Advertisement

Virology Journal

, 13:110 | Cite as

Alphacoronavirus in urban Molossidae and Phyllostomidae bats, Brazil

  • Karen Miyuki Asano
  • Aline Santana Hora
  • Karin Côrrea Scheffer
  • Willian Oliveira Fahl
  • Keila Iamamoto
  • Enio Mori
  • Paulo Eduardo Brandão
Open Access
Short report
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Coronaviruses: emerging and re-emerging pathogens in humans and animals
  2. Emerging viruses

Abstract

Background

Bats have been implicated as the main reservoir of coronavirus (CoV). Thus the role of these hosts on the evolution and spread of CoVs currently deserve the attention of emerging diseases surveillance programs. On the view of the interest on and importance of CoVs in bats the occurrence and molecular characterization of CoV were conducted in bats from Brazil.

Findings

Three hundred five enteric contents of 29 bat species were tested using a panCoV nested RT-PCR. Nine specimens were positive and eight was suitable for RdRp gene sequencing. RdRp gene phylogeny showed that all CoVs strains from this study cluster in Alphacoronavirus genus, with one Molossidae and one Phlyllostomidae-CoV specific groups. Phylogenetic analyses of two S gene sequences showed a large diversity within the Alphacoronavirus genus.

Conclusions

This study indicated a CoV-to-host specificity and draws attention for CoV detection in Cynomops sp, a potential new reservoir. The phylogenetic analyses indicate that diversity of CoV in bats is higher than previously known.

Keywords

Bat Coronavirus Molossidae Phyllostomidae 

Background

Bats have been recognized as the natural reservoirs of a large variety of emerging and re-emerging viruses and have been implicated as the main reservoir of coronavirus (CoV). Thus the role of these hosts on the evolution and spread of CoVs currently deserve the attention of emerging diseases surveillance programs as illustrated by the finding of bats as reservoirs for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) and MERS (Middle East Syndrome) coronavirus [1, 2].

CoV (Nidovirales:Coronaviridae:Coronavirinae) are classified into four genus: Alpha and Betacoronavirus are often found in mammals, while Gammacoronavirus were detected in wild birds, poultry, and marine mammals and Deltacoronavirus were detected in wild birds, pigs, and wild feline [3, 4, 5].

The first report of bat CoV was described in 2005 [6] in bats of Miniopterus pusillus species. Since then, several studies have identified the presence of CoV in bat population from various regions of the world, and to date have been detected both Alphacoronavirus and Betacoronavirus [6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13].

Although there is a great diversity of bats in Brazil, there are few studies related to bat CoV. Betacoronavirus has been reported in a Desmodus rotundus vampire bat and Alphacoronaviruses have been detected in Molosuss rufus, M. currentium, M. molossus, Carollia perspicillata, C. brevicauda and Tadarida brasilensis bats (14–18), but a range of bat species that might act as reservoirs for known or unknown CoVs still remains to be surveyed.

On the view of the interest on and importance of bat CoV surveillance, the aim of this study was survey the occurrence of bat CoV in Brazil and to perform molecular characterization of CoVs detected.

Methods

This work was conducted with samples from 73 municipalities of São Paulo State, Southern Brazil, using 305 samples of enteric content of 29 bat species of three families (Molossidae, Phyllostomidae and Vespertilionidae). These animals were submitted to Instituto Pasteur (São Paulo, Brazil) from March/2013 to July/2014, as a part of rabies surveillance program, and were stored at −20 °C. Each animal was necropsied, the entire intestine was removed from abdominal cavity and all intestinal content was extracted and stored at −20 °C.

Feces suspensions (v/v, 10 %) were prepared with DEPC-treated water. Suspensions were clarified at 12,000 × g for 30 min at 4 °C and the supernatants were used in the assays. Extraction of total RNA was carried out with TRIzol Reagent™ (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA) according to the manufacture’s instruction followed by reverse transcription with Random Primers and M-MLV™ Reverse Transcriptase (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA) as per manufacturer’s instructions.

All samples were submitted to a pancoronavirus nested RT-PCR targeting the RNA-dependent RNA-polimerase (RdRp) [14], using Taq Platinum™ DNA Polymerase (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA) as per manufacturer’s instructions. Positive samples were submitted to a RT-PCR targeting to S gene for phylogenetic inference [9].

Amplicons were purified using the ExoSap-IT® reagent (USB, Cleveland, OH, USA) or Illustra™ GFX™ Gel Extraction Kit (GE Healthcare, Buckinghamshire, UK) and bi-directional Sanger sequencing with the respective primers was carried out with BigDye v.3.1™ and ABI 3500 Genetic Analyzer™ (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA).

Chromatograms generated were subjected to Phred online application (http://asparagin.cenargen.embrapa.br/phph/) for assessment of their quality and the final consensus sequences were obtained with CAP Contig application in Bioedit 7.2.5 program [15]. Sequences obtained were aligned with homologous sequences retrieved from GenBank using CLUSTAL/W software in Bioedit 7.2.5 program [15].

Alignments were used for phylogenetic trees construction with distance optimization criterion with neighbor-joining algorithm and Composite Maximum Likelihood evolutionary model with 1000 “bootstrap” repetitions, using the MEGA 6 program [16].

Results and discussion

Nine out of the 305 samples (2,95 %) were found positive and DNA sequences were obtained for the RdRp for eight of them: sequences 4292/2013/Desmodus rotundus; 4539/2013/Cynomops planirostris, 4620/2013/Glossophaga soricina, 4702/2013/Cynomops abrasus, 4705/2013/Cynomops abrasus, 5026/2013/Cynomops abrasus, 2173/2014/Cynomops planirostris, 2218/2014/Cynomops planirostris (Genbank accession numbers KU552072 to KU552079).

Five species tested were positive: Cynomops abrasus (3/11 = 27.3 %), Cynomops planirostris (3/5 = 60 %), Desmodus rotundus (1/41 = 2.4 %), Glossophaga soricina (1/33 = 3 %) and Platyrrhinus lineatus (1/12 = 8.3 %). Only the sample of P. lineatus was not confirmed by DNA sequencing.

The occurrence of CoV per specie demonstrates a high frequency in Cynomops genus: 60 % for C. abrasus and 27.3 % for C. planirostris, indicating these species must have an important role in CoV maintenance in bat population in this region. In South America, CoV detection on bats have shown a low occurrence of CoV per species [12, 17, 18], however, none of these studies included the Cynomops genus. Though CoVs have been described in Brazilian Molossidae bats [19, 20], Cynomops sp were previously unknown hosts for CoVs.

The Alphacoronaviruses found in Cynomops sp (Molossidae) were closely related with Alphacoronaviruses already detected in South Brazil (RdRp nt identities 81.4–82.9 %).

D. rotundus is one of the three hematophagous bat species and can be found only in the Americas, from northern Mexico to northern Argentina [21]. Although the presence of Betacoronavirus has already been described [22], this is the first report of an Alphacoronavirus in common vampire bat, showing that this species can carry both Alpha and Betacoronavirus.

G. soricina is a nectarivorous neotropical bat that might be found inside houses and has already been described as a host for Alphacoronaviruses [23]. Although separated by a large geographic area of more than 4000 km, G. soricina CoV found in São Paulo showed high nucleotide and amino acids identities when compared with G. soricina CoV of Trinidad and Tobago (90.3 and 98.4 %, respectively). G. soricina species does not migrate over long distances [24], therefore it is unlikely that transmission has occurred among these specimens, suggesting a virus-host adaptation.

RdRp phylogeny (Fig. 1) showed that all CoVs strains from this study clustered in the Alphacoronavirus genus, with one Molossidae and one Phyllostomidae-CoV specific groups. The Molossidae CoV of this study clustered with Molossidae bat CoV from South Brazil with high bootstrap value (85 %). Although phylogenetic analysis indicates a geographic relation, the Alphacoronaviruses of this study was separated by a geographic area of 1000 km approximately from Molossidae batCoV previously detected in Brazil [19]. Besides, there are few studies regarding batCoV in Brazil, which difficult a phylogeographic relatedness hypothesis confirmation. Phyllostomidae CoV of this study clustered with sequences of Carollia perspicillata and G. soricina, two Phyllostomid bats from Trinidad and Tobago, with high bootstrap value (70 %) (Fig. 1). Taking together these results supports the theory that host specificity is more important than geographic pattern as previously noticed [13, 17, 2526].
Fig. 1

phylogenetic tree constructed with neighbor-joining method and maximum likelihood composite substitution model for partial 393 bp fragment of coronavirus RdRp gene. Numbers on each node represents the bootstrap values. The scale represents the number of substitutions sites. Samples of this study are identified with a black triangle

Two 547 nt sequences of S gene (GenBank accession numbers KU552080 and KU552081) were obtained for C. planirostris and C. abrasus CoV. The nucleotide identity between these two sequences was high (99.8 %), suggesting the transmission of CoV among different bats species. However, the nucleotide identity with sequences retrieved from GenBank was low, varying from 39,1 and 65,8 %, showing a large genetic diversity with Alphacoronavirus from others countries.

