Field Evaluation of Diagnostic Test Sensitivity and Specificity for Salmonid Alphavirus (SAV) Infection and Pancreas Disease (PD) in Farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in Norway Using Bayesian Latent Class Analysis

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU)2016/429): Infection with salmonid alphavirus (SAV)

Infection with salmonid alphavirus (SAV) was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as laid out in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to infection with SAV. The assessment was performed following the ad hoc method on data collection and assessment developed by AHAW Panel and already published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to the assessment, it was uncertain whether infection with salmonid alphavirus can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (50-80% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that infection with salmonid alphavirus does not meet the criteria in Section 1 (Category A; 5-10% probability of meeting the criteria) and it is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Categories B, C, D and E; 50-90%, probability of meeting the criteria). The animal species to be listed for infection with SAV according to Article 8 criteria are provided.

A metagenomic insight into the Yangtze finless porpoise virome

The Yangtze finless porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides asiaeorientalis) inhabiting the Yantze River, China is critically endangered because of the influences of infectious disease, human activity, and water contamination. Viral diseases are one of the crucial factors that threatening the health of Yangtze finless porpoise. However, there are few studies which elaborate the viral diversity of Yangtze finless. Therefore, this study was performed to investigate the viral diversity of Yangtze finless by metagenomics. Results indicated that a total of 12,686,252 high-quality valid sequences were acquired and 2,172 virus reads were recognized. Additionally, we also obtained a total of 10,600 contigs. Phages was the most abundant virus in the samples and the ratio of DNA and RNA viruses were 69.75 and 30.25%, respectively. Arenaviridae, Ackermannviridae and Siphoviridae were the three most predominant families in all the samples. Moreover, the majority of viral genus were Mammarenavirus, Limestonevirus and Lambdavirus. The results of gene prediction indicated that these viruses play vital roles in biological process, cellular component, molecular function, and disease. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on the viral diversity of Yangtze finless porpoise, which filled the gaps in its viral information. Meanwhile, this study can also provide a theoretical basis for the establishment of the prevention and protection system for virus disease of Yangtze finless porpoise.

Evaluation of diagnostic test procedures for SARS-CoV-2 using latent class models

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antigen tests have been used extensively for screening during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemics. However, the real‐world sensitivity and specificity of the two testing procedures in the field have not yet been estimated without assuming that the PCR constitutes a gold standard test. We use latent class models to estimate the in situ performance of both tests using data from the Danish national registries. We find that the specificity of both tests is very high (>99.7%), while the sensitivities are 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.8%–98.4%) and 53.8% (95% CI: 49.8%–57.9%) for the PCR and antigen tests, respectively. These findings have implications for the use of confirmatory PCR tests following a positive antigen test result: we estimate that serial testing is counterproductive at higher prevalence levels.