Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 16, Number 2—February 2010
Dispatch

Extensive Mammalian Ancestry of Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Virus

Natalia A. Ilyushina1, Jeong-Ki Kim1, Nicholas J. Negovetich1, Young-Ki Choi1, Victoria Lang, Nicolai V. Bovin, Heather L. Forrest, Min-Suk Song, Philippe Noriel Q. Pascua, Chul-Joong Kim, Robert G. WebsterComments to Author , and Richard J. Webby
Author affiliations: St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA (N.A. Ilyushina, J.-K. Kim, N.J. Negovetich, V. Lang, H.L. Forrest, R.G. Webster, R.J. Webby); D.I. Ivanovsky Institute of Virology, Moscow, Russia (N.A. Ilyushina); Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Daejeon, Republic of Korea (J.-K. Kim); Chungbuk National University College of Medicine and Medical Research Institute, Cheongju, Republic of Korea (Y.-K. Choi, M-S Song, P.N.Q. Pascua); Shemyakin Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry, Moscow (N.V. Bovin); Chungnam National University College of Veterinary Medicine, Daejeon (C.-J. Kim); University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis (R.G. Webster, R.J. Webby)

Main Article

Table 2

Replication and transmission of influenza virus A/California/04/2009 (H1N1) in various bird species

Common name (genus and species) Virus titer*
 Transmission†
1 dpi
 3 dpi
 5 dpi
Oropharynx Cloaca Oropharynx Cloaca Oropharynx Cloaca
Chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) 1.7 ± 0.5 < < < < < 0
Domestic duck (Anas platyrhynchos) 1.7 ± 0.5 < < < < < 0
Wild duck (Anas platyrhynchos) 1.3 ± 0.0 < < < < < 0
Quail (Coturnix japonica) 3.4 ± 0.9‡ < 2.0 ± 1.3‡ 0.8 ± 0.9 1.3 ± 0.9 1.3 ± 0.9 33‡

*dpi, days postinoculation; <, titer below limit of detection (<0.75 log10EID50/mL). Virus titers were determined in eggs and are expressed as the log10 50% egg infectious dose (EID50)/mL (8). Data are presented as means ± standard deviation of titers of positive samples (≥0.75 log10 EID50/mL).
†Percentage of contact birds from which virus was isolated.
‡p<0.05, by 1-way analysis of variance.

Main Article

References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Swine influenza A (H1N1) infection in two children—southern California, March–April 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58:400–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. World Health Organization. Global Alert and Response. Pandemic (H1N1) 2009–update 58. 2009 Jul 6 [cited 2009 Jul 9]. http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_07_06/en/index.html
  3. Nicholls  JM, Chan  RWY, Russell  RJ, Air  GM, Peiris  JSM. Evolving complexities of influenza virus and its receptors. Trends Microbiol. 2008;16:149–57. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Stevens  J, Blixt  O, Glaser  L, Taubenberger  JK, Palese  P, Paulson  JC, Glycan microarray analysis of the hemagglutinins from modern and pandemic influenza viruses reveals different receptor specificities. J Mol Biol. 2006;355:1143–55. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Matrosovich  M, Tuzikov  A, Bovin  N, Gambaryan  AS, Klimov  A, Castrucci  MR, Early alterations of the receptor-binding properties of H1, H2, and H3 avian influenza virus hemagglutinins after their introduction into mammals. J Virol. 2000;74:8502–12. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Garten  RJ, Davis  CD, Russell  CA, Shu  B, Lindstrom  S, Balish  A, Antigenic and genetic characteristics of swine-origin 2009 A (H1N1) influenza viruses circulating in humans. Science. 2009;325:197–201. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Smith  GJD, Vijaykrishna  D, Bahl  J, Lycett  SJ, Worobey  M, Pybus  OG, Origins and evolutionary genomics of the 2009 swine-origin H1N1 influenza A epidemic. Nature. 2009;459:1122–5. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Reed  LJ, Muench  H. A simple method for estimating fifty percent endpoints. Am J Hyg. 1938;27:493–7.
  9. Swayne  DE, Pantin-Jackwood  M, Kapczynski  D, Spackman  E, Suarez  DL. Susceptibility of poultry to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus [letter]. Emerg Infect Dis [serial on the Internet]. 2009 Dec [cited 2009 Nov 18]. http://www.cdc.gov/EID/content/15/12/2061.htm
  10. Ito  T, Suzuki  Y, Mithaul  L, Vines  A, Kida  H, Kawaoka  Y. Receptor specificity of influenza A viruses correlates with the agglutination of erythrocytes from different animal species. Virology. 1997;227:493–9. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Medeiros  R, Escriou  N, Naffakh  N, Manuguerra  JC, van der Werf  S. Hemagglutinin residues of recent human A (H3N2) influenza viruses that contribute to the inability to agglutinate chicken erythrocytes. Virology. 2001;289:74–85. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Mochalova  L, Gambaryan  A, Romanova  J, Tuzikov  A, Chinarev  A, Katinger  D, Receptor-binding properties of modern human influenza viruses primarily isolated in Vero and MDCK cells and chicken embryonated eggs. Virology. 2003;313:473–80. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gamblin  SJ, Haire  LF, Russell  RJ, Stevens  DJ, Xiao  B, Ha  Y, The structure and receptor binding properties of the 1918 influenza hemagglutinin. Science. 2004;303:1838–42. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Main Article

1These authors contributed equally to this article.

Page created: December 13, 2010
Page updated: December 13, 2010
Page reviewed: December 13, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external