Abstract
West Nile virus is a re-emerging arbovirus whose impact on public health is increasingly important as more and more epidemics and epizootics occur, particularly in America and Europe, with evidence of active circulation in Africa. Because birds constitute the main reservoirs, migratory movements allow the diffusion of various lineages in the world. It is therefore crucial to properly control the dispersion of these lineages, especially because some have a greater health impact on public health than others. This work describes the development and validation of a novel whole-genome amplicon-based sequencing approach to West Nile virus. This study was carried out on different strains from lineage 1 and 2 from Senegal and Italy. The presented protocol/approach showed good coverage using samples derived from several vertebrate hosts and may be valuable for West Nile genomic surveillance.
Keywords: West Nile virus, lineages, next-generation sequencing, amplicon-based sequencing
1. Introduction
The threat from new re-emerging viruses has markedly increased in recent decades due to population growth, urbanization, and the expansion of global travel, facilitating the rapid spread of infection during an outbreak. West Nile virus (WNV), an arbovirus belonging to the flavivirus genus, was firstly isolated in 1937 in Uganda [1] before spreading throughout the world [2]. The enzootic cycle includes mosquitoes and several vertebrate species including birds, allowing long-distance viral spread during migratory seasons [3,4]. Humans are considered WNV dead-end hosts because no human-to-mosquito transmission has been reported yet [5]. Most WNV infections are asymptomatic or may develop into self-limited febrile illness, but a very small percentage of cases progress to neuroinvasive disease with a range of symptoms and occasionally death [6,7].
Before 1990, WNV disease was considered to have a minor public health impact with only sporadic human cases. Since the first outbreaks reported in Algeria and Romania in 1994 and 1996, the virus has diffused to cause large epidemics in North America, Northern African, and Western and Eastern European countries [7].
In Italy, areas with either proven active asymptomatic WNV circulation or high probability of human infection have been previously reported [8,9], and an increasing number of neuroinvasive human infections have been described [10,11].
In Africa, little evidence of WNV epidemics has been noted. In Senegal, where WNV was first isolated in an acute human case in 1970, the virus has also been detected in mosquitoes, birds, horses, and human samples. From 2012 to 2021, active WNV circulation in mosquitoes and humans was documented following a reintroduction event from Europe [12].
WNV exhibits great genetic diversity with currently eight different lineages (excluding Koutango virus) circulating in the world [13]. Lineages 1 (WNV-L1) and 2 (WNV-L2) are the ones causing the main public health concern [7,12]. Genetic characterization of the strains detected yield potential tracking of the routes of the introduction of viruses, which is a particular interest for public health authorities in designing surveillance and countermeasures plans.
Genome sequencing of viruses has proven to be critical in the management of epidemics. Many approaches can be used to obtain viral whole genomes: (i) propagation with cell cultures followed by nucleic acids metagenomic (mNGS); (ii) hybrid capture using specific biotinylated probes; and (iii) a multiplex PCR-based target enrichment or amplicon-based protocol. This last approach became the most used one for the SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic due to its applicability in a wide range of input titers, yielding directly sequenced clinical samples, as well as its high specificity and scalability under resource-limited conditions with lower costs [14,15,16,17].
Due to the wide range of WNV hosts, many One Health studies focus on WNV. As genomic data are key information for understanding the mechanisms of the emergence and circulation of this virus, it is crucial to develop a rapid, reliable, and cost-effective sequencing tool that is more accessible than isolation methods or mNGS.
We describe here the development and evaluation of a whole-genome amplicon-based sequencing approach for WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 using Illumina technology in different types of vertebrates and mammals from Senegal and Italy.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Primers Design for Tiled Amplicon-Based Sequencing Systems for West Nile Virus
Primer design was made in IPD using a web-based tool entitled Primal Scheme [18] in order to obtain two non-overlapping pools of WNV targeting primers to perform multiplexed PCR reactions, generating approximately 400 bp amplicons tiled along the targeted genome. A WNV reference genome (accession number: NC009942) was chosen as the template. An alignment of WNV whole-genome sequences available on Genbank representative of all WNV lineages in both Africa and Europe was then used to identify nucleotide mismatches for potential correction at ambiguous sites of each primer to ensure both good coverage and high specificity for diverse WNV lineages. Overall, the approach used was a two-pool multiplex amplicon-based sequencing.
2.2. West Nile Virus Primer Pools Validation
Validation of the primer sets followed several steps: (i) inclusivity test by sequencing attempts on several WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 strains; (ii) specificity and sensitivity tests by sequencing attempts on several flaviviruses and other arboviruses, as well as serial dilutions of WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 culture isolates; and (iii) final validation by sequencing confirmed positive WNV samples derived from different species of vertebrates and mosquitoes from Italy and Senegal.
2.2.1. Sequencing of WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 Isolates
The designed primer systems were challenged for amplicon-based whole-genome sequencing of well-characterized WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 isolates from Senegal and Italy. The experiments were undertaken by both the teams in Senegal and Italy with their local isolates. WNV-L1 (n = 10) and WNV-L2 (n = 8) well-characterized viral isolates from both countries were used to assess the ability of the designed primer pools for whole-genome amplicon-based sequencing. WNV strains from Senegal were obtained after infection of C6/36 monolayer cells with homogenized mosquito pools as previously described [12]. Isolates from Italy were obtained from birds’ internal organ homogenates after two to three passages on Vero monolayer cell lines, followed by an infection on C6/36 cell lines. A genome coverage of 95% and above was targeted.
2.2.2. Specificity and Sensitivity of the WNV Amplicon-Based Sequencing Systems
The second step was to assess specificity by performing the experiment on several other arboviruses: Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV); yellow fever virus (YFV); Zika virus (ZIKV); dengue 2 virus (DENV-2); Wesselsbron virus (WSLV); Kedougou virus (KDGV); Usutu virus (USUV); and chikungunya virus (CHIKV). The sensitivity of the approach was evaluated using serial dilutions of WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 culture isolates at different concentrations (106–102 RNA copy/μL). Each concentration was sequenced in triplicate.
2.2.3. Validation on Confirmed Positive WNV Samples
Finally, sequencing attempts on both WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 positive samples from mosquitoes, birds, and horses from Italy and Senegal were conducted. The CT values of the samples were confirmed by RT-qPCR using a consensus WNV assay [6] in Senegal and a molecular WNV sub-typing assay [19] in Italy, prior to proceeding to the sequencing.
2.2.4. Next-Generation Sequencing and Genome Assembly
Viral RNAs were extracted using the QIAamp viral RNA mini-kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) and were reverse-transcribed into cDNAs using the Superscript IV Reverse Transcriptase enzyme (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The synthesized cDNAs served as templates for direct amplification to generate approximately 400 bp amplicons tiled along the genome using two non-overlapping pools of WNV targeting primers at 10 nM and Q5® High-Fidelity 2X Master Mix (New England Biolabs) with the following thermal cycling protocol: 98 °C for 30 s; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 15 s and 65 °C for 5 min; and a final cooling step at 4 °C.
In Senegal, libraries were then synthesized by tagmentation using the Illumina DNA Prep kit and the IDT® for Illumina PCR Unique Dual Indexes. After a cleaning step with the Agencourt AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter, Indianapolis, IN), libraries were quantified using a Qubit 3.0 fluorometer (Invitrogen Inc., Waltham, MA, USA) for manual normalization before pooling in the sequencer. Cluster generation and sequencing were conducted with ab Illumina MiSeq instrument with 2 × 300 nt read length. Consensus genomes were generated using the nextflow-based nf-core viral reconstruction pipeline (https://github.com/nf-core/viralrecon, accessed on 20 January 2023) from the standardized nf-core pipelines [20,21]. The versions of nextflow and viralrecon used were v21.10.6 and v2.5, respectively. In Italy, amplified DNA was diluted to obtain a concentration of 100–500 ng, then used for library preparation with an Illumina DNA prep kit, and sequenced with a NextSeq 500 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) using a NextSeq 500/550 Mid Output Reagent Cartridge v2 for 300 cycles with standard 150 bp paired-end reads. After quality control and trimming with the Trimmomatic v0.36 (Usadellab, Düsseldorf, Germany) [22] and FastQC tool v0.11.5 (Bioinformatics Group, Babraham Institute, Cambridge, UK) [23,24], reads were de novo assembled using SPADES v3.11.1 (Algorithmic Biology Lab, St Petersburg, Russia) [25]. The contigs obtained were analyzed with BLASTn to identify the best match reference. Mapping of the trimmed reads was then performed using the iVar computational tool [26] to obtain a consensus sequence.
3. Results
3.1. West Nile Virus Oligonucleotide Primers Sets
A first multiplex primer system was designed based on a WNV-L1 reference genome (accession number: NC009942), generating a set of 35 oligonucleotide primer pairs that amplify overlapping products spanning almost the whole WNV genome.
The primers set (set A) was subsequently compared to an alignment of 15 sequences representing the different WNV lineages (Table S1). Degeneration was then added in relevant ambiguous sites on each primer in order to cover a maximum of lineages while trying to maintain a balance for specificity. The list of WNV primers in set A can be found in Table 1. We should notice that two extra primers (KOUV_2_RIGHT and KOUV_7_LEFT) were incorporated into set A to potentially extend the sequencing to Koutango virus, even if this work was not carried out in this study.
Table 1.
Sequences of the West Nile virus primers sets A and B.
| WNV Primers Set A | WNV Primers Set B | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| WNV_1_LEFT | GCCTGTGTGAGCTGACAAACTT | WNV-L2_1_LEFT | GCCTGTGTGAGCTGACAAACTT |
| WNV_1_RIGHT | TTCTTTTGTTTTGAGCTCCKCC | WNV-L2_1_RIGHT | TTCTTTTGTTTTGTGCTCCGGC |
| WNV_2_LEFT | ACAGCGATGAAACACCTTCTGA | WNV-L2_2_LEFT | ACAGCGATGAAGCATCTCTTGA |
| WNV_2_RIGHT | CGTGTCTTGGTGCATCTTCCAT | WNV-L2_2_RIGHT | GBCGDGTYTTDGTGCATCTYCC |
| KOUV_2_RIGHT | TTYCCTCTGATGCATCTTCCAT | WNV-L2_3_LEFT | GTSYTRGCTGCTGGAAATGAYC |
| WNV_3_LEFT | CCRGTACTGTCGGCTGGTAATG | WNV-L2_3_RIGHT | CMACCCATGTAGCTCCAGAYAC |
| WNV_3_RIGHT | CVAGAACCAAATCCACCCAWGT | WNV-L2_4_LEFT | ATNCTATTGCTCCTGGTRGCA |
| WNV_4_LEFT | ACAGCTTCAACTGCCTTGGAAT | WNV-L2_4_RIGHT | TCCADCCAGTTGCTTTGGTKGW |
| WNV_4_RIGHT | TGRTTCTTCCTATTGCCTTGGT | WNV-L2_5_LEFT | GTRGACAGRGGATGGGGAAAYG |
| WNV_5_LEFT | GGYTGCGGACTATTTGGMAAA | WNV-L2_5_RIGHT | GRTTCCTCCAHGYGGTGCTT |
| WNV_5_RIGHT | CTCCACACAGTACTTCCAGCAC | WNV-L2_6_LEFT | CCTTCCTGGTYCACCGAGARTG |
| WNV_6_LEFT | GGHACAAAGACGTTCTTGGTYC | WNV-L2_6_RIGHT | KGAVGAAATGGGCACYTTRCAR |
| WNV_6_RIGHT | GMACTTTGCAAGGTCCATCYGT | WNV-L2_7_LEFT | GCDTTYAAATTCGCYGGGACTC |
| WNV_7_LEFT | AYGCTTTCAAGTTTCTTGGGACT | WNV-L2_7_RIGHT | GTGTATRGCTTTCCCYACYGAG |
| KOUV_7_LEFT | AYGCTTTCAAGTTTCTTGGGCAT | WNV-L2_8_LEFT | ACTCAGAGGAGCTCAACGACTC |
| WNV_7_RIGHT | AASACTTGATGGACAGCCTTCC | WNV-L2_8_RIGHT | ATTYTTGCTAGGCCTTGTGGHG |
| WNV_8_LEFT | ARMGACTAGCCGCTCTAGGAGA | WNV-L2_9_LEFT | CGGTGYGGAAGTGGAGTGTTYA |
| WNV_8_RIGHT | TGDGCTTTCTGAATGATCTTGGCT | WNV-L2_9_RIGHT | TRYTRTTCCATGCTCGGTTSR |
| WNV_9_LEFT | AAYGATGTGGAGGCTTGGATGG | WNV-L2_10_LEFT | YGCDCCAGARCTAGCTAACAAYA |
| WNV_9_RIGHT | AWRCTATTCCAAGCGCGATTSK | WNV-L2_10_RIGHT | CCCTGGYCTCCTGTTRTGRTTGC |
| WNV_10_LEFT | TMTTTGCACCAGAACTCGCYAA | WNV-L2_11_LEFT | CACHYTGTGGGGTGATGGAGTT |
| WNV_10_RIGHT | CWGGTCTCCGATTGTGATTGCT | WNV-L2_11_RIGHT | CAGAAGGCCCAACTGAAAAGGA |
| WNV_11_LEFT | AYACCTTGTGGGGCGATGGART | WNV-L2_12_LEFT | GAYGAAAAGACCCTCGTGCA |
| WNV_11_RIGHT | GGCCCAACTGAAAAGGGTCAAT | WNV-L2_12_RIGHT | CCATTTGRAAGAAAGCAGCTGCR |
| WNV_12_LEFT | TGGARATCAGACCACAGAGRCA | WNV-L2_13_LEFT | CAGTCTTTCTGGTGGCTTCBTT |
| WNV_12_RIGHT | TTGRAAGAAAACAGCCGCCARC | WNV-L2_13_RIGHT | YCCAGCKGCAAGTATCATBGGA |
| WNV_13_LEFT | CCAGTGTTTATGGTGGCWTCGT | WNV-L2_14_LEFT | MRGTTGGAAGCYTCATCAARGARA |
| WNV_13_RIGHT | CHGCAAGGATCATGGGGTTGAA | WNV-L2_14_RIGHT | TGAAAATTTCCATCRTCATCCARCC |
| WNV_14_LEFT | GVAGCTTGATCAGGGAGAARAG | WNV-L2_15_LEFT | GGACRGCTGAYATYACYTGGGA |
| WNV_14_RIGHT | TCCBGGATCATTCATGARCTGG | WNV-L2_15_RIGHT | RCTCATGAGAGCRGCTCCCTTR |
| WNV_15_LEFT | CKGACATTTCCTGGGAAAGTGA | WNV-L2_16_LEFT | ATHATGACTCGAGGTCTGCTYG |
| WNV_15_RIGHT | TCATCAAAGCGGCTCCTTTWGT | WNV-L2_16_RIGHT | MRCCATTDGGCATGATGACKCC |
| WNV_16_LEFT | CTYGGCAGTTATCAAGCAGGAG | WNV-L2_17_LEFT | RGACTATCCCACYGGAACRTCA |
| WNV_16_RIGHT | WATBGCGCTTATGTATGAHCCR | WNV-L2_17_RIGHT | TGGCACATGACATCAACGATYT |
| WNV_17_LEFT | CMATAGTGGACAAAAACGGTGATGT | WNV-L2_18_LEFT | TKAGAGGACTTCCCATYCGGTA |
| WNV_17_RIGHT | DGTGAGGGTAGCATGACACATG | WNV-L2_18_RIGHT | TTBCCCATTTTCACACTTGGAACR |
| WNV_18_LEFT | ATGKCTGAAGCACTGAGRGGA | WNV-L2_19_LEFT | ACMGAGCCTGGAACACTGGVTA |
| WNV_18_RIGHT | CCCATCTTGACACTAGGCACAA | WNV-L2_19_RIGHT | CCTCCATAGCAATACTCATCACCA |
| WNV_19_LEFT | CGRGCTTGGAACTCTGGATAYG | WNV-L2_20_LEFT | TGATGGAAGAGTCATCCTGGGV |
| WNV_19_RIGHT | TACTCATCACCAACTTGCGAYG | WNV-L2_20_RIGHT | GTGTTGGTTCGAGGTCCATCAA |
| WNV_20_LEFT | GGAGAACCATCTGCAGTGACAG | WNV-L2_21_LEFT | CWGTCTGGCTCGCTTACAAAGT |
| WNV_20_RIGHT | CMACTTCGTTGTTGTCTTCTAAAATTG | WNV-L2_21_RIGHT | ARGCTATTGTCTGAAGGGCRTC |
| WNV_21_LEFT | CYTACAAGGTTGCAGCRGCT | WNV-L2_22_LEFT | TTKGACACGATGTATGTGGTKG |
| WNV_21_RIGHT | ACTCCCATGGTCATCACACWCA | WNV-L2_22_RIGHT | CAYTCTTGGTCTTGTCCAGCCA |
| WNV_22_LEFT | GAGGMAGAGCTCACAGAATGGC | WNV-L2_23_LEFT | YCAGCTYGCCGTGTTTTTGATY |
| WNV_22_RIGHT | CCTTGACCTCAATTCTTTGCCC | WNV-L2_23_RIGHT | CYGCAGTCACAGTCACAGTCAG |
| WNV_23_LEFT | TTGTGTCATGACCCTTGTSAGC | WNV-L2_24_LEFT | YTTTGTVGACGTTGGTGTGTCA |
| WNV_23_RIGHT | GGDACCATGTAGGCATAGTGGC | WNV-L2_24_RIGHT | TYGTTGCRTTCCACACTGARCT |
| WNV_24_LEFT | TTYGTCGATGTTGGAGTKTCA | WNV-L2_25_LEFT | ARRACTGTCAGAGAGGCYGGAA |
| WNV_24_RIGHT | GTYGTTGCGTTCCAMACWGAGC | WNV-L2_25_RIGHT | GCCTTTCCACTAACCACCGYAR |
| WNV_25_LEFT | RGACHGTVCGAGAAGCYGGAAT | WNV-L2_26_LEFT | RHGCCAGGAGAGAGGGAAAYRT |
| WNV_25_RIGHT | GRTCGAGGAAACBCCGTTCGAC | WNV-L2_26_RIGHT | CCARTCTTCCACCATCTCCARR |
| WNV_26_LEFT | RAGAAGGCAAYRTCACYGGAGG | WNV-L2_27_LEFT | CACACTGCTCTGTGACATTGGA |
| WNV_26_RIGHT | ARAATTCCCTTGGCCCTCGG | WNV-L2_27_RIGHT | AGAATTGAGGAGAGGCTTCCCY |
| WNV_27_LEFT | TCAAGTGCTGAGGTTGAAGAGC | WNV-L2_28_LEFT | AAGAAAACVTGGAAGGGACCYC |
| WNV_27_RIGHT | GCCTGAGTCGTTCAATCCTGTT | WNV-L2_28_RIGHT | TBGTGGTCTCATTGAGGACGTR |
| WNV_28_LEFT | TGTAAACTTGGGAAGTGGAACCA | WNV-L2_29_LEFT | CTCCTTTCGGHCAACAACGRGT |
| WNV_28_RIGHT | TTTWTCKCTGGCCAYAAAVGCC | WNV-L2_29_RIGHT | CYCCBAGCCACATGAACCADAT |
| WNV_29_LEFT | GTGGAYACGAAAGCTCCTGARC | WNV-L2_30_LEFT | ACYTGCATCTACAACATGATGGG |
| WNV_29_RIGHT | ATTGAGAAAACCSAGAGCTTCG | WNV-L2_30_RIGHT | GGBCTCATCACTTTCACGACYT |
| WNV_30_LEFT | MAARGCCAARGGMAGCAGAG | WNV-L2_31_LEFT | CDAAGGTBCTTGARCTGCTDGR |
| WNV_30_RIGHT | CCYCTCTGATCTTCTCTGGAGA | WNV-L2_31_RIGHT | GGACCTTTGACATGGCATTBAGR |
| WNV_31_LEFT | TGAGCTCACCTATCGWCACAAA | WNV-L2_32_LEFT | GGHGATGACTGYGTGGTDAA |
| WNV_31_RIGHT | CAYCCAGTTGACGGTTTCCACT | WNV-L2_32_RIGHT | GRACCCAGTTVACAGGCACA |
| WNV_32_LEFT | TGGTRAAGCCCCTGGAYGAY | WNV-L2_33_LEFT | GCAGATGTGGCTGYTGCTTTAT |
| WNV_32_RIGHT | TCTCCTCCTGCATGGATSGA | WNV-L2_33_RIGHT | YRTCTTCATACCTCCTCARDGA |
| WNV_33_LEFT | AGWAGAGACCTGMGGYTCAT | WNV-L2_34_LEFT | GCGCHACTTGGGCTGAAAAYAT |
| WNV_33_RIGHT | TCTACAAAACTGTGTCCTCAACCA | WNV-L2_34_RIGHT | MYCTTCCGAGACGGTTCTGA |
| WNV_34_LEFT | AGTCAGWKCAATCATCGGRGAWG | WNV-L2_35_LEFT | GGAAGTTGAGTAGACGGTGCTG |
| WNV_34_RIGHT | CACTATCGCAGACTGCACTCTC | WNV-L2_35_RIGHT | TCCCAGGTGTCAATATGCTGTT |
| WNV_35_LEFT | CAGGAGGACTGGGTGAACAAAG | ||
| WNV_35_RIGHT | TGGTTGTGCAGAGCAGAAGATC | ||
A second primer set (set B) was designed based on a WNV-L2 reference genome (accession number: MH021189) and was compared with an alignment of 82 WNV-L2 sequences (Table S2) to capture the diversity within the lineage. The list of WNV primers in set B can be found in Table 1.
3.2. WNV Primers Sets Validation
3.2.1. Validation of Set A
Inclusivity Test
After the design of set A, seven WNV-L1 and three WNV-L2 isolates from Senegal were selected, and three viral culture supernatants for each lineage from three different Italian regions were processed for amplicon-based sequencing in triplicate. Overall, tiled amplicon whole-genome sequencing undertaken on both strains from Senegal and Italy yielded 99–100% horizontal coverage with genome length between 10,961 nt and 11,018 nt for WNV-L1 and between 10,914 nt and 10,926 nt for WNV-L2 (Table 2).
Table 2.
Inclusivity test of the West Nile virus set A primers.
| RT-PCR Ct Value | Total Number of Trimmate Reads | Number of WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viral strain WNV L1 Italy | 14 | 2369.723 | 649.022 | 99% | 5802.67 | 10.969 |
| 14 | 1922.532 | 581.215 | 99% | 5346.85 | 10.966 | |
| 13 | 2715.830 | 754.081 | 99% | 6244.36 | 10.966 | |
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | |||||
| Viral strain WNV L1 Senegal | 25 | 623.535 | 238.259 | 99% | 7997 | 10.961 |
| 28 | 5034.151 | 1035.983 | 99% | 6862.12 | 10.965 | |
| 16 | 5034.151 | 547.775 | 99% | 5183.83 | 10.966 | |
| 19 | 810.906 | 327.395 | 100% | 3971.4 | 11.018 | |
| 17 | 924.142 | 363.236 | 99% | 4412.7 | 10.963 | |
| 17 | 899.818 | 342.133 | 99% | 3851.34 | 10.966 | |
| 17 | 819.552 | 358.631 | 99% | 4306.94 | 10.961 | |
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 7/7 (100%) | |||||
| Viral strain WNV L2 Italy | 18 | 2607.185 | 546.249 | 100% | 3607.99 | 10.926 |
| 18.71 | 2466.682 | 511.381 | 100% | 3488.1 | 10.926 | |
| 18.13 | 2061.961 | 465.844 | 100% | 3445.55 | 10.926 | |
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | |||||
| Viral strain WNV L2 Senegal | 14 | 4861.644 | 706.114 | 100% | 3519.51 | 10.914 |
| 14 | 4087.737 | 835.098 | 100% | 5593.58 | 10.914 | |
| 14 | 4750.250 | 885.595 | 100% | 5609.34 | 10.914 | |
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | |||||
Sensitivity Test
One representative isolate of each lineage, i.e., WNV 15217 (accession number: FJ483548) and WNV Thessaloniki_MC82m/2018 (accession number: MN652880) for WNV-L1 and WNV-L2, respectively, was selected to evaluate the detection limit of the set A primers under optimal conditions. Serial dilutions from 106 to 102 cp/µL were processed in triplicate for sequencing. The set A primers were able to detect more than 95% of the total WNV-L1 genome up to 104 cp/µL. At 103 cp/µL, the horizontal coverage was between 91% and 94%, while at 102 cp/µL, 80 to 82% of the WNV-L1 sequence was completed. However, poor coverage was observed in the WNV-L2 samples (between 17% and 35% completeness) as shown in Table 3.
Table 3.
Sensitivity test of the West Nile virus set A primers.
| Viral Strain | Quantity Value (cp/μL) | Quantity Mean Value (Ct) | Total Number of Trimmate Reads | Number of WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WNV L1 (reference used for the mapping on Genpat: WNV L1 FJ483548 | 106 | 18.68 | 1457.278 | 503.152 | 99% | 5043.56 | 10.959 |
| 106 | 1371.693 | 476.605 | 99% | 4997.04 | 10.964 | ||
| 106 | 938.406 | 375.653 | 99% | 4372.01 | 10.959 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 105 | 23.45 | 1342.407 | 426.914 | 99% | 4587.33 | 10.960 | |
| 105 | 1174.155 | 397.215 | 99% | 4435.79 | 10.959 | ||
| 105 | 825.135 | 315.219 | 99% | 3776.67 | 10.956 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 104 | 27 | 906.690 | 292.718 | 96% | 3456.26 | 10.964 | |
| 104 | 984.952 | 297.351 | 97% | 3414.38 | 10.959 | ||
| 104 | 1247.127 | 327.095 | 96% | 3570.22 | 10.959 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 103 | 30 | 1096.401 | 249.798 | 94% | 2735.41 | 10.962 | |
| 103 | 506.380 | 153.284 | 93% | 1853.42 | 10.955 | ||
| 103 | 569.039 | 170.272 | 91% | 2099.54 | 10.955 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| 102 | 33 | 57.229 | 20.115 | 82% | 295.76 | 10.366 | |
| 102 | 53.435 | 18.515 | 81% | 281.027 | 10.958 | ||
| 102 | 41426 | 15.149 | 80% | 227.617 | 10.951 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| WNV L2 (reference used for the mapping: WNV L2 MN652880) | 106 | 18.68 | 1262.167 | 12.484 | 35% | 391.547 | 10.028 |
| 106 | 1315.568 | 11.576 | 33% | 383.276 | 10.928 | ||
| 106 | 1103.838 | 16.652 | 26% | 706.146 | 10.928 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| 105 | 22.87 | 1210.495 | 11.251 | 36% | 347.197 | 10.928 | |
| 105 | 823.025 | 10.243 | 33% | 345.101 | 10.928 | ||
| 105 | 1478.160 | 12.253 | 34% | 394.675 | 10.928 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| 104 | 26.41 | 1228.945 | 9.715 | 32% | 337.862 | 10.928 | |
| 104 | 1090.849 | 9.547 | 32% | 327.57 | 10.928 | ||
| 104 | 947.964 | 4.405 | 30% | 159.122 | 10.928 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| 103 | 30 | 442.063 | 2.796 | 26% | 121.744 | 10.928 | |
| 103 | 577.277 | 3.500 | 27% | 143.439 | 10.926 | ||
| 103 | 369.041 | 1.615 | 22% | 79.118 | 10.245 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
| 102 | 33.14 | 35.426 | 1.362 | 17% | 789.157 | 10.924 | |
| 102 | 68.307 | 627 | 17% | 360.495 | 10.926 | ||
| 102 | 63.643 | 731 | 18% | 571.297 | 10.926 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 0/3 (0%) | ||||||
Specificity Test
Amplicon-based whole-genome sequencing with set A primers was conducted on six flavivirus species (YFV, ZIKV, DENV-2, WSLV, KDGV, USUV), as well as RVFV and CHIKV, in order to assess the specificity of this WNV targeted approach. All the samples failed the bowtie2 1000 mapped-read threshold and no consensus genome could be assembled.
WNV Set A Primers Validation on Real Homogenates
Thirty-one (31) WNV-L1 and fifty-four (54) WNV-L2 homogenates with known Ct values by RT-qPCR were selected for targeted sequencing using the set A primers. Homogenates were obtained from mosquito pools and the internal organs of birds with low to high viral loads.
Among WNV-L1 homogenates, horizontal coverage was between 34% and 100%. A total of 35% of the samples reached above 95% horizontal coverage and about 65% of samples for 90% horizontal coverage. Most complete genomes had Ct values between 16 and 28. However, we also noted that among the least well-covered samples, Ct values ranged from 25 to 35, highlighting that factors other than the viral load could be involved. Additionally, five samples were WNV-L1/WNV-L2 co-infections, and the amplicon-based approach yielded from 87% to 96% WNV-L1 horizontal coverage, even when WNV-L2 had a higher viral load. Relatively correct coverage (between 74% and 92%) was obtained from other four samples from mosquitoes trapped in Senegal, for which viral co-infections with either alphaviruses, mesoniviruses, or flaviviruses were reported. All these results are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4.
Test of the West Nile virus set A primers with WNV-L1 homogenates. (* Samples with multiple viral species/WNV lineage).
| Viral Homogenate WNV L1—Sample Number | Host | RT-PCR Ct Value | Co-InfectionCt Value | # Total Trimmate Reads | # WNV L1 Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Accipiter gentilis | 15 | - | 2,037,215 | 591,954 | 100% | 6362.04 | 11,027 |
| 2 | Pica pica | 16 | - | 14,648,025 | 1,333,187 | 100% | 6381.67 | 11,016 |
| 3 | Corvus cornix | 16 | - | 6,447,209 | 657,948 | 99% | 5135.45 | 10,966 |
| 4 | Pica pica | 18 | - | 2,923,237 | 387,986 | 99% | 4264.56 | 10,966 |
| 5 | Phalacrocorax carbo | 19 | - | 11,441,518 | 1,107,291 | 99% | 5888.49 | 10,961 |
| 6 | Corvus cornix | 19 | - | 2,347,380 | 351,292 | 99% | 4177.69 | 10,963 |
| 7 | Culex pipiens | 20 | - | 3,495,685 | 744,562 | 99% | 5560.68 | 10,968 |
| 8 | Culex pipiens | 22 | - | 7,571,826 | 597,499 | 98% | 3973.2 | 10,967 |
| 9 | Corvus cornix | 22 | - | 5,382,363 | 629,364 | 99% | 4806.11 | 10,960 |
| 10 | Passer domesticus | 22 | - | 3,942,375 | 304,215 | 97% | 3084.4 | 10,962 |
| 11 | Culex pipiens | 23 | - | 4,560,711 | 283,771 | 93% | 2899.47 | 10,960 |
| 12 | Corvus Cornix | 24 | - | 3,052,530 | 342,271 | 93% | 3508.25 | 10,966 |
| 13 * | Culex pipiens | 25 | L2 Ct 28 | 3,576,787 | 403,166 | 94% | 3761.48 | 10,966 |
| 14 * | Culex pipiens | 25 | L2 Ct 28 | 1,557,373 | 263,149 | 90% | 2471.3 | 10,954 |
| 15 | Larus michahellis | 25 | - | 1,813,567 | 129,834 | 88% | 1805.95 | 10,952 |
| 16 | Streptopelia decaocto | 26 | - | 1,439,897 | 203,172 | 91% | 2592.09 | 10,961 |
| 17 | Pica pica | 26 | - | 7,677,172 | 251,982 | 81% | 2920.03 | 10,963 |
| 18 | Parus major | 26 | - | 755,951 | 38,780 | 69% | 747.61 | 9389 |
| 19 * | Culex pipiens | 27 | L2 Ct 32 | 3,371,541 | 369,610 | 96% | 3287.31 | 10,956 |
| 20 | Turdus merula | 27 | - | 2,710,572 | 66,229 | 82% | 1039.08 | 10,954 |
| 21 | Culex pipiens | 28 | - | 6,865,408 | 269,727 | 94% | 2618.84 | 10,962 |
| 22 * | Culex pipiens | 28 | L2 Ct 31 | 3,378,716 | 190,102 | 87% | 2201.29 | 10,966 |
| 23 | Streptopelia decaocto | 28 | - | 1,842,010 | 22,006 | 68% | 430.494 | 10,946 |
| 24 | Equus caballus | 28 | - | 1,805,957 | 159,703 | 92% | 2101.31 | 10,960 |
| 25 | Athene noctua | 29 | - | 3,394,989 | 15,767 | 34% | 404 | 10,802 |
| 26 | Columba palumbus | 31 | - | 835,362 | 9948 | 57% | 211.706 | 10,960 |
| 27 * | Culex pipiens | 33 | L2 Ct 25 | 4,662,340 | 220,508 | 91% | 2381.21 | 10,963 |
| 28 * (Alphavirus, Mesonivirus) | Culex neavei | 28.5 | - | 391,494 | 1,135,180 | 92.42% | 2514.3 | 10,194 |
| 29 * (Barkedji, Mesonivirus) | Culex poicilipes | 35.59 | - | 64,716 | 616,500 | 82.35% | 1789.36 | 9083 |
| 30 * (Barkedji) | Culex neavei | 29.52 | - | 302,175 | 1,394,466 | 89% | 2001.3 | 9819 |
| 31 * (Alphavirus, Barkedji, Usutu) | Culex neavei | 25.03 | - | 180,791 | 484,221 | 73.89% | 822.02 | 8150 |
Regarding WNV-L2 homogenates, experiments undertaken with the set A primers were consistent with the data from inclusivity and specificity tests. Indeed, less than 6% of the samples processed had above 95% of the genome covered (3 out 54), and 87% had ≤64% horizontal coverage, regardless of the viral load (Table 5).
Table 5.
Test of the West Nile virus set A primers with WNV-L2 homogenates. (* Samples with multiple viral species/WNV lineage).
| Viral Homogenate WNV L2—Sample Number | Host | RT-PCR Ct Value | Co-Infection Ct Value | # Total Trimmate Reads | # WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Accipiter gentilis | 16 | - | 3336.278 | 450.617 | 100% | 3304.6 | 10.926 |
| 2 | Accipiter gentilis | 16 | - | 1773.333 | 393.125 | 99% | 2982.38 | 10.926 |
| 3 | Accipiter gentilis | 19 | - | 2753.185 | 225.096 | 72% | 1533.63 | 10.926 |
| 4 | Garrulus glandarius | 20 | - | 3540.566 | 304.094 | 96% | 1588.44 | 10.923 |
| 5 | Culex pipiens | 22 | - | 1092.527 | 517.44 | 58% | 779.912 | 10.921 |
| 6 | Culex pipiens | 23 | - | 568.562 | 54.658 | 59% | 905.155 | 10.834 |
| 7 | Corvus cornix | 23 | - | 1383.831 | 85.880 | 62% | 1168.95 | 10.922 |
| 8 | Passer italiae | 24 | - | 476.120 | 45.644 | 47% | 1089.79 | 10.923 |
| 9 | Columba palumbus | 26 | - | 1313.900 | 76.773 | 64% | 908.822 | 10.923 |
| 10 | Columba palumbus | 27 | - | 5.377 | 7.319 | 25% | 257.256 | 10.868 |
| 11 | Columba palumbus | 28 | - | 545.944 | 5073 | 23% | 281.009 | 8.425 |
| 12 | Turdus merula | 31 | - | 514.655 | 72 | 4% | 26.336 | 375 |
| 13 | Pica pica | 31 | - | 330.374 | 280 | 5% | 685.197 | 4.128 |
| 14 | Phasianus colchicus | 32 | - | 243.656 | 242 | 5% | 543.463 | 7.510 |
| 15 | Pica pica | 33 | - | 341.153 | 613 | 9% | 760.203 | 8.413 |
| 16 | Pica pica | 33 | - | 376.185 | 128 | 4% | 307.715 | 3.779 |
| 17 | Egretta garzetta | 34 | - | 616.781 | 395 | 6% | 715.396 | 7.923 |
| 18 | Culex pipiens | 29 | - | 1537.448 | 24.517 | 33% | 676.501 | 9.393 |
| 19 | Culex pipiens | 28 | - | 588.313 | 32.437 | 49% | 749.224 | 10.924 |
| 20 | Culex pipiens | 27 | - | 606.886 | 28.181 | 52% | 494.551 | 10.923 |
| 21 | Culex pipiens | 25 | - | 884.756 | 43.657 | 52% | 864.517 | 10.891 |
| 22 | Culex pipiens | 30 | - | 259.173 | 2.572 | 3% | 989.276 | 381 |
| 23 | Culex pipiens | 28 | - | 436.461 | 14.473 | 29% | 630.097 | 10.923 |
| 24 | Culex pipiens | 24 | - | 2172.952 | 45.568 | 45% | 716.974 | 10.923 |
| 25 * | Culex pipiens | 31 | L1 Ct 28 | 3378.716 | 9.132 | 27% | 447.986 | 10.928 |
| 26 | Culex pipiens | 25 | - | 339.617 | 33.681 | 42% | 827.229 | 10.790 |
| 27 | Culex pipiens | 21 | - | 1223.422 | 35.451 | 23% | 1197.74 | 10.921 |
| 28 | Culex pipiens | 23 | - | 1832.341 | 38.134 | 15% | 1569.34 | 10.555 |
| 29 | Culex pipiens | 25 | - | 686.602 | 25.509 | 18% | 1178.55 | 10.609 |
| 30 | Culex pipiens | 27 | - | 502.162 | 8.253 | 3% | 3113.1 | 388 |
| 31 | Corvus cornix | 28 | - | 1357.321 | 7.159 | 31% | 312.307 | 10.475 |
| 32 | Pica pica | 20 | - | 6417.489 | 198.613 | 94% | 1616.11 | 10.927 |
| 33 * | Culex pipiens | 25 | L1 Ct 33 | 4662.340 | 33.608 | 60% | 534.955 | 10.926 |
| 34 * | Culex pipiens | 24 | USUV Ct 27 | 5133.183 | 77.022 | 61% | 888.532 | 10.925 |
| 35 | Culex pipiens | 24 | - | 153.601 | 10 | 47% | 275.337 | 556 |
| 36 | Corvus cornix | 29 | - | 877.218 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| 37 | Culex pipiens | 23 | - | 199.550 | 99.490 | 88% | 1126.14 | 10.890 |
| 38 | Culex pipiens | 24 | - | 323.115 | 5.048 | 23% | 308.136 | 4.395 |
| 39 * | Culex pipiens | 27 | L1 Ct 25 | 3576787 | 9.461 | 51% | 239.312 | 10.928 |
| 40 | Culex pipiens | 22 | - | 78.378 | 42.637 | 63% | 824.461 | 10.922 |
| 41 | Larus marinus | 23 | - | 546.215 | 142.178 | 81% | 1460.97 | 10.923 |
| 42 * | Culex pipiens | 27 | L1 Ct 32 | 3371.541 | 5.603 | 47% | 154.32 | 10.928 |
| 43 | Culex pipiens | 29 | - | 153.413 | 4.367 | 31% | 187.09 | 9.364 |
| 44 | Culex pipiens | 28 | - | 66.202 | 7.786 | 36% | 290.742 | 10.018 |
| 45 * | Culex pipiens | 28 | L1 Ct 25 | 1557.373 | 8.945 | 48% | 243.941 | 10.926 |
| 46 | Culex pipiens | 28 | - | 118.396 | 2.420 | 15% | 219.733 | 7.809 |
| 47 * | Culex pipiens | 27 | USUV Ct 27 | 1516.324 | 230 | 44% | 985.194 | 7.469 |
| 48 | Corvus cornix | 28 | - | 470.113 | 6.194 | 40% | 207.827 | 10.923 |
| 49 * | Culex pipiens | 23 | USUV Ct 21 | 4272.994 | 248 | 29% | 941.936 | 10.806 |
| 50 | Culex pipiens | 15 | - | 327.238 | 88.896 | 61% | 1398.22 | 10.922 |
| 51 | Ochlerotatus caspius | 25 | - | 361.194 | 16.436 | 32% | 684.576 | 10.844 |
| 52 | Culex pipiens | 24 | - | 401.408 | 25.091 | 42% | 804.597 | 9.592 |
| 53 | Pica pica | 23 | - | 899.597 | 2.771 | 24% | 150.215 | 8.402 |
| 54 * | Culex pipiens | 29 | USUV Ct 26 | 117.768 | 18.204 | 54% | 451.546 | 10.907 |
3.2.2. Validation of Set B
Inclusivity Test
Five WNV-L2 isolates from Italy were selected to assess the set B primers. A total of 100% horizontal coverage was obtained for all the strains after sequencing on an Illumina MiSeq (Table 6).
Table 6.
Inclusivity test of the West Nile virus set B primers.
| RT-PCR Ct Value | # Total Trimmate Reads | # WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viral strain WNV L2 Italy | 15 | 1218.086 | 284.232 | 100% | 3820.77 | 10.926 |
| 15 | 1792.478 | 402.082 | 100% | 5234.36 | 10.926 | |
| 15 | 1440.061 | 338.706 | 100% | 4543.81 | 10.926 | |
| 17 | 1711.005 | 328.182 | 100% | 4374.41 | 10.926 | |
| 18 | 941.641 | 224.716 | 100% | 3023.77 | 10.926 | |
| N of replicates with Coverage ≥ 95% | 5/5 (100%) | |||||
Sensitivity Test
In order to identify the set B primers’ detection limit under optimal conditions, serial dilutions from 106 to102 cp/μL of the strain WNV Thessaloniki_MC82m/2018 (accession number: MN652880) were processed in triplicate for sequencing (except the to102 cp/μL concentration, which was carried out in duplicate due to insufficient volume during the experiment). A total of 100% horizontal coverage was obtained between 106 to103 cp/μL, while the two replicates for to102 cp/μL covered 93% and 95% of the genome, as shown by Table 7.
Table 7.
Sensitivity test of the West Nile virus set B primers.
| Viral Strain | Quantity Value (cp/5 μL) | Quantity Mean Value (Ct) | # Total Trimmate Reads | # WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WNV L2 (reference used for the mapping: WNV L2 MN652880) | 106 | 19 | 1808.185 | 381.930 | 100% | 5038.73 | 10.913 |
| 106 | 4928.502 | 673.900 | 100% | 6845.55 | 10.926 | ||
| 106 | 3099.180 | 511.446 | 100% | 6107.38 | 10.913 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 105 | 22 | 2665.260 | 409.989 | 100% | 5157.74 | 10.914 | |
| 105 | 1049.020 | 237.471 | 100% | 3194.36 | 10.926 | ||
| 105 | 2820.387 | 429.662 | 100% | 5335.99 | 10.912 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 104 | 26 | 1651.945 | 261.024 | 100% | 3450.12 | 10.913 | |
| 104 | 2483.786 | 337.982 | 100% | 4234.91 | 10.914 | ||
| 104 | 2681.807 | 356.233 | 100% | 4334.71 | 10.926 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 103 | 30 | 1570.036 | 236.060 | 100% | 3029.53 | 10.894 | |
| 103 | 1153.288 | 196.257 | 100% | 2614.91 | 10.904 | ||
| 103 | 782.424 | 285.136 | 99% | 3070.47 | 10.912 | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 3/3 (100%) | ||||||
| 102 | 33 | 1764.307 | 159.591 | 95% | 2189.31 | 10.597 | |
| 102 | 2082.360 | 177.212 | 93% | 2389.54 | 10.800 | ||
| 102 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | ||
| No. of replicates with coverage ≥ 95% | 1/2 (50%) | ||||||
Specificity Test
Similar to the test conducted for set A, no amplification was observed using set B on the six flavivirus species mentioned above, as well as RVFV and CHIKV.
WNV Set B Primers Validation on Real Homogenates
Fifteen WNV-L2 homogenates from Italy with known CT values by RT-qPCR were selected for targeted sequencing using the set B primers. Homogenates were obtained from mosquito pools, as well as the internal organs of birds and horses with low to high viral loads. Overall, horizontal coverage between 97% and 100% was obtained on 14 out of 15 homogenates (93.3% with horizontal coverage > 95%). Only the horse sample exhibited 93% horizontal coverage. This sample was also the one with the lowest viral load (CT value: 35). All these results are summarized in Table 8.
Table 8.
Test of the West Nile virus set B primers with WNV-L2 homogenates.
| Viral Homogenate WNV L2—Sample Number | RT-PCR Ct Value | Host | Total Number of Trimmate Reads | Number of WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 17 | Pica pica | 1134.961 | 295.649 | 100% | 3977.58 | 10.892 |
| 2 | 27 | Corvus cornix | 1448.962 | 284.947 | 100% | 3818.15 | 10.912 |
| 3 | 21 | Culex pipiens | 1733.553 | 385.088 | 100% | 5042.35 | 10.913 |
| 4 | 23 | Culex pipiens | 1528.111 | 339.207 | 100% | 4525.72 | 10.912 |
| 5 | 21 | Athene noctua | 1801.390 | 376.213 | 100% | 4946.53 | 10.878 |
| 6 | 22 | Culex pipiens | 1407.784 | 312.376 | 99% | 4201.89 | 10.879 |
| 7 | 19 | Passer domesticus | 1515.878 | 205.605 | 100% | 2770.45 | 10.914 |
| 8 | 30 | Corvus cornix | 1470.367 | 209.316 | 98% | 2799.57 | 10.872 |
| 9 | 30 | Pica pica | 2150.396 | 205.466 | 99% | 2662.61 | 10.868 |
| 10 | 27 | Sylvia atricapilla | 3649.208 | 281.102 | 99% | 3426.07 | 10.880 |
| 11 | 25 | Culex pipiens | 2094.249 | 349.710 | 100% | 4076.35 | 10.878 |
| 12 | 29 | Anopheles maculipennis | 3435.959 | 563176 | 100% | 5709.14 | 10.912 |
| 13 | 25 | Culex pipiens | 3120.601 | 281.102 | 100% | 4601.81 | 10.912 |
| 14 | 27 | Culex pipiens | 2193.040 | 259.483 | 97% | 3231.74 | 10.904 |
| 15 | 35 | Equus ferus caballus | 1623.442 | 133.088 | 93% | 1814.74 | 10.936 |
3.2.3. Validation of Set A + B
In order to obtain a system able to efficiently sequence both WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 strains, the first set of primers (set A) was combined with the second one (set B) in equal volume. The new system, set A + B primers, was evaluated and compared in parallel with set A and set B after sequencing the WNV-L1 (n = 4) and WNV-L2 (n = 7) positive samples from internal organs of birds and horses, as well as mosquito homogenates, at different CT values (Table 9).
Table 9.
Test of the West Nile virus set A + B primers with WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 homogenates.
| Viral Homogenate WNV L1 | RT-PCR Ct Value | Host | Used Primers | Total Number of Trimmate Reads | Number of WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | L1 19 | Corvus cornix | Set A | 2347.380 | 351.292 | 99% | 4177.69 | 10.963 |
| Set A + B | 1118.615 | 287.672 | 99% | 3987.12 | 10.963 | |||
| 2 | L1 25 | Larus michahellis | Set A | 1813.567 | 129.834 | 88% | 1805.95 | 10.952 |
| Set A + B | 651.723 | 91.642 | 93% | 1305.83 | 10.960 | |||
| 3 | L1 18 | Pica pica | Set A | 2923.237 | 387.986 | 99% | 4264.56 | 10.966 |
| Set A + B | 4965.722 | 512.725 | 99% | 4562.28 | 10.966 | |||
| 4 | L1 28 | Equus ferus caballus | Set A | 1805.957 | 159.703 | 92% | 2101.31 | 10.960 |
| Set A + B | 2319.560 | 165.376 | 92% | 2200.39 | 10.960 | |||
| Viral Homogenate WNV L2 | RT-PCR Ct Value | Host | Used Primers | Total Number of Trimmate Reads | Number of WNV Reads | % HCoverage | VCoverage | Consensus Sequence Length |
| 1 | L2 17 | Pica pica | Set B | 2059.659 | 351.670 | 100% | 4232.78 | 10.892 |
| Set A + B | 1134.961 | 295.649 | 100% | 3977.58 | 10.892 | |||
| 2 | L2 27 | Corvus cornix | Set B | 1793.046 | 187.826 | 100% | 2156.81 | 10.926 |
| Set A + B | 1448.962 | 284.947 | 100% | 3818.15 | 10.912 | |||
| 3 | L2 21 | Culex pipiens | Set B | 2219.785 | 312.851 | 100% | 3515.05 | 10.926 |
| Set A + B | 1733.553 | 385.088 | 100% | 5042.35 | 10.913 | |||
| 4 | L2 23 | Culex pipiens | Set B | 2045.957 | 275.354 | 100% | 2943.77 | 10.926 |
| Set A + B | 1528.111 | 339.207 | 100% | 4525.72 | 10.912 | |||
| 5 | L2 21 | Athene noctua | Set B | 3413.467 | 359.916 | 100% | 4106.39 | 10.892 |
| Set A + B | 1801.390 | 376.213 | 100% | 4946.53 | 10.878 | |||
| 6 | L2 22 | Culex pipiens | Set B | 3109.597 | 239.795 | 95% | 2761.23 | 10.892 |
| Set A + B | 1407.784 | 312.376 | 99% | 4201.89 | 10.879 | |||
| 7 | L2 19 | Passer domesticus | Set B | 1621.442 | 123.813 | 89% | 1836.85 | 10.924 |
| Set A + B | 1515.878 | 205.605 | 100% | 2770.45 | 10.914 |
In WNV-L1 samples, no loss of sensitivity was observed between set A and set A + B for all the samples tested. Notably, for one sample from a yellow-legged gull at CT value 25, a gain of sensitivity was observed at 88% horizontal coverage using set A to 93% using set A + B joined. In the same way, sequencing conducted on WNV-L2 samples worked just as well with set B as with set A + B, regardless of Ct values. Indeed, almost 72% of the samples had 100% full genome (n = 5 out of 7).
4. Discussion
NGS is now an essential tool in the study of infectious diseases, both at the fundamental level and in its application to public health. The COVID-19 pandemic has thus been a patent example of the importance of being able to obtain information on the genetic signature of pathogens in real time. However, it should be noted that sequencing technology, and in particular whole-genome sequencing, remains an expensive approach with significant experimental constraints (for instance, the host genome background with a relatively lower amount of genetic material of the pathogen of interest in clinical specimens) in order to have some quality of data generated. A multiplex PCR-based target enrichment or amplicon-based protocol [14] was mostly used to overcome these challenges during SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance, yielding more than 14 million genomes in the GISAID platform at the time of writing this manuscript [27].
WNV is becoming a major health problem in Europe and cases have also recently been detected in Africa [7,12].
WNV cases are mainly due to lineages 1 and 2. The mechanisms of diffusion of viral strains, in particular by the migratory movements of birds, are actively studied. The genetic characterization of the identified strains allow better control of the dissemination routes for effective sanitary measures. NGS showed the persistence of a WNV strain after winter in Andalusia in Spain, suggesting endemicity with potential future epidemics in the area [28]. Another recent genomic study evidenced continuous WNV-L2 circulation in Italy throughout the year [29], while a reintroduction event was identified from Europe to Senegal, highlighting a potential threat [12].
Genomic characterization is even more important because it has been shown that West African lineages have higher virulence and replicative efficiency in vitro and in vivo compared to similar lineages circulating in the United States and Europe [6]. Genomic surveillance is thus essential as it allows a better understanding of the dissemination and dynamic of WNV strains.
In order to ensure the sustainability of this type of surveillance, we describe here the development and evaluation of a whole-genome amplicon-based sequencing approach for WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 by Illumina technology in different types of vertebrate and mosquito species from Senegal and Italy.
Three sets of primers were then designed and assessed with WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 strains. Set A and set B are specific to WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 strains, respectively, while the third one, a mixture of the two previous sets, is able to amplify both lineages.
Thus, the use of one set or another depends on the context. Indeed, in the case where the lineage is already well defined, it is appropriate to use the specific sets, whereas set A + B fits more in a context where no lineage characterization could be made before sequencing.
The evaluation in this study could only be carried out with the WNV-L1 and WNV-L2 strains. Because set A was designed from at least one representative of all the WNV lineages, it would be appropriate to undertake a similar evaluation with at least set A and set A + B on other lineages than WNV-L1 and WNV-L2. Moreover, the repetition of these experiments by other groups allows the observed results to be refined, particularly in terms of correlation with Ct values. Indeed, even if this work was carried out with rigor and with two teams in Senegal and Italy, external factors such as the sample quality after long-term storage or the sample type may have impacted the outputs of the results.
In any case, the approach presented in this manuscript could be a valuable tool for any WNV genomic investigation.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the logistic and administrative teams in Senegal and Italy who have indirectly contributed to the completion of this work.
Supplementary Materials
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/v15061261/s1, Table S1: WNV Sequences aligned for set A primers design, Table S2: WNV-L2 Sequences aligned for set B primers design.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., O.F., C.C., A.R., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); methodology, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., A.D., M.D.D., C.C., A.R., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); software, A.D., M.M.D., G.M., C.C., and C.L.; validation, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., M.D.D., V.C., M.M., C.L., O.F. (Ousmane Faye), and C.C.; formal analysis, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., A.D., M.K., N.M.T., and M.M. (Maïmouna Mbanne); investigation, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., E.h.N., D.D., M.K., N.M.T., M.M. (Maïmouna Mbanne), M.A., B.S., V.D.L., L.T., A.L., I.P., and A.G.; resources, M.M.D., A.A.S., C.L., M.D., O.F. (Ousmane Faye), C.C., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); data curation, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., G.M., A.D., E.h.N., D.D., N.M.T., L.T., A.L., and I.P.; writing—original draft preparation, M.M.D.; writing—review and editing, M.H.D.N., G.M., A.D., M.D.D., E.h.N., M.D., C.C., A.R., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); visualization, M.M.D., G.M., M.D.D., V.C., M.M., M.A., B.S., V.D.L., L.T., A.L., I.P., R.R., F.M., C.C., A.R., and G.S.; supervision, M.M.D., M.H.D.N., M.D.D., V.C., C.C., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); project administration, A.R., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye); funding acquisition, M.M.D., A.A.S., O.F. (Ousmane Faye), A.R., G.S., and O.F. (Oumar Faye). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available in the results section of the article as well as in the supplementary materials. No new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding Statement
This research was partly funded by the Africa Pathogen Genomics Initiative (Africa PGI) through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (4306-22-EIPHLSS-GENOMICS), the Institut Pasteur de Dakar internal funds, and an international PhD initiative including Fondazione Edmund Mach, University of Trento, and Istituto Zooprofilattico of Teramo.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
References
- 1.Smithburn K., Hugues T., Burke A., Paul J. A neurotropic virus isolated from the blood of a native of uganda. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1940;s1-20:471. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1940.s1-20.471. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Kramer L.D., Styer L.M., Ebel G.D. A global perspective on the epidemiology of West Nile virus. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2008;53:61–81. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Bergsman L.D., Hyman J.M., Manore C.A. A mathematical model for the spread of West Nile virus in migratory and resident birds. Math. Biosci. Eng. 2016;13:401–424. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Komar N., Langevin S., Hinten S., Nemeth N., Edwards E., Hettler D., Davis B., Bowen R., Bunning M. Experimental Infection of North American Birds with the New York 1999 Strain of West Nile Virus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2003;9:311–322. doi: 10.3201/eid0903.020628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Sule W.F., Oluwayelu D.O., Hernandez-Triana L.M., Fooks A.R., Venter M., Johnson N. Epidemiology and ecology of West Nile virus in sub-Saharan Africa. Parasit. Vectors. 2018;11:414. doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-2998-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Fall G., Di Paola N., Faye M., Dia M., Freire C.C.d.M., Loucoubar C., Zanotto P.M.d.A., Faye O., Sall A.A. Biological and Phylogenetic Characteristics of West African Lineages of West Nile Virus. PLoS Negl. Trop Dis. 2017;11:e0006078. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mencattelli G., Ndione M.H.D., Rosà R., Marini G., Diagne C.T., Diagne M.M., Fall G., Faye O., Diallo M., Faye O., et al. Epidemiology of West Nile virus in Africa: An underestimated threat. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2022;16:e0010075. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Marchi S., Montomoli E., Viviani S., Giannecchini S., Stincarelli M.A., Lanave G., Camero M., Alessio C., Coluccio R., Trombetta C.M. West Nile Virus Seroprevalence in the Italian Tuscany Region from 2016 to 2019. Pathogens. 2021;10:844. doi: 10.3390/pathogens10070844. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Marini G., Rosà R., Pugliese A., Rizzoli A., Rizzo C., Russo F., Montarsi F., Capelli G. West Nile Virus Transmission and Human Infection Risk in Veneto (Italy): A Modelling Analysis. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:14005. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-32401-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Falcinella C., Allegrini M., Gazzola L., Mulè G., Tomasoni D., Viganò O., d’Arminio Monforte A., Marchetti G., Tincati C. Three case reports of West Nile virus neuroinvasive disease: Lessons from real-life clinical practice. BMC Infect. Dis. 2021;21:1132. doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06827-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Riccardo F., Bella A., Monaco F., Ferraro F., Petrone D., Mateo-Urdiales A., Andrianou X.D., del Manso M., Venturi G., Fortuna C., et al. Rapid Increase in Neuroinvasive West Nile Virus Infections in Humans, Italy, July 2022. Eurosurveillance. 2022;27:2200653. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.36.2200653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ndione M.H.D., Ndiaye E.H., Faye M., Diagne M.M., Diallo D., Diallo A., Sall A.A., Loucoubar C., Faye O., Diallo M., et al. Re-Introduction of West Nile Virus Lineage 1 in Senegal from Europe and Subsequent Circulation in Human and Mosquito Populations between 2012 and 2021. Viruses. 2022;14:2720. doi: 10.3390/v14122720. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Fall G., Diallo M., Loucoubar C., Faye O., Sall A.A. Vector competence of Culex neavei and Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) from Senegal for lineages 1, 2, Koutango and a putative new lineage of West Nile virus. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2014;90:747–754. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Tyson J.R., James P., Stoddart D., Sparks N., Wickenhagen A., Hall G., Choi J.H., Lapointe H., Kamelian K., Smith A.D., et al. Improvements to the ARTIC multiplex PCR method for SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing using nanopore. BioRxiv. :2020. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Arana C., Liang C., Brock M., Zhang B., Zhou J., Chen L., Cantarel B., SoRelle J., Hooper L.V., Raj P. A short plus long-amplicon based sequencing approach improves genomic coverage and variant detection in the SARS-CoV-2 genome. PLoS ONE. 2022;17:e0261014. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Liu H., Li J., Lin Y., Bo X., Song H., Li K., Li P., Ni M. Assessment of two-pool multiplex long-amplicon nanopore sequencing of SARS-CoV-2. J. Med. Virol. 2022;94:327–334. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Lambisia A.W., Mohammed K.S., Makori T.O., Ndwiga L., Mburu M.W., Morobe J.M., Moraa E.O., Musyoki J., Murunga N., Mwangi J.N., et al. Optimization of the SARS-CoV-2 ARTIC Network V4 Primers and Whole Genome Sequencing Protocol. Front Med. (Lausanne) 2022;9:836728. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.836728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Quick J., Grubaugh N.D., Pullan S.T., Claro I.M., Smith A.D., Gangavarapu K., Oliveira G., Robles-Sikisaka R., Rogers T.F., Beutler N.A., et al. Multiplex PCR Method for MinION and Illumina Sequencing of Zika and Other Virus Genomes Directly from Clinical Samples. Nat. Protoc. 2017;12:1261–1276. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2017.066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Del Amo J., Sotelo E., Fernández-Pinero J., Gallardo C., Llorente F., Agüero M., Jiménez-Clavero M.A. A novel quantitative multiplex real-time RT-PCR for the simultaneous detection and differentiation of West Nile virus lineages 1 and 2, and of Usutu virus. J. Virol. Methods. 2013;189:321–327. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.02.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Ewels P.A., Peltzer A., Fillinger S., Patel H., Alneberg J., Wilm A., Garcia M.U., Di Tommaso P., Nahnsen S. The nf-core framework for community-curated bioinformatics pipelines. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020;38:276–278. doi: 10.1038/s41587-020-0439-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Di Tommaso P., Chatzou M., Floden E.W., Barja P.P., Palumbo E., Notredame C. Nextflow enables reproducible computational workflows. Nat. Biotechnol. 2017;35:316–319. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3820. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Bolger A.M., Lohse M., Usadel B. Trimmomatic: A Flexible Trimmer for Illumina Sequence Data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Cito F., Pasquale A.D., Cammà C., Cito P. The Italian Information System for the Collection and Analysis of Complete Genome Sequence of Pathogens Isolated from Animal, Food and Environment. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2018;73:296–297. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2018.04.4090. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Aprea G., Scattolini S., D’Angelantonio D., Chiaverini A., Di Lollo V., Olivieri S., Marcacci M., Mangone I., Salucci S., Antoci S., et al. Whole Genome Sequencing Characterization of HEV3-e and HEV3-f Subtypes among the Wild Boar Population in the Abruzzo Region, Italy: First Report. Microorganisms. 2020;8:1393. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8091393. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Bankevich A., Nurk S., Antipov D., Gurevich A.A., Dvorkin M., Kulikov A.S., Lesin V.M., Nikolenko S.I., Pham S., Prjibelski A.D., et al. SPAdes: A New Genome Assembly Algorithm and Its Applications to Single-Cell Sequencing. J. Comput. Biol. 2012;19:455–477. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Grubaugh N.D., Gangavarapu K., Quick J., Matteson N.L., De Jesus J.G., Main B.J., Tan A.L., Paul L.M., Brackney D.E., Grewal S., et al. An Amplicon-Based Sequencing Framework for Accurately Measuring Intrahost Virus Diversity Using PrimalSeq and IVar. Genome Biol. 2019;20:8. doi: 10.1186/s13059-018-1618-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.hCoV-19 Data Sharing via GISAID. [(accessed on 29 January 2023)]. Available online: https://gisaid.org/
- 28.Ruiz-López M.J., Muñoz-Chimeno M., Figuerola J., Gavilán A.M., Varona S., Cuesta I., Martínez-de la Puente J., Zaballos Á., Molero F., Soriguer R.C., et al. Genomic Analysis of West Nile Virus Lineage 1 Detected in Mosquitoes during the 2020–2021 Outbreaks in Andalusia, Spain. Viruses. 2023;15:266. doi: 10.3390/v15020266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Mencattelli G., Iapaolo F., Polci A., Marcacci M., Di Gennaro A., Teodori L., Curini V., Di Lollo V., Secondini B., Scialabba S., et al. West Nile Virus Lineage 2 Overwintering in Italy. Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2022;7:160. doi: 10.3390/tropicalmed7080160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available in the results section of the article as well as in the supplementary materials. No new data were created or analyzed in this study.