Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2020 Feb 28;15(2):e0229415. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229415

Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl

Ana Paula Jejesky de Oliveira 1,*, Maria Cristina Valdetaro Rangel 1, Márton Z Vidovszky 2, João Luiz Rossi Jr 1, Fernando Vicentini 3, Balázs Harrach 2, Győző L Kaján 2
Editor: Negin P Martin4
PMCID: PMC7048273  PMID: 32109945

Abstract

Avian adenoviruses (AdVs) are a very diverse group of pathogens causing diseases in poultry and wild birds. Wild birds, endangered by habitat loss and habitat fragmentation in the tropical forests, are recognised to play a role in the transmission of various AdVs. In this study, two novel, hitherto unknown AdVs were described from faecal samples of smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl. The former was classified into genus Aviadenovirus, the latter into genus Atadenovirus, and both viruses most probably represent new AdV species as well. These results show that there is very limited information about the biodiversity of AdVs in tropical wild birds, though viruses might have a major effect on the population of their hosts or endanger even domesticated animals. Surveys like this provide new insights into the diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of avian AdVs.

Introduction

Urbanisation, land conversion and road-building pose a risk to wildlife by habitat fragmentation and also by exposing the animals to the risk of roadkill [1]. Habitat loss and fragmentation modify the landscape and have consequences for biodiversity conservation [2,3]. The highway ES-060 in Brazil crosses three important environmental reserves: the Jacarenema Ecological Reserve (307 ha), the Setiba Environmental Protection Area (12,960 ha) and the Paulo César Vinha State Park (1,500 ha). The vegetation of these reserves is mainly composed of restinga, a distinct type of tropical moist broadleaf forest, regarded as a key area for biodiversity [4]. The rural expansion is intensive adjacent to the highway.

Among the negative anthropic actions, the establishment of new roads is among the most impacting changes of environment [5]. Beyond the risk of roadkill, roads inhibit the movement of many species and act as barriers (total or partial), isolating populations [2,3], with few species immune to this threat [6]. The likelihood of roadkill depends on the animal movement patterns and the landscape characteristics [7,8]. Animal movement patterns are the result of behavioural trade-offs, and are influenced by the individual’s internal state and also by the environment [9]. When roads or railroads cross movement routes, this creates areas of greater risk for the wildlife, for human safety and also for domestic animals [7].

Adenoviruses (AdVs) are DNA viruses with an icosahedral capsid and a double-stranded, linear genome. The presence of AdVs is described in many species of vertebrate animals, including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish [1014]. It is known that birds are common hosts for AdVs, a fact that has been mirrored by the large number of avian AdVs [1525]. The host bird species often live in crowded flocks, and migrate large distances by flying, and this predisposes to a rapid viral dissemination in the environment.

The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses recognises five genera belonging to the family Adenoviridae. Birds can be infected by highly divergent AdVs classified into three different genera: genus Aviadenovirus, Siadenovirus and Atadenovirus [11]. The pathogenicity of these viruses is not always clear, they can cause latent infections but diseases as well, depending on the virulence of the strain and also on cospeciation time [26]. The deeper evolutionary history of the family Adenoviridae still needs to be resolved, and the discovery of new AdVs in new hosts provides more accurate phylogenetic trees and better understanding of the co-evolution and host switches of these viruses.

Wild birds play an important role in the transmission and as reservoirs of various AdVs [2735]. Habitat loss and fragmentation cause novel interactions between pathogens, hosts and the environment. This creates new routes for disease transmission, which results in the possible dispersion and adaptation of pathogens to new hosts. To address this risk, we investigated the occurrence of AdVs in tropical screech owls (Megascops choliba), guira cuckoos (Guira guira) and smooth-billed anis (Crotophaga ani) found dead along the highway ES-060.

Materials and methods

1. Study area

The ES-060 highway crosses the municipalities of Vitória, Vila Velha and Guarapari. The northern end of the highway is located at the coordinates 20°18'48.50'' S– 40°17'32.48'' W, and the southern at the coordinates 21°18'5.44'' S– 41°0'7.77" W.

2. Origin of samples

The highway is monitored every 90 minutes for accidents or roadkill occurrence. The animals found alive or dead are collected, recorded and transferred for veterinary treatment or disposal. Faecal samples were collected from 19 dead birds in 2017: five tropical screech owls, four guira cuckoos and ten smooth-billed anis. Samples were collected during necropsies directly from the rectal ampulla of the birds.

For faecal suspension, approximately 200 mg of faecal sample was diluted to a concentration of 20% in Tris-calcium buffer (Tris 0.01 M, CaCl2 1.5 mM, pH 7.2), homogenised and centrifuged at 2000 g for 10 min. Nucleic acid was extracted by the method of Boom et al. [36], using guanidine thiocyanate and silica particles (product numbers: 50983 and 107536, respectively, both from Merck, Darmstadt, Germany).

3. PCR and sequencing

Extracted DNA samples were screened for the presence of AdVs using a pan-adenovirus PCR, targeting the gene of the viral DNA polymerase and detecting all known AdVs [10,37]. The 321-bp-long PCR products were purified using the NucleoSpin Gel and PCR Clean-up Kit (Macherey-Nagel; Düren, Germany), and sequenced using the BigDye Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific; Waltham, Massachusetts, United States of America) on both strands according to the manufacturers’ protocol.

4. Phylogenetic analysis

The acquired sequences were assembled and translated to amino acid sequences using Geneious 9.1.8. For phylogenetic tree inference, the multiple alignment was conducted using MAFFT [38], the length of the multiple alignment was 90 amino acids. The evolutionary model selection and the phylogenetic calculation were performed using RAxML 8.2.10 [39], the best-scoring model was LG with empirical base frequencies. The robustness of the tree was determined with a non-parametric bootstrap calculation using 1,000 repeats. The phylogenetic tree was visualised using MEGA 7 [40], the tree was rooted on the midpoint, and bootstrap values were given as percentages if they reached 75%. The obtained sequences were compared to entries of the NCBI Protein database using BlastX [41] on 20/09/2019.

Results and discussion

PCR products were gained from three smooth-billed ani samples and one tropical screech owl sample. The GenBank accession numbers for the sequences are MN540447 and MN540448.

The result of the phylogenetic analysis is displayed in Fig 1. The three smooth-billed ani AdV strains shared identical nucleic acid sequences on the conserved stretch of the DNA polymerase, the virus strain clustered into genus Aviadenovirus. The BlastX hit with the highest pairwise amino acid sequence identity was pigeon AdV-2 with 75.6% (E value: 4.22 x 10−43, query coverage: 100%). The screech owl AdV clustered into genus Atadenovirus, and shared 80.0% sequence identity with the helodermatid AdV-1 (syn. lizard AdV-1 or gila monster AdV; E value: 2.31 x 10−47, query coverage: 100%). This level of sequence divergence suggests that these virus strains represent novel AdV species, as the primary species demarcation criterion for AdVs is 10–15% sequence divergence on the DNA-dependent DNA polymerase amino acid sequence [11]. However, further description of the virus is required to support this hypothesis, primarily, more genomic information—including the complete sequence of the DNA polymerase—would be essential.

Fig 1. Phylogenetic analysis of the smooth-billed ani and the tropical screech owl adenoviruses.

Fig 1

The tree is based on derived amino acid sequence of partial DNA polymerase gene sequences. Adenovirus strains are represented using the host name and the serotype ordinal number, and viral species names are also applied if available. The tree was rooted on the midpoint. Accession numbers: duck 1: NP_044702, fowl 1: AAC54904, fowl 4: AEK64762, fowl 5: YP_007985646, fowl 8b: ANJ02558, fowl 9: derived from AC_000013, goose 4: YP_006383556, helodermatid 1: AAS89696, pigeon 2: APO40944, psittacine 3: YP_009112716, smooth-billed ani: QHA24662, snake 1: YP_001552247, tropical screech owl: QHA24661, turkey 1: YP_003933581, turkey 3: NP_047384.

As identical virus sequences were detected in the three smooth-billed anis, the identified AdV is most probably infectious for this bird species, and it is not a foodborne contaminant. A long-term co-evolution is hypothesised between this aviadenovirus and its host as aviadenoviruses infect a wide range of bird species [12,27,3134,42]. Though infectious, it may not be evidently pathogenic, as co-evolving viruses are often non-pathogenic or facultatively pathogenic to their host species [26,4346]. No pathological findings were observed apart from trauma due to vehicular damage neither in these anis nor in the screech owl.

The tropical screech owl AdV was detected in one bird only, and clustered into genus Atadenovirus. Atadenoviruses are thought to have coevolved with squamate reptiles [47,48], but several bird species are also infected by atadenoviruses [17,23,49]. As this owl species is a bird of prey, it is equally possible that this virus had already adapted to this host and replicated in this bird, or that this virus is a foodborne contaminant. Tropical screech owls are omnivorous and known to prey on small reptiles, rodents, and amphibians [50], so the detected atadenovirus might originate from a prey reptile. If the latter will be supported by future results, the designation tropical screech owl associated AdV is recommended for the strain.

The tropical screech owl (family Strigidae) and the smooth-billed ani (family Cuculidae) are species widely distributed in Brazil but also endemic from Costa Rica to Paraguay and northern Argentina [51,52]. The two species of birds act directly on the population dynamics of the prey populations and are able to contribute to maintaining the diversity of these communities [53,54] and to produce secondary effects in plant communities [55].

These samples show us that there is very limited information about the biodiversity of AdVs in tropical wild birds, though viruses might have a major effect on the population of their hosts or endanger even domesticated animals. Several studies have already been published about poultry AdVs [56,57], but further investigations are required to shed light on the diversity and pathogenicity of AdVs in tropical host animals.

Rural expansion causes irreversible damages to wildlife, all 19 birds investigated were found dead because of road traffic accidents. As human activity intensifies, an increasing number of pet animals and livestock are raised in the close proximity of previously unharmed natural habitats. This enhances the risk of viral spread and host changes, but this phenomena was not observed in this investigation: the detected virus strains are not of domestic animal origin, nor have been found in domesticated or pet animals yet.

Due to the ability of avian AdVs—mainly aviadenoviruses—to cause subclinical infections, the diversity of AdVs in birds is probably much more extensive than thought before [17]. The identification of two novel AdVs in specimens of two Brazilian tropical bird species suggests that numerous further unknown AdVs are circulating in other tropical bird species. Surveys like this provide new insights into the pathogenicity, diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of avian AdVs; thus, similar studies should be conducted in different geographical locations too.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the concessionaire of the Rodovia do Sol System and the Sinhá Laurinha Society.

Data Availability

Sequences were submitted to the NCBI GenBank under accession numbers MN540447 and MN540448.

Funding Statement

The research of APJO is supported by the Espírito Santo Research and Innovation Support Foundation (438/2016, fapes.es.gov.br) and University of Vila Velha (201672442, www.uvv.br). GLK is supported by the OMA Foundation (101öu6, omaa.hu), and he is also the recipient of the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (https://mta.hu/english). The research of MZV and BH is supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office (NN128309, nkfih.gov.hu/english-nkfih).

References

  • 1.Rosa AO, Mauhs J. Atropelamento de animais silvestres na rodovia RS-040 [Wildlife roadkill on the RS-040 highway]. Cad Pesqui Série Biol. 2004;16: 35–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Forman RTT, Alexander LE. Roads and their major ecological effects. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 1998;29: 207–231. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Richard T, Forman T, Deblinger RD. The ecological road-effect zone of a Massachusetts (U.S.A.) suburban highway. Conserv Biol. 2000;14: 36–46. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99088.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.iema.es.gov.br. Parque Estadual Paulo Cesar Vinha [Internet]. 2019 [cited 26 Sep 2019]. Available: https://iema.es.gov.br/PEPCV
  • 5.Pinheiro BF, Turci LCB. Vertebrados atropelados na estrada da Variante (BR-307), Cruzeiro do Sul, Acre, Brasil [Vertebrates roadkill on the Variante road (BR-307), Cruzeiro do Sul, Acre, Brazil]. Nat online. 2013;11: 68–78. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Trombulak SC, Frissell CA. Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conserv Biol. 2000;14: 18–30. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99084.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Gunson KE, Mountrakis G, Quackenbush LJ. Spatial wildlife-vehicle collision models: a review of current work and its application to transportation mitigation projects. J Environ Manage. 2011;92: 1074–82. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lewis JS, Rachlow JL, Horne JS, Garton EO, Wakkinen WL, Hayden J, et al. Identifying habitat characteristics to predict highway crossing areas for black bears within a human-modified landscape. Landsc Urban Plan. 2011;101: 99–107. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.01.008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nathan R, Getz WM, Revilla E, Holyoak M, Kadmon R, Saltz D, et al. A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2008. pp. 19052–19059. 10.1073/pnas.0800375105 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wellehan JFX, Johnson AJ, Harrach B, Benkő M, Pessier AP, Johnson CM, et al. Detection and analysis of six lizard adenoviruses by consensus primer PCR provides further evidence of a reptilian origin for the atadenoviruses. J Virol. 2004;78: 13366–13369. 10.1128/JVI.78.23.13366-13369.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Harrach B, Benkő M, Both GW, Brown M, Davison AJ, Echavarría M, et al. Family Adenoviridae In: King AMQ, Lefkowitz E, Adams MJ, Carstens EB, editors. Virus Taxonomy: IXth Report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. San Diego: Elsevier; 2011. pp. 125–141. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Harrach B, Kaján GL. Aviadenovirus In: Tidona CA, Darai G, editors. The Springer Index of Viruses. 2nd ed New York: Springer-Verlag; 2011. pp. 13–28. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Doszpoly A, Harrach B, LaPatra S, Benkő M. Unconventional gene arrangement and content revealed by full genome analysis of the white sturgeon adenovirus, the single member of the genus Ichtadenovirus. Infect Genet Evol. 2019;75: 103976 10.1016/j.meegid.2019.103976 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Harrach B, Tarján ZL, Benkő M. Adenoviruses across the animal kingdom: a walk in the zoo. FEBS Lett. 2019;n/a. 10.1002/1873-3468.13687 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Katoh H, Ohya K, Kubo M, Murata K, Yanai T, Fukushi H. A novel budgerigar-adenovirus belonging to group II avian adenovirus of Siadenovirus. Virus Res. 2009;144: 294–297. 10.1016/j.virusres.2009.04.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wellehan JFJ, Greenacre CB, Fleming GJ, Stetter MD, Childress AL, Terrell SP. Siadenovirus infection in two psittacine bird species. Avian Pathol. 2009;38: 413–417. 915082004 [pii] 10.1080/03079450903183660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Phalen DN, Agius J, Vaz FF, Eden J-S, Setyo LC, Donahoe S. A survey of a mixed species aviary provides new insights into the pathogenicity, diversity, evolution, host range, and distribution of psittacine and passerine adenoviruses. Avian Pathol. 2019;48: 437–443. 10.1080/03079457.2019.1617835 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kovács ER, Benkő M. Complete sequence of raptor adenovirus 1 confirms the characteristic genome organization of siadenoviruses. Infect Genet Evol. 2011;11: 1058–1065. S1567-1348(11)00102-X [pii] 10.1016/j.meegid.2011.03.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Ballmann MZ, Vidovszky MZ. Tág gazdaspektrumú psittacine adenovírus (PsAdV-2) kimutatása különböző papagájfajok hazai egyedeiben. [Detection of broad-host-range psittacine adenovirus (PsAdV-2) in representatives of different parrot species]. Magy Állatorvosok Lapja. 2013;135: 78–84. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bodewes R, van de Bildt MW, Schapendonk CM, van Leeuwen M, van Boheemen S, de Jong AA, et al. Identification and characterization of a novel adenovirus in the cloacal bursa of gulls. Virology. 2013;440: 84–88. 10.1016/j.virol.2013.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Joseph HM, Ballmann MZ, Garner MM, Hanley CS, Berlinski R, Erdélyi K, et al. A novel siadenovirus detected in the kidneys and liver of Gouldian finches (Erythura gouldiae). Vet Microbiol. 2014;172: 35–43. 10.1016/j.vetmic.2014.04.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Marek A, Kaján GL, Kosiol C, Harrach B, Schlötterer C, Hess M. Complete genome sequences of pigeon adenovirus 1 and duck adenovirus 2 extend the number of species within the genus Aviadenovirus. Virology. 2014;462–463: 107–114. 10.1016/j.virol.2014.08.031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.To KKW, Tse H, Chan W-M, Choi GKY, Zhang AJX, Sridhar S, et al. A novel psittacine adenovirus identified during an outbreak of avian chlamydiosis and human psittacosis: zoonosis associated with virus-bacterium coinfection in birds. Vinetz JM, editor. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8: e3318 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003318 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ballmann MZ, Harrach B. Detection and partial genetic characterisation of novel avi- and siadenoviruses in racing and fancy pigeons (Columba livia domestica). Acta Vet Hung. 2016;64: 514–528. 10.1556/004.2016.047 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Cassmann E, Zaffarano B, Chen Q, Li G, Haynes J. Novel siadenovirus infection in a cockatiel with chronic liver disease. Virus Res. 2019;263: 164–168. 10.1016/j.virusres.2019.01.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kaján GL, Doszpoly A, Tarján ZL, Vidovszky M, Papp T. Virus–host coevolution with a focus on animal and human DNA viruses. J Mol Evol. 2020;88: 41–56. 10.1007/s00239-019-09913-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Schrenzel M, Oaks JL, Rotstein D, Maalouf G, Snook E, Sandfort C, et al. Characterization of a new species of adenovirus in falcons. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43: 3402–3413. 43/7/3402 [pii] 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3402-3413.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kovács ER, Jánoska M, Dán Á, Harrach B, Benkő M. Recognition and partial genome characterization by non-specific DNA amplification and PCR of a new siadenovirus species in a sample originating from Parus major, a great tit. J Virol Methods. 2010;163: 262–268. S0166-0934(09)00446-7 [pii] 10.1016/j.jviromet.2009.10.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Park YM, Kim JH, Gu SH, Lee SY, Lee MG, Kang YK, et al. Full genome analysis of a novel adenovirus from the South Polar skua (Catharacta maccormicki) in Antarctica. Virology. 2012;422: 144–150. 10.1016/j.virol.2011.10.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Lee SY, Kim JH, Park YM, Shin OS, Kim H, Choi HG, et al. A novel adenovirus in Chinstrap penguins (Pygoscelis antarctica) in Antarctica. Viruses. 2014;6: 2052–2061. 10.3390/v6052052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Das S, Fearnside K, Sarker S, Forwood JK, Raidal SR. A novel pathogenic aviadenovirus from red-bellied parrots (Poicephalus rufiventris) unveils deep recombination events among avian host lineages. Virology. 2017;502: 188–197. 10.1016/j.virol.2016.12.031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Teske L, Rubbenstroth D, Meixner M, Liere K, Bartels H, Rautenschlein S. Identification of a novel aviadenovirus, designated pigeon adenovirus 2 in domestic pigeons (Columba livia). Virus Res. 2017;227: 15–22. 10.1016/j.virusres.2016.09.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Milani A, Zamperin G, Fusaro A, Salviato A, Bano L, Zandonà L, et al. Complete genome sequence of psittacine adenovirus 1, identified from Poicephalus senegalus in Italy. Thrash JC, editor. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2018;7: e01037–18. 10.1128/MRA.01037-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Vibin J, Chamings A, Collier F, Klaassen M, Nelson TM, Alexandersen S. Metagenomics detection and characterisation of viruses in faecal samples from Australian wild birds. Sci Rep. 2018;8: 8686 10.1038/s41598-018-26851-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Yang N, McLelland J, McLelland DJ, Clarke J, Woolford L, Eden P, et al. Psittacid Adenovirus-2 infection in the critically endangered orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogastor): A key threatening process or an example of a host-adapted virus? PLoS One. 2019;14: e0208674 10.1371/journal.pone.0208674 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Boom R, Sol CJA, Salimans MMM, Jansen CL, Wertheim-van Dillen PM., van der Noordaa J. Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28: 495–503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kaján GL. Poultry adenoviruses In: Liu D, editor. Molecular detection of animal viral pathogens. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016. pp. 735–746. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30: 772–780. 10.1093/molbev/mst010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30: 1312–1313. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol Biol Evol. 2016;33: 1870–1874. 10.1093/molbev/msw054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang JH, Zhang Z, Miller W, et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25: 3389–3402. 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Marek A, Kaján GL, Kosiol C, Benkő M, Schachner A, Hess M. Genetic diversity of species Fowl aviadenovirus D and Fowl aviadenovirus E. J Gen Virol. 2016;97: 2323–2332. 10.1099/jgv.0.000519 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Kaján GL, Stefancsik R, Ursu K, Palya V, Benkő M. The first complete genome sequence of a non-chicken aviadenovirus, proposed to be turkey adenovirus 1. Virus Res. 2010;153: 226–233. 10.1016/j.virusres.2010.08.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Kaján GL, Davison AJ, Palya V, Harrach B, Benkő M. Genome sequence of a waterfowl aviadenovirus, goose adenovirus 4. J Gen Virol. 2012;93: 2457–2465. 10.1099/vir.0.042028-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Benkő M. Adenoviruses: Pathogenesis In: Caplan M Mitchell R BRML, editor. Reference Module in Biomedical Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Kaján GL, Affranio I, Tóthné Bistyák A, Kecskeméti S, Benkő M. An emerging new fowl adenovirus genotype. Heliyon. 2019;5: e01732 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01732 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Harrach B. Reptile adenoviruses in cattle? Acta Vet Hung. 2000;48: 485–490. 10.1556/004.48.2000.4.11 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Papp T, Fledelius B, Schmidt V, Kaján GL, Marschang RE. PCR-sequence characterization of new adenoviruses found in reptiles and the first successful isolation of a lizard adenovirus. Vet Microbiol. 2009;134 10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.08.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Hess M, Blöcker H, Brandt P. The complete nucleotide sequence of the egg drop syndrome virus: an intermediate between mastadenoviruses and aviadenoviruses. Virology. 1997;238: 145–156. 10.1006/viro.1997.8815 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Motta-Junior JC, de Arruda Bueno A. Trophic ecology of the burrowing owl in Southeast Brazil. In: Chancellor RD, Meyburg B-U, editors. Raptors Worldwide. Budapest: World Working Group on Birds of Prey and Owls and MME/BirdLife Hungary; 2004. pp. 763–775. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Sick H. Famílias e espécies: Ordem Cuculiformes. Ornitologia Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira; 1997. pp. 383–392. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Marks JS, Cannings RJ, Mikkola H. Family Strigidae (Typical Owls) In: Hoyo J del, Elliott A, Sargatal J, Christie DA, editors. Handbook of the Birds of the World–Volume 5: Barn-owls to Hummingbirds. Barcelona: Lynx Edicions; 1999. pp. 56–151. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Valkama J, Korpimäki E, Arroyo B, Beja P, Bretagnolle V, Bro E, et al. Birds of prey as limiting factors of gamebird populations in Europe: A review. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2005;80: 171–203. 10.1017/s146479310400658x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Norrdahl K, Korpimäki E. Effects of predator removal on vertebrate prey populations: birds of prey and small mammals. Oecologia. 1995;103: 241–248. 10.1007/BF00329086 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, Power ME, Berger J, Bond WJ, et al. Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science. 2011;333: 301–306. 10.1126/science.1205106 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Zadravec M, Slavec B, Krapez U, Kaján GL, Racnik J, Juntes P, et al. Inclusion body hepatitis associated with fowl adenovirus type 8b in broiler flock in Slovenia—a case report. Slov Vet Res. 2011;48: 107–113. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Schachner A, Matos M, Grafl B, Hess M. Fowl adenovirus-induced diseases and strategies for their control—a review on the current global situation. Avian Pathol. 2018;47: 111–126. 10.1080/03079457.2017.1385724 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Negin P Martin

18 Dec 2019

PONE-D-19-31175

Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl

PLOS ONE

Dear mrs JEJESKY DE OLIVEIRA,

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 address all reviewer concerns as described below prior to submission. Also, provide full sequences and a web link to the Genebank sequences.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Feb 01 2020 11:59PM. When you are 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.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

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). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Negin P. Martin, Ph.D.

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 http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you are reporting an analysis of a microarray, next-generation sequencing, or deep sequencing data set. PLOS requires that authors comply with field-specific standards for preparation, recording, and deposition of data in repositories appropriate to their field. Please upload these data to a stable, public repository (such as ArrayExpress, Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ), NCBI GenBank, NCBI Sequence Read Archive, or EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (ENA)). In your revised cover letter, please provide the relevant accession numbers that may be used to access these data. For a full list of recommended repositories, see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-omics or http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-sequencing.

[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

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

Reviewer #3: N/A

Reviewer #4: N/A

**********

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: No

Reviewer #4: 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

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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: The MS titled “Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl” describes the amplification of a DNA polymerase domain from fecal samples from 19 raod kill animals. The amplicon sequences (translates to ~90 aa sequence) is used to determine that there are two new species of adenoviruses associated with these birds. I’ll be honest that I find it strange that a 90aa sequence can be used on this day and age for typing viruses to a species level.

I have highlighted some comments that I think are important to address

Line 30-32: this is a rather odd introduction to a manuscript.

Line 86-90: provide details of the size of the amplicon as the reader is aware that the MS is bases on a small region of the DNA polymerase. Also, if you undertook direct sequencing of PCR products, I am assuming you should have had slightly noisy chromatograms due to polymorphisms.

Line 94-93: RAxML does not do model selection. It is a maximum likelihood inference software. You would have had to use ProtTest to determine the best model. Please provide the best fit model.

Line 104: Two accession #s but you have more than two positives?

Line 107-110: This BLASTx data. You need to provide coverage and e-value. The coverage may be 10% with 75.6% identity.

Reviewer #2: Avian adenoviruses (AdVs) are a very diverse group of pathogens causing the diseases in poultry and wild birds. In this study, two novel AdVs were described from faecal samples of smooth-billed and tropical screech owl. District type of tropical broadleaf forest regarded area for biodiversity. The former was classified into genus Aviadenovirus, the latter into genus Atadenovirus, and both viruses most probably represent new AdV species. These results show that there is very limited information about the biodiversity of AdVs in tropical wild birds, and the diversity of these viruses is probably much more extensive than thought before. This viruses might have a major effect on the population of their hosts or endanger even domesticated animals. Surveys like this provide new insights into the diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of AdVs.

As authors pointed out the surveys like this provide new insights into the pathogenicity, diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of avian AdVs.

The manuscript is important from epidemiological point of view and I am for the publication of this manuscript in Plos One, however, the proofreading is needed.

Reviewer #3: The manuscript having title "Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl" needs to be improved as it requires major revisions. Moreover, the manuscript does not describe significant novel findings. So, i think it is not suitable for the journal like "PLOS ONE".

English language should be improved and it should be revised by a native English speaker.

Title of the manuscript is not appropriate, it may be changed to "Molecular characterization of adenoviruses associated with smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl".

Reviewer #4: The manuscript describes the detection and identification of avian adenoviruses in wild birds native in the tropical rain forests of Brazil. The manuscript is well written and provides new insights into the diversity of AAdVs.

However, the following comments should be addressed:

@abstract:

L27: avian AdVs

@ introduction:

The issue of urbanisation, land conversion, roads etc. having significant effect on wildlife populations and even the distribution of pathogens, are mentioned extensively in the introduction (L36-47). However, the discussion in this regard is lacking and in parts contradictory to the introduction/hypothesis (new hosts 'L66' - long term co-evolution of virus and host 'L123-127').

In L64-66 authors describe screech owls and ani as new hosts. To my knowledge these birds were investigated for the first time for the prevalence of AdVs - how do authors define 'new' hosts?

@ Material and methods:

L75-80 - origin of samples - what was the timeframe in which samples were procured?

L81-90 - please complete information in regards to manufacturers (e.g. silica particles, Clean-up kit..)

@Figure 1:

information on gene sequences used should include accession numbers (and possibly species or country of origin) in order to facilitate comparative analyses.

@Discussion:

L123 - Please add information on nutritional habits of ani (granivor, carnivor??) if you mention possibility of foodborne contaminants.

L126-127 - Was necropsy (mentioned in L79-80) indicative for any pathological changes apart from trauma due to vehicular damage?

@References:

With respect to the length of the manuscript 57 references seem excessive? Are all references necessary?

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Dr. M. Salahuddin Shah

Reviewer #4: 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 to be viewed.]

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 us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Feb 28;15(2):e0229415. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229415.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


27 Jan 2020

Negin P. Martin, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

January 27, 2020

Subject: rebuttal letter

Dear Dr. Martin,

The authors are grateful for the reviewers for their thorough work. The manuscript was heavily edited to meet the recommendations of the reviewers. Please find our answers below. We hope you can find these and the revised version acceptable.

Sincerely,

Ana Paula Jejesky de Oliveira

Corresponding author

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 http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

The MS was edited to meet the style requirements.

