Rising evidence of COVID-19 transmission potential to and between animals: do we need to be concerned?

  1. Andrei R. Akhmetzhanov
  2. Natalie M. Linton
  3. Hiroshi Nishiura

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)—the virus that causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19)—has been detected in domestic dogs and cats, raising concerns of transmission from, to, or between these animals. There is currently no indication that feline- or canine-to-human transmission can occur, though there is rising evidence of the reverse. To explore the extent of animal-related transmission, we aggregated 17 case reports on confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections in animals as of 15 May 2020. All but two animals fully recovered and had only mild respiratory or digestive symptoms. Using data from probable cat-to-cat transmission in Wuhan, China, we estimated the basic reproduction number R 0 under this scenario at 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 1.05, 1.13). This value is much lower than the R 0 reported for humans and close to one, indicating that the sustained transmission between cats is unlikely to occur. Our results support the view that the pet owners and other persons with COVID-19 in close contact with animals should be cautious of the way they interact with them.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.21.20109041: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    In order to avoid missing possible reports, we also scanned the ProMED-mailing list (http://promedmail.org) using the query “covid AND animals.” 2.2.
    http://promedmail.org
    suggested: (ProMed-Mail, RRID:SCR_010260)

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    However, our results are subject to a few limitations. First, the data shared by [6] do not allow us to distinguish the negative serological tests of domestic cats from those of stray cats. We therefore assumed domestic cats to be part of the chain of transmission among all cats. We also assumed that stray cats were unlikely to be in close contact with humans. However, some stray cats could be fed by humans and there is a chance that the virus could be transmitted by an infected human to a stray cat by a contaminated feeder or other fomite. Second, we assumed that interventions implemented by the Chinese government to halt the epidemic in Wuhan in February-March 2020 did not affect the transmission dynamics of the virus among cats. Third, our calculation of the probability of a major outbreak—estimated at 7.9%—relied on the assumption of a homogeneous contact pattern between stray and domestic cats and imposed an exponentially distributed infectious period. The use of a heterogeneous contact pattern and (for example) a gamma distribution for the infectious period would provide more precise results [24–26], however incorporation of these factors requires more detailed data on the serological tests and the cat population in Wuhan than was available in the preprint by Zhang et al. In conclusion, the current evidence supports the advice of veterinary authorities worldwide that the pet owners and other persons with COVID-19 in close contact with animals should pay special attentio...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.21.20109041 on medRxiv