Antibodies Related to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Coxiella burnetii, and Francisella tularensis Detected in Serum and Heart Rinses of Wild Small Mammals in the Czech Republic.

Wild small mammals are the most common reservoirs of pathogenic microorganisms that can cause zoonotic diseases. The aim of the study was to detect antibodies related to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Coxiella burnetii, and Francisella tularensis in wild small mammals from the Czech Republic. In total, sera or heart rinses of 211 wild small mammals (168 Apodemus flavicollis, 28 Myodes glareolus, 9 A. sylvaticus, and 6 Sorex araneus) were examined by modified enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Antibodies related to B.burgdorferi s.l., C. burnetii, and F. tularensis were detected in 15%, 19%, and 20% of animals, respectively. The prevalence of B. burgdorferi and F. tularensis statistically differed in localities and F. tularensis also differed in sex. Antibodies against 2-3 pathogens were found in 17% of animals with a higher prevalence in M. glareolus. This study brings new data about the prevalence of the above-mentioned pathogens.

Detection of Antibodies Against Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus and Other Flaviviruses in a Zoological Collection in Slovenia.

Monitoring infectious diseases is one of the most important pillars of preventative veterinary medicine in zoological collections. The zoo environment offers a great variety of different animal species living in proximity and in contact with small wild animals and vectors (e.g., ticks and mosquitos). In this context, tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV), Usutu virus (USUV), and West Nile virus (WNV) causing vector-borne diseases are emerging pathogens that raise concern. The aim of the study was to detect antibodies to selected flaviviruses in various animal species in the Ljubljana Zoo, Slovenia. In total, 874 sera from 96 animal species were tested for antibodies to TBEV by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA); positive samples were confirmed by a virus neutralization test (VNT) using TBEV, WNV, and USUV antigens. Antibodies to TBEV were detected by ELISA in 3.9% (34/874) of zoo animals, with 4% (30/753) in mammals and 5% (4/86) in birds; the sera of reptiles (n = 34) and amphibians (n = 1) were negative. Antibodies to TBEV were confirmed by VNT in 11 mammals; one bird was positive for both WNV and USUV. The mixture of exotic animal species and their contact with wild animals and vectors such as ticks and mosquitos suggest that screening of infectious diseases in zoo animals might provide good insight into the epizootological situation of the area. This is the first survey of TBEV, WNV, and USUV in a zoological collection in Slovenia.

Biosurveillance of Selected Pathogens with Zoonotic Potential in a Zoo.

Monitoring of infectious diseases is one of the most important pillars of preventive medicine in zoos. Screening for parasitic and bacterial infections is important to keep animals and equipment safe from pathogens that may pose a risk to animal and human health. Zoos usually contain many different animal species living in proximity with people and wild animals. As an epidemiological probe, 188 animals (122 mammals, 65 birds, and one reptile) from a zoo in Slovenia were examined for selected pathogens. Antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora caninum were detected by ELISA in 38% (46/122) and 3% (4/122) of mammals, and in 0% (0/64) and 2% (1/57) of birds, respectively; the reptile (0/1) was negative. A statistically significant difference in T. gondii prevalence was found in Carnivora compared to Cetartiodactyla and primate antibodies to Encephalitozoon cuniculi were detected by IFAT in 44% (52/118) of mammals and 20% (11/56) of birds, respectively; the reptile (0/1) was negative. Herbivores had a higher chance of being infected with E. cuniculi compared to omnivores. Antibodies to Chlamydia abortus and Coxiella burnetii were not detected in any of the 74 tested zoo animals. The sera of 39 wild rodents found in the zoo were also examined; they were negative for all three parasites. The parasite T. gondii was detected by PCR in the tissue of two mute swans (Cygnus olor), three eastern house mice (Mus musculus), one yellow-necked field mouse (Apodemus flavicollis), and one striped field mouse (A. agrarius). Positive samples were genotyped by a single multiplex PCR assay using 15 microsatellite markers; one sample from a mute swan was characterized as type II. This micro-epidemiological study offers a better understanding of pathogens in zoo animals and an understanding of the role of zoos in biosurveillance.

Wild Small Mammals and Ticks in Zoos-Reservoir of Agents with Zoonotic Potential?

Wild small mammals and ticks play an important role in maintaining and spreading zoonoses in nature, as well as in captive animals. The aim of this study was to monitor selected agents with zoonotic potential in their reservoirs and vectors in a zoo, and to draw attention to the risk of possible contact with these pathogens. In total, 117 wild small mammals (rodents) and 166 ticks were collected in the area of Brno Zoo. Antibodies to the bacteria Coxiella burnetii, Francisella tularensis, and Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. were detected by a modified enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 19% (19/99), 4% (4/99), and 15% (15/99) of rodents, respectively. Antibodies to Leptospira spp. bacteria were detected by the microscopic agglutination test in 6% (4/63) of rodents. Coinfection (antibodies to more than two agents) were proved in 14.5% (15/97) of animals. The prevalence of C. burnetii statistically differed according to the years of trapping (p = 0.0241). The DNAs of B. burgdorferi s.l., Rickettsia sp., and Anaplasma phagocytophilum were detected by PCR in 16%, 6%, and 1% of ticks, respectively, without coinfection and without effect of life stage and sex of ticks on positivity. Sequencing showed homology with R. helvetica and A. phagocytophilum in four and one positive samples, respectively. The results of our study show that wild small mammals and ticks in a zoo could serve as reservoirs and vectors of infectious agents with zoonotic potential and thus present a risk of infection to zoo animals and also to keepers and visitors to a zoo.