2. We note that you are reporting an analysis of a microarray, next-generation sequencing, or deep sequencing data set. PLOS requires that authors comply with field-specific standards for preparation, recording, and deposition of data in repositories appropriate to their field. Please upload these data to a stable, public repository (such as ArrayExpress, Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ), NCBI GenBank, NCBI Sequence Read Archive, or EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (ENA)). In your revised cover letter, please provide the relevant accession numbers that may be used to access these data. For a full list of recommended repositories, see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-omics or http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-sequencing.

Sequences were submitted to the NCBI GenBank under accession numbers MN540447 and MN540448. The sequences are released now.

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

Reviewer #4: Yes

The MS was edited heavily to meet the requirements of the Reviewers.

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

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

Reviewer #3: N/A

Reviewer #4: N/A

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: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

Sequences were submitted to the NCBI GenBank under accession numbers MN540447 and MN540448. The sequences are released now.

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

Reviewer #4: Yes

The MS was edited heavily to enhance its readability.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1:

The MS titled “Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl” describes the amplification of a DNA polymerase domain from fecal samples from 19 raod kill animals. The amplicon sequences (translates to ~90 aa sequence) is used to determine that there are two new species of adenoviruses associated with these birds. I’ll be honest that I find it strange that a 90aa sequence can be used on this day and age for typing viruses to a species level.

The reviewer is absolutely right, that species designation would be more accurate based on complete genome data. Furthermore, official proposal of a new adenovirus species by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses would only be possible based on complete genome analysis.

However, the viruses were detected from fecal samples. Without virus isolation, complete genome sequencing can be challenging from fecal samples. And the isolation would require most possibly primary cells from tropical screech owl and smooth-billed ani embryos. This technique is often used for fowl (chicken) adenoviruses: these viruses are isolated regularly on primary cells originating from killed chicken embryos [1]. Unfortunately, embrionated eggs of these wild birds are not available, but even if they were, their use would be ethically disputable.

Thus, we conducted merely a preliminary prediction about the species of the strains based on their high divergence from other adenoviruses. We have formulated our hypothesis accordingly at l. 117–123. But it must be stressed that according to the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, species designation of adenoviruses depends primarily on the DNA polymerase-based phylogenetic distance [2]. So even with a complete genome sequence in hand, one would use primarily the DNA-polymerase sequence to determine the species of the strain.

I have highlighted some comments that I think are important to address

Line 30-32: this is a rather odd introduction to a manuscript.

The Reviewer is right; the MS was updated at this location (l. 32–37)

Line 86-90: provide details of the size of the amplicon as the reader is aware that the MS is bases on a small region of the DNA polymerase.

The Reviewer is right, amplicon size was missing from the MS, but it was added now (l. 91).

Also, if you undertook direct sequencing of PCR products, I am assuming you should have had slightly noisy chromatograms due to polymorphisms.

The Reviewer is right, animals are often infected by several adenovirus strains causing a sequence polymorphism. In such cases, the molecular cloning of the PCR product is conducted [3]. However, this was not observed in this study, all sequence reads had nice quality, the mean base call confidence values in the four assemblies (originating from three anis and one owl) ranged 45.3–46.4, and the three different smooth-billed ani adenovirus strains shared an identical nucleic acid sequence (l. 111–113).

Line 94-93: RAxML does not do model selection. It is a maximum likelihood inference software. You would have had to use ProtTest to determine the best model. Please provide the best fit model.

The Reviewer is right, RAxML 8 is a maximum likelihood inference software, but it is also capable of determining the protein substitution model using the -m PROTGAMMAAUTO option (manual p. 31). The best-scoring model was LG with empirical base frequencies in our case. This information was included into the MS now (l. 101).

Line 104: Two accession #s but you have more than two positives?

As stated in the MS (l. 111–113), "the three smooth-billed ani AdV strains shared identical nucleic acid sequences". Thus one sequence was deposited for the smooth-billed ani AdV, and one for the tropical screech owl AdV.

Line 107-110: This BLASTx data. You need to provide coverage and e-value. The coverage may be 10% with 75.6% identity.

The query coverages were 100% for both BlastX searches, the E values were 4.22 x 10-43 and 2.31 x 10-47 for the smooth-billed ani and screech owl AdV, respectively. This information was included into the MS now (l. 114-117).

Reviewer #2:

Avian adenoviruses (AdVs) are a very diverse group of pathogens causing the diseases in poultry and wild birds. In this study, two novel AdVs were described from faecal samples of smooth-billed and tropical screech owl. District type of tropical broadleaf forest regarded area for biodiversity. The former was classified into genus Aviadenovirus, the latter into genus Atadenovirus, and both viruses most probably represent new AdV species. These results show that there is very limited information about the biodiversity of AdVs in tropical wild birds, and the diversity of these viruses is probably much more extensive than thought before. This viruses might have a major effect on the population of their hosts or endanger even domesticated animals. Surveys like this provide new insights into the diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of AdVs.

As authors pointed out the surveys like this provide new insights into the pathogenicity, diversity, evolution, host variety, and distribution of avian AdVs.

The manuscript is important from epidemiological point of view and I am for the publication of this manuscript in Plos One, however, the proofreading is needed.

The authors are grateful for the time and effort of the Reviewer. The MS was edited to meet the requirements of the Reviewers and the journal.

Reviewer #3:

The manuscript having title "Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl" needs to be improved as it requires major revisions. Moreover, the manuscript does not describe significant novel findings. So, i think it is not suitable for the journal like "PLOS ONE".

The MS was edited to enhance its readability and meet the requirements of the Reviewers and the journal. The first criterion for publication in PLOS One is that "the study presents the results of original research". This and all other criteria are met by this MS.

English language should be improved and it should be revised by a native English speaker.

Title of the manuscript is not appropriate, it may be changed to "Molecular characterization of adenoviruses associated with smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl".

For a molecular characterization the complete genome sequence of the virus strains would be essential. Unfortunately, this is not available to the authors.

Reviewer #4:

The manuscript describes the detection and identification of avian adenoviruses in wild birds native in the tropical rain forests of Brazil. The manuscript is well written and provides new insights into the diversity of AAdVs.

However, the following comments should be addressed:

@abstract:

L27: avian AdVs

The Reviewer is right, the MS was edited accordingly.

@ introduction:

The issue of urbanisation, land conversion, roads etc. having significant effect on wildlife populations and even the distribution of pathogens, are mentioned extensively in the introduction (L36-47). However, the discussion in this regard is lacking and in parts contradictory to the introduction/hypothesis (new hosts 'L66' - long term co-evolution of virus and host 'L123-127').

The Reviewer is right, the MS was complemented at l. 163–168.

In L64-66 authors describe screech owls and ani as new hosts. To my knowledge these birds were investigated for the first time for the prevalence of AdVs - how do authors define 'new' hosts?

The reviewer is right, the MS was easily misinterpretable at this location.

The word "novel" or "new" has been used in three different contexts in the MS.

1. At l. 64–66 (now l. 66–68) the authors tried to express the possibility of host switches due to environmental changes. Such changes might provide new hosts for the virus strains.

2. Adenoviruses were detected in the host species tropical screech owl and smooth-billed ani for the first time.

3. These two viral strains might represent two novel, hitherto undescribed AdV species as well, not accepted by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses yet.

To enhance readability and clarify the MS, it was edited at l. 22, 25, 68 and 166–168.

@ Material and methods:

L75-80 - origin of samples - what was the timeframe in which samples were procured?

Samples have been collected for a year during 2017. This information was included into the MS now (l. 80).

L81-90 - please complete information in regards to manufacturers (e.g. silica particles, Clean-up kit..)

The Reviewer is right, information about the manufacturers were complemented at l. 86–94.

@Figure 1:

information on gene sequences used should include accession numbers (and possibly species or country of origin) in order to facilitate comparative analyses.

The Reviewer is right, accession numbers are included into the figure legend (l. 129–134) as well as viral species names into Figure 1.

@Discussion:

L123 - Please add information on nutritional habits of ani (granivor, carnivor??) if you mention possibility of foodborne contaminants.

The Reviewer is right, this information is included into the MS now (l. 149–152).

L126-127 - Was necropsy (mentioned in L79-80) indicative for any pathological changes apart from trauma due to vehicular damage?

No other pathological findings were observed, and this information is included into the MS now (l. 141–143).

@References:

With respect to the length of the manuscript 57 references seem excessive? Are all references necessary?

There are no limitations by PLOS One for the number of references, and articles are not printed, so no environmental questions should be considered. Thus, the authors decided to give credit where credit is due, and also provide appropriate references to mentioned issues and applied techniques. Especially in the case of wild bird adenoviruses, these references serve as a collection of recommended literature as well.

References

1. Kaján GL, Affranio I, Tóthné Bistyák A, Kecskeméti S, Benkő M. An emerging new fowl adenovirus genotype. Heliyon. 2019;5: e01732. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01732

2. Harrach B, Benkő M, Both GW, Brown M, Davison AJ, Echavarría M, et al. Family Adenoviridae. In: King AMQ, Lefkowitz E, Adams MJ, Carstens EB, editors. Virus Taxonomy: IXth Report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. San Diego: Elsevier; 2011. pp. 125–141.

3. Kaján GL, Kecskeméti S, Harrach B, Benkő M. Molecular typing of fowl adenoviruses, isolated in Hungary recently, reveals high diversity. Vet Microbiol. 2013;167: 357–363. doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.09.025

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Negin P Martin

6 Feb 2020

Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl

PONE-D-19-31175R1

Dear Dr. JEJESKY DE OLIVEIRA,

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

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. 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 enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and 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.

With kind regards,

Negin P. Martin, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Negin P Martin

11 Feb 2020

PONE-D-19-31175R1

Identification of two novel adenoviruses in smooth-billed ani and tropical screech owl

Dear Dr. Jejesky de Oliveira:

I am 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 notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, 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.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Negin P. Martin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    Sequences were submitted to the NCBI GenBank under accession numbers MN540447 and MN540448.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES