Interestingly, during this short pandemic period, a high haplotypic variation was observed in the RBD of the viral S protein, suggesting new risks for other hosts. Our findings are consistent with other published results reporting laboratory and natural infections in different species. Finally, urgent measures of wildlife monitoring are needed regarding SARS-CoV-2, as well as measures for avoiding or limiting human contact with wildlife, and precautionary measures to protect wildlife workers and researchers; monitoring disposal of waste and sewage than can potentially affect the environment, and designing protocols for dealing with the outbreak.