USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70283570

Transporting common vampire bats (Desmodus rotundus) by land: Design of a transport container and care during transit

Elsa M. Cárdenas-Canales·Mathew C. Bohne·Elizabeth A. Falendysz·Jorge E. Osorio·Tonie E Rocke
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Introduction: To comply with biosafety regulations for the transport of wild-caught common vampire bats (Desmodus rotundus) by land from San Luis Potosí, Mexico to Madison, Wisconsin, USA, we designed a unique container that allowed for feeding (with bovine blood) while maintaining a sealed environment and preventing escape of animals or potential sources of infectious materials (e.g., spills, aerosols). Methods: The container was designed by modifying a commercially available mouse transport container and installing a tube/syringe system that allowed delivering and retrieving the blood during the feeding session and cleaning afterward. We transported 93 vampire bats in ten transport containers with no more than ten individuals per container. Conclusion: During transit, the vampire bats acclimated well to the novel environment and were able to access blood during feeding. Although one bat was found dead on arrival, the remaining 92 were transported without complications and deposited at a biosafety level 3 facility once in the U.S.

Explore related subjects

Applied BiosafetyArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elsa M. Cárdenas-Canales, Mathew C. Bohne, Elizabeth A. Falendysz, Jorge E. Osorio, Tonie E Rocke. 2025-05-30. Transporting common vampire bats (Desmodus rotundus) by land: Design of a transport container and care during transit. https://doi.org/10.1089/apb.2025.0004

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2022

Biosafety practices when working with bats: A guide to field research considerations

Introduction: Field work with bats is an important contribution to many areas of research in environmental biology and ecology, as well as microbiology. Work with bats poses hazards such as bites and scratches, and the potential for exposure to infectious pathogens such as rabies virus. It also exposes researchers to many other potential hazards inherent to field work, such as environmental conditions, delayed emergency responses, or challenging work conditions. Methods: This article discusses the considerations for a thorough risk assessment process around field work with bats, pre- and post-occupational health considerations, and delves into specific considerations for areas related to biosafety concerns—training, personal protective equipment, safety consideration in field methods, decontamination, and waste. It also touches on related legal and ethical issues that sit outside the realm of biosafety, but which must be addressed during the planning process. Discussion: Although the focal point of this article is bat field work located in northern and central America, the principles and practices discussed here are applicable to bat work elsewhere, as well as to field work with other animal species, and should promote careful considerations of how to safely conduct field work to protect both researchers and animals.

Applied Biosafety↗
USGS2019

Inactivation of viable surrogates for the select agents virulent Newcastle disease virus and highly pathogenic avian influenza virus using either commercial lysis buffer or heat

Introduction: Federal Select Agent Program regulations require laboratories to document a validated procedure for inactivating select agents prior to movement outside registered space. Avian influenza viruses and virulent Newcastle disease virus (vNDV) are cultured in chicken amnio-allantoic fluid (AAF), but the efficacy of commercial lysis buffers to inactivate viruses in protein-rich media has not been documented. Objectives: We assesses the efficacy of MagMAX™ lysis buffer for inactivating highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) and vNDV in chicken AAF and confirm the inactivation of avian influenza in serum using heat. Methods: Low pathogenic avian influenza virus (LPAIV) and avian paramyxovirus subtype-1 (APMV-1) were incubated with lysis buffer and tested for viability. Known viable LPAIV and APMV-1 RNA was extracted from AAF using MagMAX™-96 AI/ND Viral RNA Isolation kit, and the eluate was tested for remaining infectious agent. Finally, inactivation of LPAIV in serum was examined over 3 combinations of temperature and incubation time. Results: MagMAX™ lysis buffer inactivated both LPAIV and APMV-1 in AAF when incubated for 30 minutes at room temperature. The full extraction process eliminated viable virus from the final RNA eluate. LPAIV in serum heated to 70°C for 30 minutes was rendered noninfectious. Conclusion: The ability of a diagnostic laboratory to move samples from one space to another is critical to maintaining biosecurity as well as efficient laboratory workflow. Our study demonstrates a method to ensure the inactivation of viable avian influenza and avian paramyxoviruses in AAF, RNA eluate, and viable avian influenza virus in sera.

Applied Biosafety↗