Skip to main content
Download PDF

Seroevidence of SARS-CoV-2 spillback to rodents in Sarawak, Malaysian Borneo

BMC Veterinary Research volume 20, Article number: 161 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

SARS-CoV-2 is believed to have originated from a spillover event, where the virus jumped from bats to humans, leading to an epidemic that quickly escalated into a pandemic by early 2020. Despite the implementation of various public health measures, such as lockdowns and widespread vaccination efforts, the virus continues to spread. This is primarily attributed to the rapid emergence of immune escape variants and the inadequacy of protection against reinfection. Spillback events were reported early in animals with frequent contact with humans, especially companion, captive, and farmed animals. Unfortunately, surveillance of spillback events is generally lacking in Malaysia. Therefore, this study aims to address this gap by investigating the presence of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies in wild rodents in Sarawak, Malaysia.

Results

We analysed 208 archived plasma from rodents collected between from 2018 to 2022 to detect neutralising antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 using a surrogate virus neutralisation test, and discovered two seropositive rodents (Sundamys muelleri and Rattus rattus), which were sampled in 2021 and 2022, respectively.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that Sundamys muelleri and Rattus rattus may be susceptible to natural SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, there is currently no evidence supporting sustainable rodent-to-rodent transmission.

Peer Review reports

Main

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first reported in a cluster of patients with pneumonia in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. SARS-CoV-2 spreads rapidly, resulting in clusters of respiratory infections worldwide, and been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in March 2020. As of 19th September 2022, SARS-CoV-2 infected > 617 million individuals and claimed > 6.5 million lives worldwide [1].

The SARS-CoV-2 spillover event is considered one of the greatest One Health disasters that costed >$16 trillion USD in pandemic management, reduced productivity and health [2]. Retrospectively, several epidemiological warnings over the course of the last two decades in the form of epidemic coronavirus spillover events, namely the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012 were significantly downplayed. Following this, the discovery of a bat coronavirus RaTG13 with a 96.2% genomic sequence similarity to SARS-CoV-2 in Mojiang, Yunnan, China in 2012 failed to ring a bell [3]. Recently, another bat coronavirus, BANAL-13, with higher genomic similarity to SARS-CoV-2 (96.8%), has been discovered in Laos, further cementing the idea that SARS-CoV-2 was indeed a spillover from bats. To date, the intermediary host of SARS-CoV-2 remains a mystery, although several studies have suggested pangolins to be the probable intermediate host [4,5,6].

The first documented spillback case was recorded in Hong Kong on the 29th February 2020 involving a dog [7]. Since then, SARS-CoV-2 has been reported in twenty-three different animal species globally, including cats, dogs [8], mink, otters, pet ferrets, lions, tigers [9], pumas, snow leopards, gorillas, white-tailed deer [10, 11], fishing cat, Binturong, South American coati, spotted hyena, Eurasian lynx, Canada lynx, hippopotamus, hamster, mule deer, giant anteater, West Indian manatee, black-tailed marmoset, common squirrel monkey [12] (as of 31st July 2022).

Historically, scientific evidence has shown that rodents are non-competent hosts for SARS-CoV-2 primarily due to the low avidity of the wildtype SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) to murine Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) expressed in cell lines [12,13,14]. However, with the emergence of the N501Y mutation in the spike of Alpha/B.1.1.7 (WHO/Pango lineage), Beta/B1.351 and Gamma/P3 variants of concern, there has been a notable shift. This mutation not only confers enhanced affinity towards human ACE2 but also to house mice (Mus musculus) and brown rats (Rattus norvegicus) [15]. To date, there has been no active SARS-CoV-2 infections in rodents. The sole evidence of SARS-CoV-2 exposure in rodents comes from Hong Kong, where seropositivity was identified in a single individual (Rattus norvegicus) [16]. Similar serosurveillance studies conducted in Belgium and Germany have reported no prior exposure of rodents to SARS-CoV-2 [17, 18].

With the increasing trend of home quarantine for SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals, thereby replacing designated quarantine centres, and the high prevalence of subclinical infections, we hypothesize that more infectious SARS-CoV-2-contaminated waste may enter unsegregated domestic waste. This situation could potentially expose scavenging rodents to SARS-CoV-2 infections. Therefore, our study aims to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies in wild rodents in Sarawak, Malaysia.

Results

A total of 208 archived plasma samples from rodents, collected between 2018 to Aug 2022 in Sarawak, Malaysia, underwent screening for neutralising antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The tested plasma samples included rodents from six species: Rattus tanezumi, Sundamys muelleri, Rattus tiomanicus, Rattus rattus, Leopoldamys sabanus, and Maxomys whiteheadi (Table 1). Notably, one individual each from the year 2021 (Sundamys muelleri) and year 2022 (Rattus rattus) exhibited surrogate virus neutralisation test (sVNT) inhibition of 47% surpassing the manufacturer’s positive cutoff value ≥30% (see Fig. 1). The seropositivity of SARS-CoV-2 in the rodent was 0% (n = 0/4; 2018), 0% (n = 0/55; 2019), 0% (n = 0/40; 2020), 0.01% (n = 1/85; 2021), n = 0.04% (1/24; 2022).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody in rodents sampled from 2018 to 2022. Neutralising antibody level in % inhibition was derived from the surrogate virus neutralisation test cPASS (Genscript) and the manufacturer’s positive cutoff value was represented as a red line. Blue and red dots represent seronegative and seropositive results, respectively

Full size image

Discussion

Significance of findings

We provided the first serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 exposure in Sundamys muelleri and Rattus rattus. In a related study, Miot et al., 2022 reported the detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies in Rattus norvegicus, suggesting potential susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 within the Muridae family [19]. Notably, these three species – Sundamys muelleri, Rattus rattus and Rattus norvegicus - are free-ranging ubiquitous wildlife (synanthrope) that have adapted to urban living. They typically manifest as pests, displaying primarily nocturnal behaviour and shying away from humans, unlike many other naturally infected animal species by SARS-CoV-2.

Gradual adaptation SARS-CoV-2 RBD to murine ACE2

The initial study indicated that the prototype SARS-CoV-2 RBD exhibits poor binding to murine ACE2 suggesting a natural resistance of rodents to SARS-CoV-2 infections [14]. However, subsequent in silico and in vivo studies have demonstrated the gradual adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 variants to murine ACE2 receptors. For instance, genomic sequence analysis suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant may have been resulted from a ping pong effect – a spillback from humans to mice, garnered mutation that enhanced the RBD’s avidity for the mouse ACE2 receptor before spillover again into humans [20, 21]. In vivo studies have demonstrated the permissiveness of deer mice (Peromyscus manicalatus) and golden/Syrian hamster (Mesocricetus auratus) to SARS-CoV-2 infections in laboratory settings, after being inoculated with infective doses ranging from 104 to 106 tissue culture infective dose 50 (TCID50) [22, 23], a high inoculum titre that may not be naturally encountered in the habitat. Infected deer mice shed viruses in the respiratory tract, faeces and urine; and they readily transmit the infection to naïve deer mice via direct contact [23] highlighting a possible risk of sustained mouse-to-mouse transmission.

The observed low SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in our study suggests that spillback from humans to rodents via environmental contamination does occur but is not sustainable within the free-ranging rodents population. Permissive hosts such as white-tailed-deer [10], minks [24] and Syrian hamster [25] exhibited high seroprevalence rates with high sVNT inhibition, indicating ongoing active transmission at the time of sampling. The moderate sVNT inhibition observed in our study may represent the waxing or waning of immunity after exposure.

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in the environment

Infected individuals shed the SARS-CoV-2 virus via their respiratory tract and faeces. Since the primary mode of transmission is via aerosol, the use of face masks and respirators have been proven effective in reducing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens. Face masks absorb infectious respiratory droplets, effectively reducing the release of infectious aerosols into the surrounding but in one fallen swoop enriches it with infectious particles [26]. Since SARS-CoV-2 can survive on inanimate objects for hours, and even days [27], and this survival period can be extended as long as 21 days in the presence of protective biological fluids such as nasal mucus, sputum and saliva [28]. Consequently, the improper disposal of used facemasks has become a concern, but has become largely neglected practice in public health settings [29]. In addition, the increased usage of rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test (RAT) kits has contributed to the rise in the disposal of used RAT kits in unsegregated domestic waste. Rodents scavenging through domestic waste may inadvertantly come into contact with used facemasks and RAT kits, which could potentially serve as a source of transmission.

Both SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 are known to be shed in the stool of some infected individuals, raising concerns about potential over faecal-oral transmission. Although viable SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated from the stool [28], there has been no documented evidence of faecal transmission. Despite these arguments, SARS-CoV-2 remains viable in the faeces, contaminating sewer shed and leading to the discovery of both circulating [28, 30] and novel SARS-CoV-2 lineages in the watershed [28]. Smyth and co-workers have argued that the mysterious SARS-CoV-2 lineages exhibit rare mutations which allow expanded tropism to cells expressing human, mouse or rat ACE2 receptors, suggesting a potential origin of these novel SARS-CoV-2 lineages from rodents [31].

The two seropositive rodents were sampled in market and residential areas during the Delta and Omicron variants wave, respectively [32, 33]. Both locations in the context of One Health could be the nexus of the spillback events, with used face masks, RAT kits, and other potentially infectious materials entering the domestic refuse bins until scheduled disposal. We speculate that the infected rodents may have scavenged the SARS-CoV-2 contaminated food waste in the exposed municipal bins due to spoilage, negligence or overflowing refuse.

Limitations

While we believe that this manuscript describes the first detection of neutralising SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in rodents in Malaysia, we also recognised several limitations in our study [1]. Neither virological nor molecular screenings were carried out in an attempt to confirm the infecting agent, which does not fulfil Koch’s postulates [2]. The moderate sVNT inhibition could indicate potential waxing or waning of immunity, non-specific antibody binding, or cross-reactivity [10]. However, plasma obtained from the pre-COVID-19 era (2018–2019), and low COVID-19 transmission era (2020) discounted the possibility of non-specific binding and cross-reactivity, [3] We did not compare our findings with the ‘gold standard’ PRNT50 due to the absence of biocontainment facilities. Nevertheless, the species-independent sVNT has consistently shown high concordance with VNT or PRNT50. However, previous assay evaluation studies have reported that the sensitivity of sVNT may differ between species. For instance, higher sVNT inhibition was observed on low PRNT50 sera from ferrets, rabbits, and cattle, while negative to moderate PRNT50 sera from a non-human primate, Cynomolgus macaques yielded low to negative sVNT inhibition [34]. Nonetheless, sVNT has been consistently shown to be in concordance with PRNT50 in humans, dogs, cats and hamsters [4, 35, 36] archived plasmas were collected opportunistically and may have introduced sampling bias.

Conclusions

The spillback of SARS-CoV-2 to rodents has been happening in Sarawak, Malaysian Borneo since 2021, but there is no evidence of a sustained transmission within the rodents’ population.

Continuous surveillance should be intensified at strategic locations such as municipal landfill and sewerage treatment plant to ensure that public health mitigation procedures can be implemented in a timely manner if a sustained transmission is detected.

Methods

Samples

Archived plasma samples from rodents collected for an ongoing pathogen surveillance activity from Jan 2018 to August 2022 were used in this study [37]. Cage traps were deployed at research sites during the sampling periods. The traps were baited with banana, salted fish, shrimp paste, and bread. Regular checks of the cage traps were done twice daily, both in the morning and evening, with bait replenishment carried out each morning. Rodents captured in the traps were carefully secured in cloth bags and subsequently transported to the laboratory for additional processing.

The morphometric measurements of each captured rodents were recorded, such as the total length, head-body length, tail length, and hindfoot, together with their weight in the laboratory. The species identification was done in accordance with the criteria outlined in Phillipps and Phillipps, 2018 [38].

The rodents were anesthetized in a closed container permeated with excess isoflurane. Subsequently, once the animals were confirmed deceased, blood samples were extracted from the heart using a 5 ml syringe via the intracardiac route, and stored in EDTA tubes. Blood and plasma were separated via centrifugation, and stored at -20 °C until use.

Table 1 Rodents species captured in forested, residential, and market areas in Sarawak
Full size table

Surrogate virus neutralisation test

All samples were screened for the presence of neutralising antibodies targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-Hu-1 (ancestral) RBD using species-independent surrogate virus neutralisation test, cPASS™ (Genscript, NJ, USA) [39]. Briefly, the tenfold diluted plasmas were combined with equal volume of horseradish peroxydase (HRP) conjugated RBD and preincubated for 30 min at 37 °C, before being transferred to ACE2-coated ELISA plate and incubated for 15 min at 37 °C. The wells were sequentially washed four times and chromogenic signal development was done using tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) substrate and reaction stopped with concentrated 1 M hydrochloric acid. Absorbance was measured at 450 nm using SpectraMax iD3 microplate reader (Molecular Devices, San Jose, USA). Results are presented as percent inhibition = (1- [OD value of Sample/OD value of Negative control]) x 100%. The manufacturer’s positive cutoff value is ≥ 30%. Results were analysed in Microsoft Excel Version 16.62.

Data availability

Data used and materials used in this manuscript can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ACE:

angiotensin converting enzyme

CoV:

coronavirus

COVID:

coronavirus disease

ELISA:

enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

HRP:

horse radish peroxidase

MERS:

middle eastern respiratory syndrome

PRNT:

plaque reduction neutralisation test

RAT:

rapid antigen test

RBD:

receptor binding domain

SARS:

severe acute respiratory syndrome

sVNT:

surrogate virus neutralisation test

TCID:

tissue culture infective dose

TMD:

tetramethylbenzidine

USD:

united states dollar

VNT:

virus neutralisation test

WHO:

World Health Organisation

References

  1. COVID Live. - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer [Internet]. [cited 2022 Sep 19]. Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/.

  2. Cutler DM, Summers LH. The COVID-19 Pandemic and the $16 Trillion Virus. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1495–6. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771764.

  3. Zhou P, Yang X, Lou, Wang XG, Hu B, Zhang L, Zhang W et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature. 2020;579(7798):270–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7.

  4. Xiao K, Zhai J, Feng Y, Zhou N, Zhang X, Zou JJ et al. Isolation of SARS-CoV-2-related coronavirus from Malayan pangolins. Nat. 2020;583(7815):286–9. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2313-x.

  5. Lam TTY, Jia N, Zhang YW, Shum MHH, Jiang JF, Zhu HC et al. Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins. Nat. 2020;583(7815):282–5. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2169-0.

  6. Wacharapluesadee S, Tan CW, Maneeorn P, Duengkae P, Zhu F, Joyjinda Y et al. Evidence for SARS-CoV-2 related coronaviruses circulating in bats and pangolins in Southeast Asia. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):1–9. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-02121240-1.

  7. Sit THC, Brackman CJ, Ip SM, Tam KWS, Law PYT, To EMW, et al. Infection of dogs with SARS-CoV-2. Nature. 2020;586(7831):776–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Tan CS, Bandak DB, Habeebur-Rahman SP, Tan LT, Lim LLA. Serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in companion animals in Sarawak, Malaysia. Virol J. 2023;20(1):176. Available from: https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-023-02133-9.

  9. McAloose D, Laverack M, Wang L, Killian ML, Caserta LC, Yuan F, et al. From people to Panthera: natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in tigers and lions at the Bronx Zoo. MBio. 2020;11(5):e02220.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Chandler JC, Bevins SN, Ellis JW, Linder TJ, Tell RM, Jenkins-Moore M, et al. SARS-CoV-2 exposure in wild white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2021;118(47):e2114828118.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Willgert K, Didelot X, Surendran-Nair M, Kuchipudi SV, Ruden RM, Yon M et al. Transmission history of SARS-CoV-2 in humans and white-tailed deer. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1).

  12. SARS-CoV-2. in animals - Situation report 15 - WOAH - World Organisation for Animal Health [Internet]. [cited 2022 Sep 13]. Available from: https://www.woah.org/en/document/86934/.

  13. Bao L, Deng W, Huang B, Gao H, Liu J, Ren L et al. The pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in hACE2 transgenic mice. Nat 2020 5837818. 2020;583(7818):830–3. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y.

  14. Zhao X, Chen D, Szabla R, Zheng M, Li G, Du P et al. Broad and Differential Animal Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 Receptor Usage by SARS-CoV-2. J Virol. 2020;94(18). https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00940-20.

  15. Shuai H, Chan JFW, Yuen TTT, Yoon C, Hu JC, Wen L, et al. Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants expand species tropism to murines. EBioMedicine. 2021;73:103643.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Tan CS, Hamzah ND, Ismail ZHF, Jerip AR, Kipli M. Self-sampling in Human Papillomavirus screening during and post-COVID-19 pandemic. Med J Malaysia. 2021;76(3):298–303. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34031326.

  17. Colombo VC, Sluydts V, Mariën J, Vanden Broecke B, Van Houtte N, Leirs W et al. SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) from Antwerp sewer system, Belgium. Transbound Emerg Dis 2021:3016–21.

  18. Wernike K, Drewes S, Mehl C, Hesse C, Imholt C, Jacob J, et al. No Evidence for the Presence of SARS-CoV-2 in Bank Voles and Other Rodents in Germany, 2020–2022.Pathog. 2022;11(10):1112. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/11/10/1112/htm.

  19. Miot EF, Worthington BM, Ng KH, De Guilhem de Lataillade L, Pierce MP, Liao Y et al. Surveillance of Rodent Pests for SARS-CoV-2 and Other Coronaviruses, Hong Kong. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022;28(2):467.

  20. Wei C, Shan KJ, Wang W, Zhang S, Huan Q, Qian W. Evidence for a mouse origin of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. J Genet Genomics. 2021;48(12):1111.

  21. Kuiper MJ, Wilson LOW, Mangalaganesh S, Lee C, Reti D, Vasan SS. But Mouse, You Are Not Alone: On Some Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variants Infecting Mice. ILAR J. 2021;62(1–2):48–59. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/ilarjournal/article/62/12/48/6503941.

  22. Sia SF, Yan LM, Chin AWH, Fung K, Choy KT, Wong AYL et al. Pathogenesis and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in golden hamsters. Nat. 2020;583(7818):834–8. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2342-5.

  23. Griffin BD, Chan M, Tailor N, Mendoza EJ, Leung A, Warner BM et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in the North American deer mouse. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):1–10. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-02123848-9.

  24. Berguido FJ, Burbelo PD, Bortolami A, Bonfante F, Wernike K, Hoffmann D et al. Serological detection of sars-cov‐2 antibodies in naturally‐infected mink and other experimentally‐infected animals. Viruses. 2021;13(8):1649. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/8/1649/htm.

  25. Yen HL, Sit THC, Brackman CJ, Chuk SSY, Gu H, Tam KWS, et al. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 delta variant (AY.127) from pet hamsters to humans, leading to onward human-to-human transmission: a case study. Lancet. 2022;399(10329):1070–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ueki H, Furusawa Y, Iwatsuki-Horimoto K, Imai M, Kabata H, Nishimura H et al. Effectiveness of Face Masks in Preventing Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2. mSphere. 2020;5(5). https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00637-20.

  27. Kasloff SB, Leung A, Strong JE, Funk D, Cutts T. Stability of SARS-CoV-2 on critical personal protective equipment. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1).

  28. Kwon T, Gaudreault NN, Richt JA. Seasonal Stability of SARS-CoV-2 in Biological Fluids. Pathog. 2021. 2021;10(5):540. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/10/5/540/htm.

  29. Shiferie F. Improper disposal of face masks during COVID-19: unheeded public health threat. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;38(366).

  30. Fontenele RS, Kraberger S, Hadfield J, Driver EM, Bowes D, Holland LRA, et al. High-throughput sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater provides insights into circulating variants. Water Res. 2021;205:117710.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Smyth DS, Trujillo M, Gregory DA, Cheung K, Gao A, Graham M et al. Tracking cryptic SARS-CoV-2 lineages detected in NYC wastewater. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):1–9. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-02228246-3.

  32. GISAID -. hCoV-19 Variants Dashboard [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 8]. Available from: https://gisaid.org/hcov-19-variants-dashboard/.

  33. Azami NAM, Perera D, Thayan R, AbuBakar S, Sam IC, Salleh MZ, et al. SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance in Malaysia: displacement of B.1.617.2 with AY lineages as the dominant Delta variants and the introduction of Omicron during the fourth epidemic wave. Int J Infect Dis. 2022;125:216–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Embregts CWE, Verstrepen B, Langermans JAM, Böszörményi KP, Sikkema RS, de Vries RD, et al. Evaluation of a multi-species SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization test. One Heal. 2021;13:100313.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Perera RAPM, Ko R, Tsang OTY, Hui DSC, Kwan MYM, Brackman CJ et al. Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization test for detection of antibody in human, canine, cat, and hamster sera. J Clin Microbiol. 2021;59(2). https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02504-20.

  36. Schulz C, Martina B, Mirolo M, Müller E, Klein R, Volk H et al. SARS-CoV-2–Specific Antibodies in Domestic Cats during First COVID-19 Wave, Europe. Emerg Infect Dis.

  37. Perison PWD, Amran NS, Adrus M, Anwarali Khan FA. Detection and molecular identification of blood parasites in rodents captured from urban areas of southern Sarawak, Malaysian Borneo. Vet Med Sci. 2022. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.849.

  38. Quentin P, Karen P. Phillipps’ field guide to the mammals of Borneo. Second. Princeton University Press; 2018. pp. 274–87.

  39. Tan CW, Chia WN, Qin X, Liu P, Chen MIC, Tiu C et al. A SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization test based on antibody-mediated blockage of ACE2–spike protein–protein interaction. Nat Biotechnol 2020. 2020;38(9):1073–8. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-020-0631-z.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Sampling of rodents was approved by the Sarawak Forestry Department under research permit No.(121)JHS/NCCD/600-7/2/107 (park permit WL66/2018) and No. (201) JHS/NCCD/600-7/2/107/J1d.2 (park permit No. WL96/2019).

Funding

Open access funding provided by Universiti Malaysia Sarawak. The study was financially supported by the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, 94300, Malaysia

    Cheng Siang Tan & Sultana Parvin Habeebur Rahman

  2. Faculty of Resource Science and Technology, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, 94300, Malaysia

    Madinah Adrus, Haziq Izzuddin Muhamad Azman & Riz Anasthasia Alta Abang

Authors
  1. Cheng Siang Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Madinah Adrus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sultana Parvin Habeebur Rahman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Haziq Izzuddin Muhamad Azman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Riz Anasthasia Alta Abang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CST and MA conceived the idea and designed the study, SPHR, HIMA, RAAA performed sample processing and analysis. CST drafted the manuscript. All authors reviewed, and improved the manuscript. All authors approved the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheng Siang Tan.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. All procedures in this study have been permitted and approved by the Universiti Malaysia Sarawak Animal Ethic Committee along with reference number UNIMAS/AEC/R/F07/038 and UNIMAS/AEC/R/F07/046. The study was carried out in compliance with the ARRIVE guideline.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tan, C.S., Adrus, M., Rahman, S.P.H. et al. Seroevidence of SARS-CoV-2 spillback to rodents in Sarawak, Malaysian Borneo. BMC Vet Res 20, 161 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-024-03892-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-024-03892-5

Keywords

BMC Veterinary Research

ISSN: 1746-6148

Contact us