Canine distemper virus (CDV) has recently emerged as an extinction threat for the endangered Amur tiger (Panthera tigris altaica). CDV is vaccine-preventable, and control strategies could require vaccination of domestic dogs and/or wildlife populations. However, vaccination of endangered wildlife remains controversial, which has led to a focus on interventions in domestic dogs, often assumed to be the source of infection. Effective decision making requires an understanding of the true reservoir dynamics, which poses substantial challenges in remote areas with diverse host communities. We carried out serological, demographic, and phylogenetic studies of dog and wildlife populations in the Russian Far East to show that a number of wildlife species are more important than dogs, both in maintaining CDV and as sources of infection for tigers. Critically, therefore, because CDV circulates among multiple wildlife sources, dog vaccination alone would not be effective at protecting tigers. We show, however, that low-coverage vaccination of tigers themselves is feasible and would produce substantive reductions in extinction risks. Vaccination of endangered wildlife provides a valuable component of conservation strategies for endangered species. Significance The decline and progressive fragmentation of many threatened populations increase extinction vulnerability due to outbreaks of infectious disease. Vaccination is one of the few tools available to mitigate these threats, but its use is often hampered by insufficient epidemiological understanding and historic controversies over endangered wildlife vaccination. Using the example of Amur tigers and CDV, we describe a holistic approach to select appropriate disease mitigation strategies based on key epidemiological evidence from the field. We then assess the protection of vaccinated tigers against the locally circulating CDV strain and use modeling to compare the efficacy and cost of potential vaccination programs. This practical approach provides conservation managers with an evidence-based rationale to address disease-mediated extinction risks for threatened wildlife populations.

The pandemic spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), represents an ongoing international health crisis. A key symptom of SARS-CoV-2 infection is the onset of fever, with a hyperthermic temperature range of 38 to 41°C. Fever is an evolutionarily conserved host response to microbial infection that can influence the outcome of viral pathogenicity and regulation of host innate and adaptive immune responses. However, it remains to be determined what effect elevated temperature has on SARS-CoV-2 replication. Utilizing a three-dimensional (3D) air–liquid interface (ALI) model that closely mimics the natural tissue physiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the respiratory airway, we identify tissue temperature to play an important role in the regulation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Respiratory tissue incubated at 40°C remained permissive to SARS-CoV-2 entry but refractory to viral transcription, leading to significantly reduced levels of viral RNA replication and apical shedding of infectious virus. We identify tissue temperature to play an important role in the differential regulation of epithelial host responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection that impact upon multiple pathways, including intracellular immune regulation, without disruption to general transcription or epithelium integrity. We present the first evidence that febrile temperatures associated with COVID-19 inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in respiratory epithelia. Our data identify an important role for tissue temperature in the epithelial restriction of SARS-CoV-2 independently of canonical interferon (IFN)-mediated antiviral immune defenses.

Vaccines are proving to be highly effective in controlling hospitalisation and deaths associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection but the emergence of viral variants with novel antigenic profiles threatens to diminish their efficacy. Assessment of the ability of sera from vaccine recipients to neutralise SARS-CoV-2 variants will inform the success of strategies for minimising COVID19 cases and the design of effective antigenic formulations. Here, we examine the sensitivity of variants of concern (VOCs) representative of the B.1.617.1 and B.1.617.2 (first associated with infections in India) and B.1.351 (first associated with infection in South Africa) lineages of SARS-CoV-2 to neutralisation by sera from individuals vaccinated with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) and ChAdOx1 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccines. Across all vaccinated individuals, the spike glycoproteins from B.1.617.1 and B.1.617.2 conferred reductions in neutralisation of 4.31 and 5.11-fold respectively. The reduction seen with the B.1.617.2 lineage approached that conferred by the glycoprotein from B.1.351 (South African) variant (6.29-fold reduction) that is known to be associated with reduced vaccine efficacy. Neutralising antibody titres elicited by vaccination with two doses of BNT162b2 were significantly higher than those elicited by vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. Fold decreases in the magnitude of neutralisation titre following two doses of BNT162b2, conferred reductions in titre of 7.77, 11.30 and 9.56-fold respectively to B.1.617.1, B.1.617.2 and B.1.351 pseudoviruses, the reduction in neutralisation of the delta variant B.1.617.2 surpassing that of B.1.351. Fold changes in those vaccinated with two doses of ChAdOx1 were 0.69, 4.01 and 1.48 respectively. The accumulation of mutations in these VOCs, and others, demonstrate the quantifiable risk of antigenic drift and subsequent reduction in vaccine efficacy. Accordingly, booster vaccines based on updated variants are likely to be required over time to prevent productive infection. This study also suggests that two dose regimes of vaccine are required for maximal BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1-induced immunity.

Lassa fever is a viral hemorrhagic fever caused by the Lassa virus LASV, which was first isolated in the rodent Mastomys natalensis in 1974 in Kenema, Sierra Leone. As little is known about the abundance and the presence of LASV in rodents living in the Bo area, we carried out a small mammal longitudinal population survey. A standardized trapping session was performed in various habitats and seasons in six villages over two years (2014–2016) and samples collected were tested for arenavirus IgG and LASV. A Bayesian phylogenetic analysis was performed on sequences identified by PCR. A total of 1490 small mammals were collected, and 16 rodent species were identified, with M. natalensis (355, 24%) found to be the most prevalent species. Forty-one (2.8%) samples were IgG positive, and 31 of these were trapped in homes and 10 in surrounding vegetation. Twenty-nine of 41 seropositive rodents were M. natalensis. We detected four LASV by PCR in two villages, all found in M. natalensis. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the sequences were distributed within the Sierra Leonean clade within lineage IV, distinguishing a Bo sub-clade older than a Kenema sub-clade. Compared to other settings, we found a low abundance of M. natalensis and a low circulation of LASV in rodents in villages around Bo district.

To determine how the intrinsic severity of successively dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants changed over the course of the pandemic. A retrospective cohort analysis in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHS GGC) Health Board. All sequenced non-nosocomial adult COVID-19 cases in NHS GGC with relevant SARS-CoV-2 lineages (B.1.177/Alpha, Alpha/Delta, AY.4.2 Delta/non-AY.4.2 Delta, non-AY.4.2 Delta/Omicron, and BA.1 Omicron/BA.2 Omicron) during analysis periods were included. Outcome measures were hospital admission, ICU admission, or death within 28 days of positive COVID-19 test. We report the cumulative odds ratio; the ratio of the odds that an individual experiences a severity event of a given level vs all lower severity levels for the resident and the replacement variant after adjustment. After adjustment for covariates, the cumulative odds ratio was 1.51 (95% CI: 1.08–2.11) for Alpha versus B.1.177, 2.09 (95% CI: 1.42–3.08) for Delta versus Alpha, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.76–1.27) for AY.4.2 Delta versus non-AY.4.2 Delta, 0.49 (95% CI: 0.22–1.06) for Omicron versus non-AY.4.2 Delta, and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.68–1.09) for BA.2 Omicron versus BA.1 Omicron. The direction of change in intrinsic severity between successively emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants was inconsistent, reminding us that the intrinsic severity of future SARS-CoV-2 variants remains uncertain.