Why the study?
Rodents and shrews live in close proximity to humans as hosts of zoonotic pathogens, but Group A rotavirus and its potential risk factors were not characterized in these animals in Bangladesh.
Group A rotavirus circulates in rodents and shrews in Bangladesh, with higher prevalence in males, urban areas, and during the wet season, highlighting a potential zoonotic reservoir.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
RVA in peri-domestic rodents and shrews may flag overlooked zoonotic exposure risk; leaves open genotype and human transmission potential.
Rodents and shrews live in close proximity to humans and have been identified as important hosts of zoonotic pathogens. This study aimed to detect Group A rotavirus (RVA) and its potential risk factors in rodents and shrews in Bangladesh. We captured 417 small mammals from 10 districts with a high degree of contact between people and domestic animals and collected rectal swab samples between June 2011 and October 2013. We tested the swab samples for RVA RNA, targeting the NSP3 gene segment using real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Overall, RVA prevalence was the same (6.7%) in both rodents and shrews. We detected RVA RNA in 5.3% of Bandicota bengalensis (4/76; 95% CI: 1.4-12.9), 5.1% of B. indica (4/79; 95% CI: 1.4-12.4), 18.2% of Mus musculus (4/22; 95% CI: 5.2-40.3), 6.7% of Rattus rattus (6/90; 95% CI: 2.5-13.9), and 6.7% of Suncus murinus (10/150; 95% CI: 3.2-11.9). We found significantly more RVA in males (10.4%; OR: 3.4; P = 0.007), animals with a poor body condition score (13.9%; OR: 2.7; P = 0.05), during wet season (8.3%; OR: 4.1; P = 0.032), and in urban land gradients (10.04%; OR: 2.9; P = 0.056). These findings form a basis for understanding the prevalence of rotaviruses circulating among rodents and shrews in this region. We recommend additional molecular studies to ascertain the genotype and zoonotic potential of RVA circulating in rodents and shrews in Bangladesh.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Islam et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: