Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Oct 20;18(10):e0282559. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282559

Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline panleukopenia virus from suspected domestic cats in selected Bangladesh regions

Ajran Kabir 1, Tasmia Habib 1, Chandra Shaker Chouhan 2, Jayedul Hassan 1, A K M Anisur Rahman 2, K H M Nazmul Hussain Nazir 1,3,*
Editor: Sherin Reda Rouby4
PMCID: PMC10588828  PMID: 37862355

Abstract

Feline panleukopenia (FPL) is a highly contagious cat disease and is endemic in Bangladesh. The study aims to describe the epidemiology and molecular characterization of the Feline panleukopenia virus from the suspected domestic cats in selected Bangladesh regions. Randomly, 161 rectal swabs were collected from the pet hospitals between July 2021 and December 2022. A structured questionnaire was administered through face-to-face interviews with cat owners in order to collect data on potential risk factors for FPL, such as age, sex, sharing litter boxes and every day utensils in multicat households, vaccination history, hospital visits for other diseases, and season. The rectal swabs were tested by PCR targeting the VP2 capsid protein gene, and six PCR-positive samples were further sequenced for molecular characterizations. The risk factors for FPLV were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The overall prevalence of FPL among suspects was 22.9%. The mortality and case fatality were 10.6%, and 45.9%, respectively. However, mortality in kittens was significantly higher (16.4%) than younger cats. The odds of FPL were 8.83 times (95% CI: 3.14–24.85) higher among unvaccinated cats than vaccinated cats. The winter season had almost six times (95% CI: 1.38–24.40) higher odds of FPL than rainy season. In a multicat house, the odds of FPL was about five times (95% CI: 1.93–13.45) higher for cats that shared a litter box and food utensils compared to those that did not engage in such sharing. Visiting hospitals for other reasons nearly triples the odds of FPL (OR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.04–7.54) compared to cats that do not visit hospitals. Analysis of partial sequence of the VP2 gene revealed genetic variations among the isolates from different regions. Among these isolates, four were identical to FPLV isolates from South Korea and China, while one showed complete homology with FPLV isolates from Thailand. In contrast, the remaining one was 100% identical to Carnivore protoparvovirus-1 isolated from a feline sample in Italy. Our isolates were classified into three distinct clades alongside Feline panleukopenia virus and Carnivore protoparvovirus-1. One in every three suspected cats was infected with Feline panleukopenia. Regular vaccination of the cats, especially those that share common litter box and food utensils and visit hospitals for other purposes, will help reduce the prevalence of FPL in Bangladesh. Besides, it is worth emphasizing the existence of genetic diversity among the circulating Feline panleukopenia viruses in Bangladesh.

Introduction

Feline panleukopenia (FPL) is a highly contagious and fatal viral disease of cats. The clinical signs of FPL include severe depression, vomiting, diarrhea, a sharp drop in white blood cells (WBCs), and damage to intestinal mucosa resulting in enteritis, dehydration, and ultimately death [1, 2]. The FPL virus (FPLV) can infect both domestic and wild felids (suborder Feliformia), as well as a few wild canids (suborder Caniformia) such as raccoons and foxes. This virus does not infect domestic dogs [3, 4]. FPLV belongs to the family Carnivore protoparvovirus-1and is a small, nonenveloped, linear, single-stranded DNA virus with a genome of 5.1-kb [5]. The basic structure of the virus involves two non-structural proteins (NS1 and NS2) and two structural capsid proteins (VP1 and VP2) that are encoded by two open reading frames (ORFs) [3, 4].

The FPLV is usually transmitted through the faecal-oral route, and flea bites. The virus is known to persist long time e in the environment for extended periods, such as up to one year in contaminated organic materials [6, 7]. The prevalence of FPL has been reported in various regions worldwide, including Iran [8], Canada [9], East Africa [10], Spain [11], Vietnam [12], Central West Saudi Arabia [13], and Brazil [14] Among infected cats, young kittens under one year of age experience the highest morbidity and mortality rates [15, 16]. The mortality rate for acute panleukopenia ranges from 25–90%, while per acute infections can result in 100% mortality [17]. In multicat households, the risk of contracting the disease is higher for unvaccinated and younger cats [18]. Although unvaccinated young kittens are more susceptible, cats of any age, sex, or breed can be infected [19, 20].

The clinical manifestations serve as reliable indicators for a presumptive diagnosis of FPL. However, for confirmation, the molecular test (PCR) is recommended [21]. Various PCR protocols targeting the amplification of the VP2 gene have been established and reported for the detection of FPLV [22].

Due to widespread vaccination worldwide, the prevalence of the Feline panleukopenia has significantly decreased over the past few decades [23]. However, in Bangladesh, the pet population, especially cats, is on the rise. Unfortunately, due to lack of awareness among the owners regarding vaccination schedules, hygiene practices, and proper husbandry, cats in Bangladesh are at a higher risk of contracting the Feline panleukopenia virus [24].

In addition, there is limited molecular data available in Bangladesh regarding feline panleukopenia. A recently published study reported a 18.37% prevalence of FPL from diarrheic cats in Bangladesh, while a previous study documented a 22.41% prevalence in the Tangail district. So far, only a single isolate has been molecularly characterized showing 99.71% homology with another FPLV isolate from the United Arab Emirates [2527]. However, there is lack of reported epidemiological studies in Bangladesh that describe the risk factors for FPL in suspected cats, along with molecular characterization. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to identify risk factors for FPL, detect the virus in the rectal swab of FPL-suspected cats visiting pet clinics, and provide molecular characteristics of the VP2 gene of FPLV from selected regions of Bangladesh.

Materials and methods

Ethical approval and informed consent

Verbal consent was obtained from the cat owners to collect samples used in this work. The samples were collected following standard procedures for sample collection, ensuring no harm was caused to the animals. The study received approval from the Animal Welfare and Experimental Operational Guidance Committee of the university (Approved permit number AWEEC/BAU/2021(56)).

Study and target population and sample size

The study population consisted of cats visiting pet clinics, while our target population comprised domesticated cats in urban Bangladesh were. The sample size for this study was calculated using Eq 1 as given below:

n=1.962PQd2 (1)

In the above equation, 1.96 = Z value for a 95% confidence level, Expected prevalence (10% = 0.10) [28] and Q = 1-P and d = precision = 5% = 0.05.

Based on these assumptions, the calculated sample size was 138. However, a total of 161 samples were collected for this study.

Sample and data collection

A total of 161 rectal swabs were collected randomly from suspected cats visiting different pet clinics in three districts of Bangladesh (Fig 1). The study was conducted from July 2021 to December 2022. Rectal swabs were collected using a cotton apparatus and placed in 1ml of phosphate buffer saline (PBS) The samples were then stored at 4˚C until transported to the Department of Microbiology and Hygiene, Bangladesh Agricultural University [29]. After centrifugation at 10,000 RPM for 10 minutes, a 200ul supernatant was collected and stored at -80 ˚C until further processing.

Fig 1. Bangladesh map showing different sampling areas of Feline panleukopenia virus.

Fig 1

Note: This map is created by our team using ArcGIS version 10.1(http://www.esri.com/arcgis).

During the sample collection, data regarding possible risk factors for FPL were obtained, through face-to-face interviews with cat owners, using a pre-structured questionnaire. The data collected included details about the cat’s age, sex, whether they shared litter boxes and food utensils in multicat households, vaccination history, whether the cat had been taken to hospitals for other diseases, and the specific season. Telephone numbers were also recorded during the interview. Additionally, information on mortality was obtained through telephone conversations with the cat owners and recorded in our questionnaire.

DNA extraction and PCR

Genomic DNA was extracted from the collected supernatant using AddPrep Viral Nucleic Acid Extraction Kit (AddBio\Korea) following the manufacturer’s instructions [19]. The purity of the extracted DNA was assessed using a nanodrop spectrophotometer (Thermo\USA) by measuring the absorbance at a wavelength of 260/280 nm. The DNA purity was determined within the range of 1.8 to 2.1 [30]. The DNA extracted from the vaccine (NOBIVAC® FELINE 1-HCP) was used as a positive control in the PCR assay.

PCR was performed using specific primer pairs targeting the VP2 gene residue of FPLV. The PCR reaction mixtures, consisting of 25 ul, were prepared by combining FM-F (5’-GCT TTA GAT GAT ACT CAT GT -3’) and FM-R (5’-GTA GCT TCA GTA ATA TAG TC-3’) primers, as described in a previous study [27]. The reaction mixtures were then put in a thermocycler machine maintaining the following conditions: initial denaturation at 95°C for 5 min, 35 cycles of denaturation at 95°C for 30 s, annealing at 60°C for 1 min, extension at 72°C for 1 min, and a final extension at 72°C for 10 minutes. Subsequently, the PCR-amplified products were separated on a 1.5% agarose gel in Tris-acetate EDTA buffer and visualized using an ultraviolet transilluminator (Syngene).

FPLV VP2 gene partial sequencing

Six PCR-positive amplicons of the VP2 gene were selected, with two from each location. They were then purified using the FavorPrep™ GEL/PCR Purification Kit (Biotech Corp/ USA) according to the manufacturer’s instruction. The purified amplicons were subjected to Sanger’ sequencing using the Applied BioSystems 3130 automated DNA sequencer. The resulting chromatograms were visualized and trimmed using Chromas 2.6.6 software. To confirm the sequence homology a Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) analysis was performed in the NCBI database (BLAST: Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (nih.gov)). VP2 gene sequences with the highest coverage (100%) and highest identities (99%-100%) to our sequences from different parts of the world were retrieved from the NCBI nucleotide database. Multiple sequence alignment was performed using the Clustal W algorithm in MEGA11 [31]. The nucleotide sequences were submitted to the NCBI Nucleotide Database GenBank using BankIt https://submit.ncbi.nlm.nih.Gov/subs/ GenBank. The FPV gene fragment sequences were deposited in the GenBank under accession numbers OQ291236-OQ291241.

Phylogenetic analysis

The obtained sequences from this study, along with 27 other parvovirus reference sequences obtained from GenBank (NCBI) were aligned. The evolutionary history was inferred using the neighbor-joining method based on the Tamura-Nei model, implemented in MEGA11 [31]. The branch lengths in the phylogenetic tree were measured in terms of the number of substitutions per site. A bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was conducted to evaluate the confidence level of branching in the phylogenetic tree.

Statistical analysis

The Microsoft Excel 2019 spreadsheet was used for data entry and management, and the data was then transferred into SPSS 22 for analysis [32]. The survey responses were categorized, and continuous variables were transformed into categorical forms (age, sex, sharing litter box and food utensils in multicat households, vaccination history, visit to the hospital for other purposes, season, etc.). The prevalence, mortality, and case fatality variations among districts and age groups were assessed using Z-tests for proportions. Initially, the association between Feline Panleukopenia virus infection and different explanatory variables was evaluated using univariable logistic regression models. Explanatory variables with a p-value ≤ 0.2 were selected for inclusion in the multivariable logistic regression analysis. Prior to conducting the multivariable logistic regression analysis, the variation inflation factor (VIF) was used to check for multicollinearity among the explanatory variables with a threshold of ≤ 5. A backward model selection strategy was employed for the final model selection. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to evaluate the overall model’s fit.

Results

Prevalence, mortality, and case fatality

Out of 161 suspected cats, 22.9% tested positive for FPLV in PCR. The overall mortality and case fatality were 10.6% and 45.9%, respectively (Table 1).

Table 1. Age and district-wise prevalence, mortality, and case fatality of Feline panleukopenia virus infection.

Variable Category Tested Positive Died Prevalence (%) Mortality (%) Case fatality (%)
District Dhaka 57 15 5 26.3a 8.8a 33.3a
Mymensingh 55 13 9 23.6a 16.4a 69.2a
Rajshahi 49 9 3 18.4a 6.1a 33.3 a
Age (months) Kitten (0-≤ 6) 67 20 11 29.4a 16.4a 55.0a
Young (7–24) 94 17 6 18.1a 6.4b 35.3a
Overall 161 37 17 22.9 10.6 45.9

ab values with different superscripts within the same column for each variable differ significantly (p < 0.05).

The highest prevalence was observed in Dhaka district (26.3%) and lowest in Rajshahi district (18.4%). On the other hand, Mymensingh district’s mortality (16.4%) and case fatality (69.2%) were the highest. The prevalence (29.4%) and case fatality (55.0%) were higher among kittens aged 0 - ≤ 6 months. However, but the mortality (16.4%) was significantly higher in kittens (0 - ≤ 6 months) than young cats (7–24 months) (Table 1).

Risk factors of FPL in suspected cats

Five variables were found to be associated with FPL at p-values ≤ 0.2 in the univariable screening and were included in the multivariable model (Table 2). However, in the final multivariable logistic regression model, only four variables showed significant associations with FPL among the suspected cats (Table 3). The absence of a vaccination history, sharing litter boxes and food utensils, visiting hospitals for other purposes, and the winter seasons were all significantly associated with FPL. Cats without a vaccinating history had 8.83 times higher odds of FPL compared to vaccinated cats, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 3.14–24.385. The winter season had almost six times higher odds of FPL (95% CI: 1.38–24.40) compared to rainy season. In multicat households, cats that shared a litter box and food utensils had about five times (95% CI: 1.93–13.45) higher odds of FPL in compared to those that did not share. Furthermore, visiting hospitals for other reasons nearly triples the odds of FPL (OR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.04–7.54) compared to cats who do not visit hospitals.

Table 2. Univariable association between Feline panleukopenia virus infection with explanatory variables in selected districts of Bangladesh.

Risk factors Category level Tested Prevalence (%) OR 95% CI P-Value
Age Kitten (0- ≤ 6 month) 1.93 0.92–4.05 .083
Young (7–24 month) Ref - -
Sex Male Ref - -
Female 1.52 0.72–3.19 .274
Vaccination history Yes Ref - -
No 6.48 2.52–16.65 < .001
Sharing litter box and food utensils in multicat households No Ref - -
Yes 4.01 1.81–8.86 .001
Visit to the hospital for other purposes No Ref - -
Yes 3.17 1.48–6.79 .003
Season Summer (Mar-Jun) 1.82 0.45–7.40 .405
Rainy (Jul-Oct) Ref - -
Winter (Nov-Feb) 3.04 0.84–11.04 .091

OR: Odds ratio; CI: 95% confidence interval

Table 3. The results of the final multivariable logistic regression model to identify risk factors for Feline panleukopenia virus infection in selected Bangladesh districts.

Risk factors Category level OR 95% CI P-Value
Vaccination history Yes Ref - -
No 8.83 3.14–24.85 < .001
Sharing litter box and food utensils in multicat households No Ref - -
Yes 5.09 1.93–13.45 .001
Visit to the hospital for other purposes No Ref - -
Yes 2.80 1.04–7.54 .042
Season Summer (Mar-Jun) 2.18 0.48–10.01 0.314
Rainy (Jul-Oct) Ref - -
Winter (Nov-Feb) 5.81 1.38–24.40 .016

OR: Odds ratio; CI: 95% confidence interval

BLAST analysis and sequence alignment

The VP2 capsid protein gene was targeted for the molecular detection of FPLV. All the positive samples showed sensitivity to the specific primers, resulting in a 698 bp amplicon size under UV (Fig 2). For further molecular characterization, six representative isolates from different locations were selected and sequenced, as, listed in Table 4.

Fig 2. Identification of Feline panleukopenia virus by polymerase chain reaction.

Fig 2

Gel electrophoresis showing VP2 capsid protein genes amplicons of Feline Panleukopenia virus (695bp). In Lanes: M- 100 bp DNA ladder (Promega, USA) P: Positive control N: Negative control, Lane S1-S10: Complies with the Samples of FPLV showing approximately 695 bp.

Table 4. The list of sequenced isolates with their accession number and location.

No Isolates Accession Number Organism Location
1 THBAU1 OQ291236 Carnivore protoparvovirus 1 Mymensingh
2 THBAU2 OQ291237 Feline panleukopenia virus Mymensingh
3 THBAU3 OQ291238 Feline panleukopenia virus Dhaka
4 THBAU4 OQ291239 Feline panleukopenia virus Dhaka
5 THBAU5 OQ291240 Feline panleukopenia virus Rajshahi
6 THBAU6 OQ291241 Feline panleukopenia virus Rajshahi

Upon conducting BLAST analysis, it was determined that our isolates THBAU3 (OQ291238), THBAU4 (OQ291239), THBAU5 (OQ291240), THBAU6 (OQ291241) exhibited 100% homology with previously confirmed Feline panleukopenia isolates of South Korea (MN400978.1) and China (MF541135.1). In addition, isolate THBAU2 displayed 100% identity to a Feline panleukopenia isolate from Thailand (MN127779.1), while THBAU1 showed 100% homology with Carnivore protoparvovirus-1 (MW847199.1) isolated from a feline sample in Italy.

Phylogenetic analysis

For phylogenetic analysis, the VP2 gene sequences of Feline Panleukopenia, Carnivore protoparvovirus-1, Canine Parvovirus 2 (CPV-2), Mink enteritis virus (MEV), and Raccoon parvovirus (RaPV) were retrieved from the NCBI database.

The phylogenetic analysis revealed the presence of five distinct clades. Among our six isolates, THBAU1 clustered with Carnivore protoparvovirus-1 isolates, while the remaining isolates formed two separate clades along with Feline Panleukopenia virus isolates (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Phylogenetic tree of FPLV.

Fig 3

The Neighbor-Joining tree was constructed using 33 partial VP2 gene sequences of Carnivore protoparvovirus-1, Feline panleukopenia virus, Canine parvovirus, Mink enteritis virus, and Raccoon parvovirus. The evolutionary distances between sequences were calculated using the Tamura-Nei method. The evolutionary analyses were conducted using MEGA11 software [31] and the tree was visualized in iTOL. In the tree, the sequences obtained in this study are highlighted in red.

Discussion

One in every three FPL suspect cats was found to be infected with FPLV. Non-vaccination, sharing of litter boxes and food utensils, seasonal variation, and visiting pet hospitals were identified as risk factors for FPL. We recommended regular vaccination for cats, especially those that share litter box and food utensils, and those that visit hospitals to reduce the prevalence of FPL in the Bangladesh context.

Pet animal rearing, particularly cats, is gaining popularity in Bangladesh due to their ease of care. However, the increasing prevalence of FPL, a highly contagious and deadly disease, poses a significant threat to the cat population. Unfortunately, many cat owners in Bangladesh are unaware of the disease and lack proper management practices. This study represents the first comprehensive investigation into the epidemiology and molecular characteristics of FPL in Bangladesh.

The prevalence of FPL observed in our study was 23%, which is higher than the prevalence reported in a previous study [27]. However, our findings align with the results reported in studies [25, 26]. The relatively higher prevalence observed in our study may be attributed to the sampling method employed. It is important to note that our study specifically collected samples from suspected domestic cats visiting pet hospitals, rather than randomly sampling from the general cat population. This targeted sampling approach could have influenced the prevalence and may not be representative of the overall cat population in Bangladesh. This study also revealed a mortality of 10.6% with a case fatality of 45.5%. Several factors contribute to these high figures, including a lack of understanding among pet owners regarding proper pet management, delayed veterinary visits, inadequate vaccination, and the absence of a specialized pet hospital in our country. In addition, this study exhibited a significant correlation between FPL and mortality in Kitten aged 0-≤ 6 months compared to young cats aged 7–24 months. This might be because most kittens were unvaccinated and had lower immunity levels [15, 16].

The pet owners who administered the FPLV vaccine to their cats significantly reduced the occurrence of FPLV compared to those who did not, which is consistent with findings reported in [21]. This is possible as vaccinated cats substantial quantities of antibodies that provide protection against FPLV infection. In addition, vaccinated cats that contract FPLV exhibit milder clinical signs and symptoms compared to unvaccinated cats with FPLV-infection [33].

Our study also revealed a strong association between sharing litter box and food utensils in multicat households and the occurrence of FPL. The practice of using the same litter box and eating utensils can facilitate the transmission of the disease, as healthy cats can come into contact with the virus through their saliva, urine, feces, nasal secretions, tears, and contaminated clothing [18, 34].

Intriguingly, visiting a hospital for other purposes with cat significantly increases the odds of FPLV infection. Owners may interact with others’ cats while receiving treatment in the hospital, and the same thermometer and premises are used for both sick and healthy cats. The premises are not always disinfected immediately after treating a sick animal, and it is possible for the same doctor to examine both sick and healthy cats. As a result, many cats brought to hospitals for other issues become infected with diseases from diseased animals.

Hospital management can play a crucial role in preventing nosocomial FPLV infections by implementing effective infection control policies and procedures. This includes regular cleaning and disinfection of areas where animals come into contact, including potentially contaminated accessories. Moreover, staff and visitors entering pet wards must practice good personal hygiene such as hand washing before interacting with animals. Evidence of such nosocomial infections has been reported in previous studies [35, 36].

The seasonal pattern was also a significant factor in the occurrence of FPL. Our investigation observed a strong association between the winter season and occurrence of FPL. FPL viruses have a higher likelihood of infecting cats in colder and drier climates, and the cold weather during the winter season can affect the immune response of cats. Additionally, seasonal weight loss, which is also observed during the winter season, may contribute to the occurrence of disease [37].

The VP2 protein serves as the major capsid protein for Carnivore protoparvovirus-1 and plays a crucial role in determining the host range of the virus It is also subject to antibody-mediated selection [38]. Mutations in specific amino acids of the VP2 capsid protein are responsible for the variation observed among different strains of parvovirus [27]. In our study, four out of six isolates (THBAU3, THBAU4, THBAU5, THBAU6) that were partially sequenced showed 100% homology with previously published isolates from South Korea (MN400978.1, MW035309.1, HQ184200.1) and China (MF541135.1, OM918773.1, OL547637.1, MT178243.1). These isolates were obtained from the Dhaka and Rajshahi regions of Bangladesh. On the other hand, our isolate THBAU2 displayed 100% homology with FPLV isolate18R217C/TH/2018 from Thailand. Moreover, our remaining isolate THBAU1 demonstrated 100% homology with Carnivore protoparvovirus 1 isolate 44350 from Italy.

A previous study conducted in Bangladesh, focusing on the molecular characterization of the VP2 gene of feline panleukopenia virus, revealed a high level of homology with our isolates THBAU1 (more than 99.52%) and THBAU2 (99.62%). However, there is less than 99% homology observed with the other sequences analyzed. When compared to the e previously published sequence of Bangladesh [27]. Some point mutations were identified in the nucleotide sequences of our isolates’. Notably, no amino acid mutations were observed. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that several mutated variants of the virus are circulating in different regions of Bangladesh.

In our phylogenetic analysis, we observed that four isolates (THBAU3, THBAU4, THBAU5, and THBAU6) clustered together with previously identified Feline Panleukopenia viruses from South Korea and China. However, isolate THBAU2 formed a separate cluster along with Feline Panleukopenia viruses identified in Bangladesh, Egypt, and UAE. Furthermore, isolate THBAU1 formed a distinct cluster with published Carnivore protoparvovirus-1 isolates. Therefore, it can be assumed that these isolates may have been introduced to Bangladesh from the mentioned countries.

In this study, we conducted partial sequencing of the VP2 gene, which provides limited information regarding the antigenic and genetic differences between the original parvovirus and its variants. However, to gain a comprehensive understanding, a whole genome or full-length VP2 gene sequence is required. Due to lack of fund and laboratory facilities, we were only able to perform partial sequencing. The study also had limitations in terms of virus culture and its pathogenicity observation. Additionally, investigating predictive laboratory variables, such as blood profiles, between survivors and non-survivors would contribute to a more comprehensive investigation of Feline Panleukopenia in Bangladesh.

Conclusion

One in every three suspected cats was found to be infected with feline panleukopenia, and the disease exhibited a high case fatality, particularly among young cats and in a specific region. Regular vaccination of the cats, especially those that share a common litter box, food utensils, and those that visit hospitals for other purposes, will help reduce the prevalence of FPL in Bangladesh. Moreover, the genetic variation observed in this study provides valuable insights into the evolution of FPLV in Bangladesh. This information will aid in the development of effective prevention and control strategies for combating this deadly disease.

Supporting information

S1 Raw images

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Sagir’s Pet Clinic & Research Center, Mymensingh Pet Clinic and Research Center, Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Bangladesh Agricultural University, and Birds and Pet Animal Clinic, Rajshahi, for their support during sample collection.

Data Availability

Data are available from NCBI OQ291236-OQ291241.

Funding Statement

The research work was conducted using personal funds.

References

  • 1.Barrs VR. Feline panleukopenia: a re-emergent disease. Veterinary Clinics: Small Animal Practice. 2019;49(4):651–70. doi: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2019.02.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zenad MM, Radhy AM. Clinical, serological and antigenic study of feline panleukopenia virus in cats in Baghdad, Iraq. Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2020;34(2):435–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Chen S, Miao B, Chen N, Chen C, Shao T, Zhang X, et al. SYNCRIP facilitates porcine parvovirus viral DNA replication through the alternative splicing of NS1 mRNA to promote NS2 mRNA formation. Veterinary research. 2021;52(1):1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yang S, He Y, Chen X, Kalim U, Wang Y, Yang S, et al. Viral metagenomics reveals diverse viruses in the feces samples of raccoon dogs. Frontiers in veterinary science. 2021;8. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.693564 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cotmore SF, Agbandje-McKenna M, Canuti M, Chiorini JA, Eis-Hubinger A-M, Hughes J, et al. ICTV virus taxonomy profile: Parvoviridae. Journal of General Virology. 2019;100(3):367–8. doi: 10.1099/jgv.0.001212 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Johnson R. Feline Panleucopaenia Virus: III.—Some Properties Compared, to a Feline Herpes Virus. Research in Veterinary Science. 1966;7(1):112–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Goto H. Feline panleukopenia in Japan. I. Isolation and characterization of the virus. 1974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Horzinek MC. Vaccine use and disease prevalence in dogs and cats. Veterinary Microbiology. 2006;117(1):2–8. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.04.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mochizuki M, Horiuchi M, Hiragi H, San Gabriel MC, Yasuda N, Uno T. Isolation of canine parvovirus from a cat manifesting clinical signs of feline panleukopenia. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 1996;34(9):2101–5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.34.9.2101-2105.1996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Hofmann-Lehmann R, Fehr D, Grob M, Elgizoli M, Packer C, Martenson JS, et al. Prevalence of antibodies to feline parvovirus, calicivirus, herpesvirus, coronavirus, and immunodeficiency virus and of feline leukemia virus antigen and the interrelationship of these viral infections in free-ranging lions in east Africa. Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology. 1996;3(5):554–62. doi: 10.1128/cdli.3.5.554-562.1996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Millán J, Rodríguez A. A serological survey of common feline pathogens in free-living European wildcats (Felis silvestris) in central Spain. European Journal of Wildlife Research. 2009;55(3):285–91. doi: 10.1007/s10344-008-0246-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Nakamura K, Ikeda Y, Miyazawa T, Nguyen NT, Duong DD, Le KH, et al. Comparison of prevalence of feline herpesvirus type 1, calicivirus and parvovirus infections in domestic and leopard cats in Vietnam. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 1999;61(12):1313–5. doi: 10.1292/jvms.61.1313 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ostrowski S, Van Vuuren M, Lenain DM, Durand A. A serologic survey of wild felids from central west Saudi Arabia. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2003;39(3):696–701. doi: 10.7589/0090-3558-39.3.696 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Macieira DB, de Menezes RdCA, Damico CB, Almosny NR, McLane HL, Daggy JK, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for hemoplasmas in domestic cats naturally infected with feline immunodeficiency virus and/or feline leukemia virus in Rio de Janeiro—Brazil. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery. 2008;10(2):120–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jfms.2007.08.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Addie D, Toth S, Thompson H, Greenwood N, Jarrett J. Detection of feline parvovirus in dying pedigree kittens. Veterinary Record. 1998;142(14):353–6. doi: 10.1136/vr.142.14.353 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Cave T, Thompson H, Reid S, Hodgson D, Addie D. Kitten mortality in the United Kingdom: a retrospective analysis of 274 histopathological examinations (1986 to 2000). Veterinary Record. 2002;151(17):497–501. doi: 10.1136/vr.151.17.497 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Addie D, Belák S, Boucraut-Baralon C, Egberink H, Frymus T, Gruffydd-Jones T, et al. Feline infectious peritonitis. ABCD guidelines on prevention and management. Journal of Feline Medicine & Surgery. 2009;11(7):594–604. doi: 10.1016/j.jfms.2009.05.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kim S-G, Lee K-I, Kim H-J, Park H-M. Prevalence of feline panleukopenia virus in stray and household cats in Seoul, Korea. Journal of Veterinary Clinics. 2013;30(5):333–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Awad RA, Khalil WK, Attallah AG. Epidemiology and diagnosis of feline panleukopenia virus in Egypt: Clinical and molecular diagnosis in cats. Veterinary World. 2018;11(5):578. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2018.578-584 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Porporato F, Horzinek MC, Hofmann-Lehmann R, Ferri F, Gerardi G, Contiero B, et al. Survival estimates and outcome predictors for shelter cats with feline panleukopenia virus infection. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 2018;253(2):188–95. doi: 10.2460/javma.253.2.188 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tuzio H. Feline panleukopenia. Infectious disease management in animal shelters. 2021:337–66. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Carreño CH, Navarro CO, Jara MA. Design of primers in the molecular detection of Feline Panleukopenia Virus. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences. 2021;8(3):019–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Clegg S, Coyne K, Dawson S, Spibey N, Gaskell R, Radford A. Canine parvovirus in asymptomatic feline carriers. Veterinary Microbiology. 2012;157(1–2):78–85. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2011.12.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Rehme T, Hartmann K, Truyen U, Zablotski Y, Bergmann M. Feline Panleukopenia Outbreaks and Risk Factors in Cats in Animal Shelters. Viruses. 2022;14(6):1248. doi: 10.3390/v14061248 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Islam MA, Rahman MS, Rony SA, Uddin MJ, Rahman A. Antigenic detection of feline panleukopenia virus in local breed cats at Tangail district in Bangladesh. International Journal of Bioresearch. 2010;2(11):25–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Chisty NN, Belgrad JP, Al Sattar A, Akter S, Hoque MA. Clinico-epidemiological investigation of feline panleukopenia and parvoviral enteritis in the two largest pet hospitals in Bangladesh. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research. 2020;7(4):726. doi: 10.5455/javar.2020.g474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Chowdhury Q, Alam S, Chowdhury M, Rahman S, Hasan M, Uddin MB, et al. First molecular characterization and phylogenetic analysis of the VP2 gene of feline panleukopenia virus in Bangladesh. Archives of virology. 2021;166(8):2273–8. doi: 10.1007/s00705-021-05113-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Arya R, Antonisamy B, Kumar S. Sample Size Estimation in Prevalence Studies. The Indian Journal of Pediatrics. 2012;79(11):1482–8. doi: 10.1007/s12098-012-0763-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Jahan MS, Rahman MM, Ahmed R, Kabir A, Oli S, Hassan J, et al. Molecular Characterization of Duck Plague Virus for Determination of TCID 50. Research in Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries. 2021;8(1):125–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Hossain MJ, Raut S, Singh RP, Mishra P, Hossain MS, Dey AR, et al. Molecular detection of Babesia and Theileria from crossbred cattle in Sirajganj and Rangpur districts of Bangladesh. Veterinary Medicine and Science. 2022. doi: 10.1002/vms3.989 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Molecular biology and evolution. 2021;38(7):3022–7. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msab120 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Mahmud M, Iqbal M, Shahid M, Das S, Kabir A, Hossain M, et al. Bovine Foot-and-Mouth-Disease risk factors in Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Veterinary Medicine (BJVM). 2022;20(1):43–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gore TC, Lakshmanan N, Williams JR, Jirjis FF, Chester ST, Duncan KL, et al. Three-year duration of immunity in cats following vaccination against feline rhinotracheitis virus, feline calicivirus, and feline panleukopenia virus. Veterinary Therapeutics. 2006;7(3):213. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Poole G. Stability of a modified, live panleucopenia virus stored in liquid phase. Applied Microbiology. 1972;24(4):663–4. doi: 10.1128/am.24.4.663-664.1972 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Golden K, Rozanski E, Rizika S, DeStefano I. Prevalence of protective feline panleukopenia antibody titers detected by a point-of-care enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in cats presenting to a university emergency service. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research. 2022;86(3):229–32. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hohenhaus AE, Rosenberg MP, Moroff SD. Concurrent lymphoma and salmonellosis in a cat. The Canadian Veterinary Journal. 1990;31(1):38. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Naidenko SV, Pavlova EV, Kirilyuk VE. Detectionofseaconalweight lossand a serologic surveyof potential pathogensin wild Pallas’ cats (Felis [Otocolobus] manus) of theDaurian Steppe, Russia. Journal of wildlife diseases. 2014;50(2):188–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Brindhalakshmi B, Mukhopadhyay H, Antony P, Thanislass J, Vijayalakshmi P, Mangadevi N. Isolation and molecular characterization of canine and feline parvovirus strains-an updated review. J Dairy Vet Anim Res. 2016;3(5):164–9. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sherin Reda Rouby

17 Apr 2023

PONE-D-23-04863Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline Panleukopenia Virus from suspected domestic cats in BangladeshPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Nazir,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 01 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sherin Reda Rouby, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

“The research work was conducted using personal funds.”

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

4. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

Reviewer #3: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In this manuscript, the authors investigated the epidemiology of FPLV in Bangladesh and gave a phylogenetic analysis of FPLV VP2 gene. However, initial assessment indicated that this study lacks novelty and I have some major concerns and suggestions that need to be addressed.

1. In my opinion, as an epidemiological investigation and analysis, the number of samples collected in this study is not enough, and the samples were only collected from the pet hospitals. It is preferable to be able to collect samples from stray cats as well as cat breeding farms for testing to make the analysis more comprehensive.

2. The authors detected the FPLV from the hospital samples, furthermore, the prevalence of other pathogens and the co-infections with FPLV would be better mentioned.

3. It would be better to sequence the complete sequence of VP2 gene.

4. The authors detected samples from the suspected cat for FPLV, please provide more information on subsequent treatment and prognosis of the Feline Panleukopenia.

Reviewer #2: Overall I think this is a well written manuscript about a common disease in a location where not much is known about prevalence. I think that the authors are missing an opportunity to discuss in greater detail what I see as the most significant finding; that this has a significant link to veterinary visits. I would like to see a more expanded discussion about the need for increased biosecurity in regards to veterinary visits. Otherwise, well done.

Reviewer #3: The authors explore" Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline Panleukopenia Virus from suspected domestic cats in Bangladesh". However, the study was needed to some modifications as following to be ready for publications. After reading I have some concerns itemized below:

1-In introduction section: please rewrite the family of FLP (carnivore protoparvovirus-1) in italic form.

2-Did the author take rectal swab samples or fecal samples? Please clarify this information throughout the entire manuscript.

3- please, added the fig 1,……….and so on without title in the text, but the remaining details added in the right site.

4- Please, remove the last row in the table 1.

5- Please, added the word (month) near to 6, 7, 24 in the table 2.

6-Is the virus isolate (THBAU2) identical to FLP isolate from Egypt or Thailand?

7- Is the ladder 100kbp or 1kbp? From which company was it made?

8- Complete sequencing of VP2 gene is required In order to stand for certain results.

9-Virus isolation is important for diagnosis of FPL virus infection as well as fundamental studies of FPL, so, the authors will need to isolate the virus from cats.

10-The all manuscript is needed to grammar and spelling checker. Please check the entire manuscript for grammatical errors& I advise the revising for English Language by a native English speaker.

11-The statistical evaluation of the approach is little bit low.

12-Discussion part is very weak and has a great lack of evidence and scientific explanation and can’t be accepted in that way. Interpretate your results according to the evidence based knowledge and discuss it more.

13- Write your conclusion clearly after the discussion part.

14- The PCR figure is suspicious.

15- The phylogenetic analysis figure is hesitated.

With my best wishes

Fatma Abdallah

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Michael Nappier

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Oct 20;18(10):e0282559. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282559.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


31 May 2023

The authors are highly obliged and thankful to the reviewer for his constructive comments, which helped us improve the quality of the paper in terms of science and presentation. The weak points were taken care of, and necessary modifications were made and marked with track changes (please see the revised manuscript with track changes).

Reviewer #1: In this manuscript, the authors investigated the epidemiology of FPLV in Bangladesh and gave a phylogenetic analysis of FPLV VP2 gene. However, the initial assessment indicated that this study lacks novelty, and I have some major concerns and suggestions that need to be addressed.

1. In my opinion, as an epidemiological investigation and analysis, the number of samples collected in this study is not enough, and the samples were only collected from the pet hospitals. It is preferable to be able to collect samples from stray cats as well as cat breeding farms for testing to make the analysis more comprehensive.

Response: We appreciate your suggestions for collecting samples from stray cats and cat breeding farms. While our main purpose of this study was on identifying risk factors for FPL in suspected domestic cats, we acknowledge that increasing our sample size to include animals from different settings could provide greater insights. However, due to budget constraints, we were only able to test 161 samples using PCR for FLP diagnosis. Despite the limited sample size, we believe our findings contribute to the understanding of this disease in domestic cats.

2. The authors detected the FPLV from the hospital samples, furthermore, the prevalence of other pathogens and the co-infections with FPLV would be better mentioned.

Response: We did not use multiplex PCR and it was not possible to detect other pathogens. In a future study we can explore that.

3. It would be better to sequence the complete sequence of VP2 gene.

Response: Due to lack of fund, full length VP2 gene sequence was not possible at this time.

4. The authors detected samples from the suspected cat for FPLV, please provide more information on subsequent treatment and prognosis of the Feline Panleukopenia.

Response: The age and district wise mortality and case fatality were presented in Table 1.

Reviewer #2: Overall I think this is a well written manuscript about a common disease in a location where not much is known about prevalence. I think that the authors are missing an opportunity to discuss in greater detail what I see as the most significant finding; that this has a significant link to veterinary visits. I would like to see a more expanded discussion about the need for increased biosecurity in regards to veterinary visits. Otherwise, well done.

We greatly appreciate your positive attitude and acknowledgement of the significance of our study. Moreover, we have taken into consideration your valuable feedback and incorporated necessary modifications throughout the manuscript to address the limitations highlighted by you. Specifically, we have included an extensive discussion on the topic of biosecurity pertaining to veterinary visits, aligning with your observations.

Reviewer #3: The authors explore" Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline Panleukopenia Virus from suspected domestic cats in Bangladesh". However, the study was needed to some modifications as following to be ready for publications. After reading I have some concerns itemized below:

1-In introduction section: please rewrite the family of FLP (carnivore protoparvovirus-1) in italic form.

Response: Changed according to comments, Carnivore protoparvovirus-1

2-Did the author take rectal swab samples or fecal samples? Please clarify this information throughout the entire manuscript.

Response: Thank you for this comment. We used rectal swab samples, and changed throughout the entire manuscript.

3- please, added the fig 1 ,……….and so on without title in the text, but the remaining details added in the right site.

Response: Added as per your direction, This map is created by our team using ArcGIS version 10.1 (http://www.esri.com/arcgis)

4- Please, remove the last row in the table 1.

Response: Removed according to your comment

5- Please, added the word (month) near to 6, 7, 24 in the table 2.

Response: Added

6-Is the virus isolate (THBAU2) identical to FLP isolate from Egypt or Thailand?

Response: The virus isolate (THBAU2) is identical to FLP isolate from Thailand

7- Is the ladder 100kbp or 1kbp? From which company was it made?

Response: In Lanes: M- 100 bp DNA ladder (Promega, USA)

8- Complete sequencing of VP2 gene is required In order to stand for certain results.

Response: Due to lack of fund, full length VP2 gene sequence was not possible. We modified our results according to our findings. Please go through the revised manuscript (Revised Manuscript with Track Changes) for more details

9-Virus isolation is important for diagnosis of FPL virus infection as well as fundamental studies of FPL, so, the authors will need to isolate the virus from cats.

Response: Virus isolation was not possible due to inadequate lab facilities.

10-The all manuscript is needed to grammar and spelling checker. Please check the entire manuscript for grammatical errors& I advise the revising for English Language by a native English speaker.

Response: We have made an extensive English edit.

11-The statistical evaluation of the approach is little bit low.

Response: We apologize for not being to understand this comment. Please make specific comment where to improve out statistical analysis.

12-Discussion part is very weak and has a great lack of evidence and scientific explanation and can’t be accepted in that way. Interpretate your results according to the evidence-based knowledge and discuss it more.

Response: Discussion part has been modified. Please go through the revised manuscript (Revised Manuscript with Track Changes) for more details.

13- Write your conclusion clearly after the discussion part.

Response: We have added conclusion after the discussion section.

14- The PCR figure is suspicious.

Response: New PCR figure has been added.

15- The phylogenetic analysis figure is hesitated.

Response: Modification has been made in the phylogenetic analysis figure.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Sherin Reda Rouby

7 Jun 2023

Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline Panleukopenia Virus from suspected domestic cats in selected Bangladesh regions

PONE-D-23-04863R1

Dear Dr. Nazir,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Sherin Reda Rouby, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #3: The modifications made by the authors made the research paper ready for international publication, and this is from my professional point of view.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #3: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Sherin Reda Rouby

13 Jun 2023

PONE-D-23-04863R1

Epidemiology and molecular characterization of Feline Panleukopenia Virus from suspected domestic cats in selected Bangladesh regions

Dear Dr. Nazir:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Professor Sherin Reda Rouby

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Raw images

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    Data are available from NCBI OQ291236-OQ291241.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES