Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV, Nairoviridae family) and Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV, Phenuiviridae family) are zoonotic vector-borne pathogens with clinical relevance worldwide. Our study aimed to determine seroprevalences of these viruses and potential risk factors among livestock (cattle, sheep, and goats) in Tunisia. Sera were tested for antibodies against CCHFV (n = 879) and RVFV (n = 699) using various enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and indirect immunofluorescence assays (IIFA). The overall seroprevalence of IgG antibodies was 8.6% (76/879) and 2.3% (16/699) against CCHFV and RVFV, respectively. For CCHF seropositivity bioclimatic zones and breed were potential risk factors for the three tested animal species; while the season was associated with cattle and sheep seropositivity, tick infestation was associated with cattle and goats seropositivity and age as a risk factor was only associated with cattle seropositivity. Age and season were significantly associated with RVFV seropositivity in sheep. Our results confirm the circulation of CCHFV and RVFV in Tunisia and identified the principal risk factors in ruminants. This knowledge could help to mitigate the risk of ruminant infections and subsequently also human infections.

Currently, next generation sequencing (NGS) is the mainly used approach for identification and monitorization of viruses with a potential public health threat in clinical and environmental samples. To facilitate detection in NGS, the sequence-independent, single-primer-amplification (SISPA) is an effective tool for enriching virus sequences. We performed a preliminary assessment of SISPA-nanopore sequencing as a potential approach for screening tick-borne viruses in six specimens with detectable Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) and Jingmen tick virus (JMTV) sequences. A comparison of unbiased NGS and SISPA followed by nanopore sequencing was carried out in 4 specimens with single and pooled ticks. The approach was further used for genome sequencing in culture-grown viruses. Overall, total/virus-specific read counts were significantly elevated in cell culture supernatants in comparison to single or pooled ticks. Virus genomes could be successfully characterized by SISPA with identities over 99%. Genome coverage varied according to the segment and total read count. Base calling errors were mainly observed in tick specimens and more frequent in lower viral loads. Culture-grown viruses were phylogenetically-related to previously-reported local viruses. In conclusion, the SISPA + nanopore sequencing was successful in generating data comparable to NGS and will provide an effective tool for broad-range virus detection in ticks.

Background: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, laboratories worldwide have been facing an unprecedented increase in demand for PCR testing because of the high importance of diagnostics for prevention and control of virus spread. Moreover, testing demand has been varying considerably over time, depending on the epidemiological situation, rendering efficient resource allocation difficult. Here, we present a scalable workflow which we implemented in our laboratory to increase PCR testing capacity while maintaining high flexibility regarding the number of samples to be processed. Methods: We compared the performance of five automated extraction instruments, using dilutions of SARS-CoV-2 cell culture supernatant as well as clinical samples. To increase PCR throughput, we combined the two duplex PCR reactions of our previously published SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay into one quadruplex reaction and compared their limit of detection as well as their performance on the detection of low viral loads in clinical samples. Furthermore, we developed a sample pooling protocol with either two or four samples per pool, combined with a specifically adapted SARS-CoV-2 quadruplex PCR assay, and compared the diagnostic sensitivity of pooled testing and individual testing. Results: All tested automated extraction instruments yielded comparable results regarding the subsequent sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection by PCR. While the limit of detection of the quadruplex SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay (E-Gene assay: 28.7 genome equivalents (ge)/reaction, orf1ab assay: 32.0 ge/reaction) was slightly higher than that of our previously published duplex PCR assays (E-Gene assay: 9.8 ge/reaction, orf1ab assay: 6.6 ge/reaction), the rate of correctly identified positive patient samples was comparable for both assays. Sample pooling with optimized downstream quadruplex PCR showed no loss in diagnostic sensitivity compared to individual testing. Conclusion: Specific adaptation of PCR assays can help overcome the potential loss of sensitivity due to higher levels of PCR multiplexing or sample dilution in pooled testing. Combining these adapted PCR assays with different sample processing strategies provides a simple and highly adjustable workflow for resource-efficient SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. The presented principles can easily be adopted in a variety of laboratory settings as well as be adapted to pathogens other than SARS-CoV-2, making it feasible for any laboratory that conducts PCR diagnostics.

Background Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, laboratories worldwide have been facing an unprecedented increase in demand for PCR testing because of the high importance of diagnostics for prevention and control of virus spread. Moreover, testing demand has been varying considerably over time, depending on the epidemiological situation, rendering efficient resource allocation difficult. Here, we present a scalable workflow which we implemented in our laboratory to increase PCR testing capacity while maintaining high flexibility regarding the number of samples to be processed. Methods We compared the performance of five automated extraction instruments, using dilutions of SARS-CoV-2 cell culture supernatant as well as clinical samples. To increase PCR throughput, we combined the two duplex PCR reactions of our previously published SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay into one quadruplex reaction and compared their limit of detection as well as their performance on the detection of low viral loads in clinical samples. Furthermore, we developed a sample pooling protocol with either two or four samples per pool, combined with a specifically adapted SARS-CoV-2 quadruplex PCR assay, and compared the diagnostic sensitivity of pooled testing and individual testing. Results All tested automated extraction instruments yielded comparable results regarding the subsequent sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection by PCR. While the limit of detection of the quadruplex SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay (E-Gene assay: 28.7 genome equivalents (ge)/reaction, orf1ab assay: 32.0 ge/reaction) was slightly higher than that of our previously published duplex PCR assays (E-Gene assay: 9.8 ge/reaction, orf1ab assay: 6.6 ge/reaction), the rate of correctly identified positive patient samples was comparable for both assays. Sample pooling with optimized downstream quadruplex PCR showed no loss in diagnostic sensitivity compared to individual testing. Conclusion Specific adaptation of PCR assays can help overcome the potential loss of sensitivity due to higher levels of PCR multiplexing or sample dilution in pooled testing. Combining these adapted PCR assays with different sample processing strategies provides a simple and highly adjustable workflow for resource-efficient SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. The presented principles can easily be adopted in a variety of laboratory settings as well as be adapted to pathogens other than SARS-CoV-2, making it feasible for any laboratory that conducts PCR diagnostics.