No abstract

No abstract

An H7N9 low pathogenicity avian influenza virus (LPAIV) emerged in 2013 through genetic reassortment between H9N2 and other LPAIVs circulating in birds in China. This virus causes inapparent clinical disease in chickens, but zoonotic transmission results in severe and fatal disease in humans. To examine a natural reassortment scenario between H7N9 and G1 lineage H9N2 viruses predominant in the Indian sub-continent, we performed an experimental co-infection of chickens with A/Anhui/1/2013/H7N9 (Anhui/13) virus and A/Chicken/Pakistan/UDL-01/2008/H9N2 (UDL/08) virus. Plaque purification and genotyping of the reassortant viruses shed via oropharynx of contact chickens showed H9N2 and H9N9 as predominant subtypes. The reassortant viruses shed by contact chickens also showed selective enrichment of polymerase genes from H9N2 virus. The viable ‘6+2’ reassortant H9N9 (having NP, NA from H7N9 and remaining genes from H9N2) was successfully shed from the oropharynx of contact chickens, plus it showed an increased replication rate in human A549 cells and a significantly higher receptor binding to α2,6 and α2,3 sialoglycans compared to H9N2. The reassortant H9N9 virus also had a lower fusion pH, replicated in directly infected ferrets at similar levels compared to H7N9 and transmitted via direct contact. Ferrets exposed to H9N9 via aerosol contact were also found to be seropositive, compared to H7N9 aerosol contact ferrets. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating that co-circulation of H7N9 and G1 lineage H9N2 viruses could represent a threat for the generation of novel reassortant H9N9 viruses with greater virulence in poultry and a zoonotic potential. Importance We evaluated the consequences of reassortment between the H7N9 and the contemporary H9N2 viruses of G1 lineage that are enzootic in poultry across the Indian sub-continent and the Middle East. Co-infection of chickens with these viruses resulted in emergence of novel reassortant H9N9 viruses with genes derived from both H9N2 and H7N9 viruses. The ‘6+2’ reassortant H9N9 (having NP and NA from H7N9) virus was shed from contact chickens in a significantly higher proportion compared to most of the reassortant viruses, showed significantly increased replication fitness in human A549 cells, receptor binding towards human (α2,6) and avian (α2,3) sialic acid receptor analogues and the potential to transmit via contact among ferrets. This study demonstrated the ability of viruses that already exist in nature to exchange genetic material, highlighting the potential emergence of viruses from these subtypes with zoonotic potential.

The China-origin H7N9 low pathogenicity avian influenza virus (LPAIV) emerged as a zoonotic threat in 2013 where it continues to circulate in live poultry markets. Absence of overt clinical signs in poultry is a typical LPAIV infection outcome, and has contributed to its insidious maintenance in China. This study is the first description of H7N9 LPAIV (A/Anhui/1/13) infection in turkeys, with efficient transmission to two additional rounds of introduced contact turkeys which all became infected during cohousing. Surprisingly, mortality was observed in six of eight (75%) second-round contact turkeys which is unusual for LPAIV infection, with unexpected systemic dissemination to many organs beyond the respiratory and enteric tracts, but interestingly no accompanying mutation to highly pathogenic AIV. The intravenous pathogenicity index score for a turkey-derived isolate (0.39) affirmed the LPAIV phenotype. However, the amino acid change L235Q in the haemagglutinin gene occurred in directly-infected turkeys and transmitted to the contacts, including those that died and the two which resolved infection to survive to the end of the study. This polymorphism was indicative of a reversion from mammalian to avian adaptation for the H7N9 virus. This study underlined a new risk to poultry in the event of H7N9 spread beyond China.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether pooling avian influenza (AI)-positive swabs with negative swabs has a detrimental effect on the sensitivity of AI real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reactions (rRT-PCRs). Cloacal and buccal swabs were sampled daily from 12 turkeys infected with A/goose/England/07(H2N2). For half the turkeys, each swab was mixed with four swabs from known AI-negative turkeys, and for the other half the swabs were tested individually. Bayesian modelling was used to (i) determine whether pooling the positive swabs compromised the cycle threshold (C(t)) value obtained from the rRT-PCRs, and (ii) estimate the likelihood of detection of an H2N2 infected turkey flock via rRT-PCR for pooled and individually tested swabs (cloacal and buccal) vs. the number of days post-infection of the flock. Results indicated that there was no significant effect of compromising AI rRT-PCR sensitivity by pooling a weak positive swab with negative swabs on the Ct values which were obtained. Pooled sampling was able to widen the detection window compared to individual sampling, for the same number of rRT-PCR tests. This indicates that pooled sampling would be an effective method of reducing the number of tests to be performed to determine flock status during an AI outbreak and for surveillance.