Infection, recovery and re-infection of farmed mink with SARS-CoV-2
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Mink, on a farm with about 15,000 animals, became infected with SARS-CoV-2. Over 75% of tested animals were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in throat swabs and 100% of tested animals were seropositive. The virus responsible had a deletion of nucleotides encoding residues H69 and V70 within the spike protein gene. The infected mink recovered and after free-testing of the mink, the animals remained seropositive. During follow-up studies, after a period of more than 2 months without virus detection, over 75% of tested animals scored positive again for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Whole genome sequencing showed that the virus circulating during this re-infection was most closely related to the virus identified in the first outbreak on this farm but additional sequence changes had occurred. Animals had much higher levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after re-infection than at free-testing. Thus, following recovery from an initial infection, seropositive mink rapidly became susceptible to re-infection by SARS-CoV-2.
Article Summary Line
Following widespread infection with SARS-CoV-2 of mink on a farm, all tested animals had seroconverted and the farm was then tested free of infection; however, less than 3 months later, a further round of infection affected more than 75% of tested animals.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.07.443055: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources SARS-CoV-2 positive RNA samples were sequenced as described (2) and SARS-CoV-2 sequences were aligned using MAFFT (24). MAFFTsuggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)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 …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.07.443055: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources SARS-CoV-2 positive RNA samples were sequenced as described (2) and SARS-CoV-2 sequences were aligned using MAFFT (24). MAFFTsuggested: (MAFFT, RRID:SCR_011811)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.
- No funding statement was detected.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
