From people to Panthera : Natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in tigers and lions at the Bronx Zoo

  1. Denise McAloose
  2. Melissa Laverack
  3. Leyi Wang
  4. Mary Lea Killian
  5. Leonardo C. Caserta
  6. Fangfeng Yuan
  7. Patrick K. Mitchell
  8. Krista Queen
  9. Matthew R. Mauldin
  10. Brittany D. Cronk
  11. Susan L. Bartlett
  12. John M. Sykes
  13. Stephanie Zec
  14. Tracy Stokol
  15. Karen Ingerman
  16. Martha A. Delaney
  17. Richard Fredrickson
  18. Marina Ivančić
  19. Melinda Jenkins-Moore
  20. Katie Mozingo
  21. Kerrie Franzen
  22. Nichole Hines Bergeson
  23. Laura Goodman
  24. Haibin Wang
  25. Ying Fang
  26. Colleen Olmstead
  27. Colleen McCann
  28. Patrick Thomas
  29. Erin Goodrich
  30. François Elvinger
  31. David C. Smith
  32. Suxiang Tong
  33. Sally Slavinski
  34. Paul P. Calle
  35. Karen Terio
  36. Mia Kim Torchetti
  37. Diego G. Diel

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

We describe the first cases of natural SARS-CoV-2 infection detected in animals in the United States. In March 2020, four tigers and three lions at the Bronx Zoo developed mild respiratory signs. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by rRT-PCR in respiratory secretions and/or feces from all seven affected animals; viral RNA and/or antibodies were detected in their keepers. SARS-CoV-2 was isolated from respiratory secretions or feces from three affected animals; in situ hybridization co-localized viral RNA with cellular damage. Whole genome sequence and haplotype network analyses showed tigers and lions were infected with two different SARS-CoV-2 strains, suggesting independent viral introductions. The source of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the lions is unknown. Epidemiological data and genetic similarities between keeper and tiger viruses indicate human to animal transmission.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.22.213959: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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 10.1101/2020.07.22.213959 on bioRxiv