No molecular evidence of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in companion animals from Veracruz, Mexico

Abstract

Active epidemiological surveillance of infectious agents represents a fundamental tool for understanding the transmission dynamics of pathogens and establishing public policies that can reduce or limit their expansion. Epidemiological surveillance of emerging agents, such as the recently recognized severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), the cause of COVID‐19, is essential to establish the risk of transmission between species. Recent studies reveal that companion animals are organisms susceptible to being infected by this pathogen due to the close contact they have with their owners. For this reason, the aim of the present work was to detect the presence of SARS‐CoV‐2 in dogs and cats in the state of Veracruz, Mexico, where there is active transmission of this microorganism in human populations. Oral and nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected from dogs and cats with a history of exposure to patients with COVID‐19. Total RNA was extracted and detection of viral genes N1 and N2 was performed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐qPCR). All 130 samples of companion animals tested by RT‐qPCR for SARS‐CoV‐2 were negative at the time they were collected. This study represents the second active surveillance of SARS‐CoV‐2 in populations of domestic dogs and cats in Latin America and the first approach in Mexico. Given that coronaviruses have shown a high capacity to be transmitted between species, it is imperative to establish measures to prevent this agent from entering and establishing in populations of companion animals.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission from infected owner to household dogs and cats is associated with food sharing

“…Furthermore, few months after the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the reverse transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from humans to domestic and wild animals have been reported worldwide ( OIE, 2020 ;Hobbs et al, 2020 ;Mahdy et al, 2019 ) According to the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), more than 20 countries have reported natural infections of SARS-CoV-2 in domestic animals ( OIE, 2020 ). In this scenario, the OIE recommends implementing active epidemiologic surveillance and report of SARS-CoV-2 infections in other animal species, especially for those in close contact with humans, such as pets ( OIE, 2020 ;Hobbs et al, 2020 . Although both in silico and experimental studies have revealed that SARS-CoV-2 transmission could be less frequent in canines than in felines ( Martínez-Hernández et al, 2020 ;Shi et al, 2020 ), naturallyinfected household cats and dogs have been reported worldwide, with similar prevalence values, ranging from 0-17.65% for cats and 0-13.33% for dogs ( OIE, 2020 ;Hobbs et al, 2020 ;Shi et al, 2020 ;Barua et al, 2021 ;Sánchez-Montes et al, 2021 ;Mahdy et al, 2019 ) Although most of these cases are asymptomatic, the presence of respiratory symptoms has been previously described (Garigliany et al, 2021;Barrs et al, 2020 ).…”

Natural and Experimental SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Domestic and Wild Animals

“…Among published surveillance studies, the highest documented seroconversion prevalence in cats was 23% in a population in close contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected owners during an active outbreak [ 62 ]. Moreover, several surveillance studies of cat populations during active outbreaks have failed to detect SARS-CoV-2 or identify any seroconversion among populations with exposure to the virus [ 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 ]. A particularly interesting study demonstrated that a group of SARS-CoV-2 infected students did not infect any of the nine cats that were in close prolonged contact with them [ 154 ].…”

Detección de anticuerpos del SARS–CoV–2 en perros en contacto con humanos positivos COVID–19

“…Los estudios previos realizados en plena pandemia han sido contradictorios, ya que algunos trabajos indican reportes positivos de transmisión en perros y gatos [4,11,12,15,24,27]; sin embargo, de ninguna manera representan una fuente de infección para las personas por lo que su valor en el ciclo epidemiológico de la enfermedad es muy bajo [5,6,9,10].…”