Experimental co-infection of calves with SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants of concern

Since emerging in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has repeatedly crossed the species barrier with natural infections reported in various domestic and wild animal species. The emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) has expanded the range of susceptible host species. Previous experimental infection studies in cattle using Wuhan-like SARS-CoV-2 isolates suggested that cattle were not likely amplifying hosts for SARS-CoV-2. However, SARS-CoV-2 sero- and RNA-positive cattle have since been identified in Europe, India, and Africa. Here, we investigated the susceptibility and transmission of the Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 VOCs in cattle. Eight Holstein calves were co-infected orally and intranasally with a mixed inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs Delta and Omicron BA.2. Twenty-four hours post-challenge, two sentinel calves were introduced to evaluate virus transmission. The co-infection resulted in a high proportion of calves shedding SARS-CoV-2 RNA at 1- and 2-days post-challenge (DPC). Extensive tissue distribution of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was observed at 3 and 7 DPC and infectious virus was recovered from two calves at 3 DPC. Next-generation sequencing revealed that only the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant was detected in clinical samples and tissues. Similar to previous experimental infection studies in cattle, we observed only limited seroconversion and no clear evidence of transmission to sentinel calves. Together, our findings suggest that cattle are more permissive to infection with SARS-CoV-2 Delta than Omicron BA.2 and Wuhan-like isolates but, in the absence of horizontal transmission, are not likely to be reservoir hosts for currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Environmental Sampling for Avian Influenza Virus Detection in Commercial Layer Facilities

The present study was designed to evaluate the utility of environmental samples for convenient but accurate detection of avian influenza virus (AIV) in commercial poultry houses. First, environmental samples from AIV-negative commercial layer facilities were spiked with an H5N2 low pathogenic AIV and were evaluated for their effect on the detection of viral RNA immediately or after incubation at -20 C, 4 C, 22 C, or 37 C for 24, 48, or 72 hr. Second, Swiffer pads, drag swabs, and boot cover swabs were evaluated for their efficiency in collecting feces and water spiked with the H5N2 LPAIV under a condition simulated for a poultry facility floor. Third, environmental samples collected from commercial layer facilities that experienced an H5N2 highly pathogenic AIV outbreak in 2014-15 were evaluated for the effect of sampling locations on AIV detection. The half-life of AIV was comparable across all environmental samples but decreased with increasing temperatures. Additionally, sampling devices did not differ significantly in their ability to collect AIV-spiked environmental samples from a concrete floor for viral RNA detection. Some locations within a poultry house, such as cages, egg belts, house floor, manure belts, and manure pits, were better choices for sampling than other locations (feed trough, ventilation fan, and water trays) to detect AIV RNA after cleaning and disinfection. Samples representing cages, floor, and manure belts yielded significantly more PCR positives than the other environmental samples. In conclusion, environmental samples can be routinely collected from a poultry barn as noninvasive samples for monitoring AIV.