The phylogenetic tree performed for partial S gene (Fig. 2) shows that the samples of this study formed a separate group from others Alphacoronavirus sequences retrieved from GenBank, with bootstrap value of 100 %. Although the fragment analyzed was small, the tree indicates that samples of this study are unique, forming a completely separate group.
Fig. 2

phylogenetic tree constructed with the neighbor-joining method and maximum likelihood composite substitution model for partial 547 bp fragment of coronavirus S gene. Numbers on each node represents the bootstrap values. The scale represents the number of substitutions sites. Samples of this study are identified with a black triangle

Environmental changes caused by man have promoted a major impact on ecology, affecting the movement of several wild animals species from their natural habitat to urban or rural areas [27], increasing the chances of contact between humans and domestic animals with wild animals. Furthermore approximately 75 % of emerging infectious diseases have zoonotic origin and wildlife as source of infection [28, 29]. Therefore, it is essential to survey and identify possible sources of infection, especially in relation to bats that are considered important reservoirs of viral agents [30, 31].

Conclusion

The significance of CoVs detected during this survey on Public Health remains to be investigated, but the finding of CoV in new viral reservoirs justifies the need for CoV surveillance. This study indicates a CoV-to-host specificity and draws attention for CoV detection in Cynomops sp, suggesting the importance of this species for CoV maintenance in the region studied. The phylogenetic analyses indicate a great diversity of CoV in bats, particularly for S gene.

Abbreviations

CoV: coronavirus; MERS: Middle East respiratory syndrome; RT-PCR: reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction; SARS: severe acute respiratory syndrome

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are greateful to Coordenacão de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES/PROEX 2327/2015) for financial support.

Authors’ contributions

KMA and PEB participated in the design of the study and drafted the manuscript. KMA, KI and EM conducted sampling of bat fecal samples. WOF and KCS conducted bat species identification. KMA and ASH participated in the molecular genetic studies. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This work was approved by Ethic Committee on Animal Use of the School of Veterinary Medicine of University of São Paulo under protocol number CEUA 2637030714.

References

  1. 1.
    Li W, Shi Z, Yu M, Ren W, Smith C, Epstein JH, et al. Bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-like coronaviruses. Science. 2008;310:676–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang Q, Qi J, Yuan Y, Xuan Y, Han P, Wan Y, et al. Bat origins of MERS-CoV supported by bat coronavirus HKU4 usage of human receptor CD26. Cell Host Microbe. 2014;16:328–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Groot RJ, Baker SC, Baric R, Enjuanes L, Gorbalenya AE, Holmes KV, et al. Family coronaviridae. In: King A, Adams M, Cartens E, Lefkowitz E, editors. Virus taxonomy: classification and nomenclature of viruses: ninth report of the International committee on taxonomy of viruses. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2012. p. 806–20.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Woo PCY, Lau SK, Lam CS, Lai KK, Huang Y, Lee P, et al. Comparative analysis of complete genome sequences of three avian coronaviruses reveals a novel group 3c coronavirus. J Virol. 2009;83:908–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Woo PCY, Lau SK, Lam CS, Lau CC, Tsang AK, Lau JH, et al. Discovery of seven novel Mammalian and avian coronaviruses in the genus deltacoronavirus supports bat coronaviruses as the gene source of alphacoronavirus and betacoronavirus and avian coronaviruses as the gene source of gammacoronavirus and deltacoronavirus. J Virol. 2012;86:3995–4008.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Poon LLM, Chu DK, Chan KH, Wong OK, Ellis TM, Leung YH, et al. Identification of a novel coronavirus in bats. J Virol. 2005;79:2001–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tong S, Conrardy C, Ruone S, Kuzmin IV, Guo X, Tao Y, et al. Detection of novel SARS-like and other coronaviruses in bats from Kenya. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:482–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Osborne C, Cryan PM, O’Shea TJ, Oko LM, Ndaluka C, Calisher CH, et al. Alphacoronaviruses in new world bats: prevalence, persistence, phylogeny, and potential for interaction with humans. PLoS One. 2011;6(5):e19156.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shirato K, Maeda K, Tsuda S, Suzuki K, Watanabe S, Shimoda H, et al. Detection of bat coronaviruses from Miniopterus fuliginosus in Japan. Virus Genes. 2012;44(1):40–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dominguez SR, O´Shea TJ, Oko LM, Holmes KV. Detection of Group 1 Coronaviruses in Bats in North America. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:1295–300.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lelli D, Papetti A, Sabelli C, Rosti E, Moreno A, Boniotti MB. Detection of coronaviruses in bats of various species in Italy. Viruses. 2013;5(11):2679–89.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moreira-Soto A, Taylor-Castillo L, Vargas-Vargas N, Rodríguez-Herrera B, Jimenez C, Corrales-Aguilar E. Neotropical bats from Costa Rica harbour diverse coronaviruses. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015;62:501–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fischer K, Zeus V, Kwasnitschka L, Kerth G, Haase M, Groschup MH, et al. Insectivorous bats carry host specific astroviruses and coronaviruses across different regions in Germany. Infect Genet Evol. 2016;37:108–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chu DK, Leung CY, Gilbert M, Joyner PH, Ng EM, Tse TM, et al. Avian coronavirus in wild aquatic birds. J Virol. 2011;85(23):12815–720.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hall TA. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Series. 1999;41(2):95–8.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30(12):2725–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corman VM, Rasche A, Diallo TD, Cottontail VM, Stöcker A, Souza BF, et al. Highly diversified coronaviruses in neotropical bats. J Gen Virol. 2013;94(9):1984–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Góes LG, Ruvacaba SG, Campos AA, Queiroz LH, Carvalho C, Jerez JA, et al. Novel bat coronaviruses, Brazil and Mexico. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013;19(10):1711–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lima FE, Campos DS, Kunert Filho HC, Batista HB, Carnielli P, Cibulski SP, et al. Detection of Alphacoronavirus in velvety free-tailed bats (Molossus molossus) and Brazilian free-tailed bats (Tadarida brasiliensis) from urban area of Southern Brazil. Virus Genes. 2013;47(1):164–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simas PV, Barnabé AC, Durães-Carvalho R, Neto DF, Caserta LC, Artacho L, et al. Bat coronavirus in Brazil related to appalachian rigde and porcine epidemic diarrhea viruses. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21(4):729–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Greenhall AM, Joermann G, Schimidt U. Desmodus rotundus. Mamm Species. 1983;202:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brandão PE, Scheffer K, Villarreal LY, Achkar S, Oliveira RN, Fahl WO, et al. A coronavirus detected in the vampire bat Desmodus rotundus. Braz J Infect Dis. 2008;12(6):466–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carrington CVF, Foster JE, Zhu HC, Zhang JX, Smith GJD, Thompson N, et al. Detection and phylogenetic analysis of group 1 coronaviruses in South American bats. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(12):1890–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fleming TH, Nuñez RA, Sternberg LSL. Seasonal changes in the diets of migrant and non-migrant nectarivorous bats as revealed by carbon stable isotope analysis. Oecologia. 1993;94(1):72–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anthony SJ, Ojeda-Flores R, Rico-Chávez O, Navarrete-Macias I, Zambrana-Torrelio CM, Rostal MK, et al. Coronaviruses in bats from Mexico. J Gen Virol. 2013;94(Pt 5):1028–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Drexler JF, Gloza-Rausch F, Glende J, Corman VM, Muth D, Goettsche M, et al. Genomic characterization of severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus in European bats and classification of coronaviruses based on partial RNA-dependent RNA polymerase gene sequences. J Virol. 2010;84(21):11336–49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Magle SB, Hunt VM, Vernon M, Crooks K. Urban wildlife research: past, present, and future. Biol Conserv. 2012;155:23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Woolhouse ME. Population biology of emerging and re-emerging pathogens. Trends Microbiol. 2002;10(10 Suppl):S3–7. Review.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Taylor LH, Latham SM, Woolhouse ME. Risk factors for human disease emergence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2001;356(1411):983–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang LF, Walker PJ, Poon LL. Mass extinctions, biodiversity and mitochondrial function: are bats ‘special’ as reservoirs for emerging viruses? Curr Opin Virol. 2011;1(6):649–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wong S, Lau S, Woo P, Yuen KY. Bats as a continuing source of emerging infections in humans. Rev Med Virol. 2007;17(2):67–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s). 2016

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen Miyuki Asano
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aline Santana Hora
    • 2
  • Karin Côrrea Scheffer
    • 1
  • Willian Oliveira Fahl
    • 1
  • Keila Iamamoto
    • 1
  • Enio Mori
    • 1
  • Paulo Eduardo Brandão
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto PasteurSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Departament of Preventive Veterinary Medicine and Animal Health, School of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations