Many of the world’s most pressing issues, such as the emergence of zoonotic diseases, can only be addressed through interdisciplinary research. However, the findings of interdisciplinary research are susceptible to miscommunication among both professional and non-professional audiences due to differences in training, language, experience, and understanding. Such miscommunication contributes to the misunderstanding of key concepts or processes and hinders the development of effective research agendas and public policy. These misunderstandings can also provoke unnecessary fear in the public and have devastating effects for wildlife conservation. For example, inaccurate communication and subsequent misunderstanding of the potential associations between certain bats and zoonoses has led to persecution of diverse bats worldwide and even government calls to cull them. Here, we identify four types of miscommunication driven by the use of terminology regarding bats and the emergence of zoonotic diseases that we have categorized based on their root causes: (1) incorrect or overly broad use of terms; (2) terms that have unstable usage within a discipline, or different usages among disciplines; (3) terms that are used correctly but spark incorrect inferences about biological processes or significance in the audience; (4) incorrect inference drawn from the evidence presented. We illustrate each type of miscommunication with commonly misused or misinterpreted terms, providing a definition, caveats and common misconceptions, and suggest alternatives as appropriate. While we focus on terms specific to bats and disease ecology, we present a more general framework for addressing miscommunication that can be applied to other topics and disciplines to facilitate more effective research, problem-solving, and public policy.

In June 2020, a cat from Arezzo (Italy) that died from a neurological disease was diagnosed with West Caucasian Bat Lyssavirus (WCBV). The virus retained high identity across the whole-genome with the reference isolate found in 2002 from a Russian bent-winged bat. We applied control measures recommended by national regulations, investigated a possible interface between cats and bats using visual inspections, bioacoustics analyses and camera trapping and performed active and passive surveillance in bats to trace the source of infection. People that were exposed to the cat received full post-exposure prophylaxis while animals underwent six months of quarantine. One year later, they are all healthy. In a tunnel located near the cat’s house, we identified a group of bent-winged bats that showed virus-neutralizing antibodies to WCBV across four sampling occasions, but no virus in salivary swabs. Carcasses from other bat species were all negative. This description of WCBV in a non-flying mammal confirms that this virus can cause clinical rabies in the absence of preventive and therapeutic measures, and highlights the lack of international guidelines against divergent lyssaviruses. We detected bent-winged bats as the most probable source of infection, testifying the encroachment between these bats and pets/human in urban areas and confirming free-ranging cats as potential hazard for public health and conservation.

Leptospirosis is an infectious disease widely reported in veterinary practice and a worldwide zoonosis. In Northeastern Italy, different serogroups and genotypes of Leptospira have been described in ill dogs, the most commonly detected being Icterohaemorragiae (ICT) ST 17, Australis (AUS) ST 24 and ST 198, Pomona (POM) ST 117 and ST 289, and Sejroe (SEJ) ST 155. However, there is little information available on the environmental exposure to Leptospira of wild and synanthropic animals. The aim of this study was to identify the circulating genotypes in potential reservoirs to fill this gap of knowledge. Between 2015 and 2022, 681 animal carcasses collected by the Public Veterinary Service were analyzed for Leptospira with a real-time PCR-based screening test, while positive samples were genotyped by multi-locus sequence typing analysis. To carry out our study, we tested 330 hedgehogs, 105 red foxes, 108 Norway rats, 79 mice, 22 coypus, 10 bank voles, 13 grey wolves, 5 common shrews and 9 greater mouse-eared bats. Five sequence types (STs) common in dogs were also found in wild animals: ST 24, ST 198, ST 17 and ST 155 in hedgehogs, ST 17 and ST 24 in foxes, ST 17 in rats, ST 17 and ST 155 in mice, and ST 117 in a wolf. In addition, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first Italian report of SEJ ST 197 in a bank vole. Furthermore, this study described a previous survey conducted in 2009 on coypus (30 animals from the province of Trento and 41 from the province of Padua), referring to a serological positivity (L. Bratislava) without any molecular detection of Leptospira. This study on Leptospira in synanthropic and wild animals highlighted the importance of increasing our epidemiological knowledge of leptospirosis and its zoonotic risks.