SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant Pathogenesis and Host Response in Syrian Hamsters

  1. Sreelekshmy Mohandas
  2. Pragya Dhruv Yadav
  3. Anita Shete
  4. Dimpal Nyayanit
  5. Gajanan Sapkal
  6. Kavita Lole
  7. Nivedita Gupta

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

B.1.617 is becoming a dominant Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage worldwide with many sublineages, of which B.1.617.2 is designated as a variant of concern. The pathogenicity of B.1.617.2 (Delta) and B.1.617.3 lineage of SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated and compared with that of B.1, an early virus isolate with D614G mutation in a Syrian hamster model. Viral load, antibody response, and lung disease were studied. There was no significant difference in the virus shedding pattern among these variants. High levels of SARS-CoV-2 sub genomic RNA were detected in the respiratory tract of hamsters infected with the Delta variant for 14 days, which warrants further transmission studies. The Delta variant induced lung disease of moderate severity in about 40% of infected animals, which supports the attributed disease severity of the variant. Cross neutralizing antibodies were detected in animals infected with B.1, Delta, and B.1.617.3 variant, but neutralizing capacity was significantly lower with B.1.351 (Beta variant).

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/v13091773
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.24.453631: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsEuthanasia Agents: Six hamsters each were challenged with 0.1 ml of 105 TCID50/ml of B.1/Delta/B.1.617.3 virus variants intranasally under isoflurane anesthesia.
    Sex as a biological variableAnimal experiments: For the virus shedding study, eighteen female, Syrian hamsters of 8-10-week-old age were divided into 3 groups of 6 animals each.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    BlindingThe lesions were graded on a numerical scale from 0 to 4 as no abnormality (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3) and severe (4) based on the severity of lesions observed by blinded scoring.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection: The serum samples collected on day 3, 5, 7 and 14 DPI were tested for IgG antibodies by a hamster anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA as described earlier [15].
    Anti-SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    IgG
    suggested: None
    anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    The isolates were propagated and passage twice in VeroCCL81 cells and sequence verified by Next generation sequencing.
    VeroCCL81
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: The data collected from the study was analysed using Graph pad Prism version 8.4.3.
    Graph pad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.24.453631v2 on bioRxiv
  4. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.24.453631v1 on bioRxiv