Bovine Coronavirus

Overview and Taxonomy of Bovine Coronavirus

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV) is a globally significant, enveloped, positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus belonging to the family Coronaviridae, subfamily Orthocoronavirinae, genus Betacoronavirus, and species Betacoronavirus 1 [9, 24]. This taxonomic placement places BCoV within the same subgenus (Embecovirus) as human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43) and canine respiratory coronavirus (CRCoV), with which it shares substantial genetic, antigenic, and structural homology [9, 19, 22]. The virus is a primary causative agent of three distinct clinical syndromes in cattle: neonatal calf diarrhea (NCD), winter dysentery (WD) in adult cattle, and bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC) [8, 9, 16]. The economic impact of BCoV is profound, with the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) recognizing it as a pathogen responsible for significant morbidity, mortality, and production losses globally, including reduced weight gain, diminished milk yield, and increased treatment costs [1, 9, 21]. The virus’s capacity for interspecies transmission and its close phylogenetic relationship with human coronaviruses have elevated its importance beyond veterinary medicine, drawing attention from public health authorities such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the context of emerging zoonotic threats and pandemic preparedness [4, 9, 20].

Virion Structure and Genomic Organization

The BCoV virion is pleomorphic, typically spherical, with a diameter ranging from 80 to 160 nm, and is characterized by a dense core of helical nucleocapsid surrounded by a lipid envelope derived from the host cell membrane [9, 13]. The genome of BCoV is among the largest of all RNA viruses, approximately 27–32 kilobases in length, and is organized with a canonical coronavirus gene order: 5′-replicase (ORF1a/1b)-spike (S)-envelope (E)-membrane (M)-nucleocapsid (N)-3′, with an additional hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) gene inserted between ORF1b and the S gene, a distinctive feature of embecoviruses [9, 24, 31].

The spike (S) glycoprotein is the major surface projection and is critical for host cell attachment and entry. It is a class I fusion protein that forms homotrimeric peplomers on the virion surface, giving the virus its characteristic “crown-like” appearance under electron microscopy [9, 13]. The S protein is cleaved by host proteases into an N-terminal S1 subunit, which contains the receptor-binding domain (RBD), and a C-terminal S2 subunit, which mediates membrane fusion [8, 18]. The S1 subunit, particularly its N-terminal domain (S1-NTD), is responsible for binding to 9-O-acetylated sialic acid (9-O-Ac-Sia) receptors on host cells, a primary attachment mechanism for BCoV [8, 19]. The S gene is the most variable region of the BCoV genome, under strong selective pressure from the host immune system, and its genetic diversity is a key driver of antigenic variation and potential tissue tropism shifts [18, 24].

The hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) glycoprotein is a second, shorter surface protein unique to embecoviruses, including BCoV, HCoV-OC43, and CRCoV [9, 12]. The HE protein functions as a receptor-destroying enzyme, possessing sialate-O-acetylesterase activity that cleaves 9-O-Ac-Sia moieties, thereby preventing viral rebinding to already infected cells and facilitating viral release and spread [12, 19]. The HE protein also plays a crucial role in modulating viral avidity; the balance between the receptor-binding activity of the S protein and the receptor-destroying activity of the HE protein is critical for efficient infection and is a known determinant of host range and interspecies transmission [12, 26]. Recent studies have identified emerging BCoV variants with insertions or deletions in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the HE gene, which can alter the affinity for O-acetylated sialic acid and potentially enhance attachment or facilitate host switching [1, 12, 26].

The nucleocapsid (N) protein is a highly conserved, multifunctional phosphoprotein that binds to the viral RNA genome, forming the helical nucleocapsid structure [9, 17]. Beyond its structural role, the N protein is a potent immunogen and is involved in viral RNA synthesis, replication, and modulation of host cell signaling pathways [17]. Critically, BCoV N protein has been shown to suppress the host innate immune response by inhibiting the RIG-I-like receptor (RLR) pathway, thereby reducing interferon-beta (IFN-β) production and facilitating viral evasion of the host antiviral state [17]. This immunomodulatory function underscores the N protein’s role in pathogenesis and its potential as a target for diagnostic assays and therapeutic interventions [2, 17].

The membrane (M) protein is the most abundant envelope protein and is essential for virus assembly and budding. It adopts a triple-spanning transmembrane topology and interacts with the N protein and the envelope (E) protein to drive virion morphogenesis [9]. The envelope (E) protein is a small, integral membrane protein involved in viral assembly, release, and pathogenesis, often functioning as an ion channel (viroporin) [9].

Genetic Diversity and Phylogenetic Classification

Phylogenetic analyses of BCoV, primarily based on the complete S and HE gene sequences, have delineated two major genetic lineages: GI (classical/European lineage) and GII (American-Asian lineage) [10, 15, 24]. The GI lineage includes the prototype enteric strain Mebus and other early isolates, while the GII lineage encompasses more contemporary circulating strains, which are further subdivided into subgroups GIIa and GIIb [3, 6, 14]. This classification reflects a global phylogeographic pattern, with the GII lineage dominating in North America, Asia, and South America, while GI strains are more prevalent in Europe [10, 24]. However, co-circulation of both lineages has been documented in several regions, including China, Europe, and South America, indicating ongoing viral flux and genetic exchange [18, 24].

The genetic diversity of BCoV is driven by two primary mechanisms: high mutation rates characteristic of RNA-dependent RNA polymerases, and recombination [24, 25]. The spike gene, particularly the S1 hypervariable region (HVR), exhibits the highest degree of nucleotide and amino acid variability, with substitution rates estimated at approximately 7.6 × 10⁻⁴ substitutions per site per year [24, 28]. This rapid evolution is driven by positive selection, likely imposed by host immune pressure, and has resulted in the emergence of distinct genetic clusters even within a single geographic region [18, 24]. Recombination events, particularly within the HE gene, have been increasingly recognized as a significant driver of BCoV evolution. Novel recombinant BCoV strains, where the HE gene contains segments from different parental lineages, have been identified in China, the United States, and yaks, suggesting that recombination contributes to the emergence of variants with altered biological properties [25-27].

Host Range and Interspecies Transmission

BCoV exhibits a remarkably broad host range, infecting not only domestic cattle (Bos taurus) but also a wide array of domestic and wild ruminants, including water buffalo, sheep, goats, llamas, alpacas, dromedary camels, and various species of deer and antelope [7, 9, 23, 27]. The virus has also been detected in non-ruminant species, such as dogs (canine respiratory coronavirus), horses, and even rodents, including the Daurian ground squirrel (Spermophilus dauricus) [9, 11, 29, 30]. This extensive host plasticity highlights the virus’s potential for cross-species transmission and its ability to adapt to new hosts.

Of particular public health significance is the close genetic and antigenic relationship between BCoV and human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43) , a common cause of the common cold [9, 19, 22]. Phylogenetic and molecular clock analyses suggest that HCoV-OC43 may have originated from a zoonotic spillover of BCoV or a bovine-like coronavirus, possibly as recently as the late 19th century [9, 22]. The two viruses share >96% nucleotide identity in the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) gene and exhibit cross-reactive antibody responses [5, 20, 22]. This historical zoonotic event underscores the potential for BCoV to serve as a source for future human epidemics. Indeed, experimental evidence demonstrates that BCoV spike protein can induce cross-reactive T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants, further emphasizing the relevance of BCoV in the context of coronavirus emergence and pandemic preparedness [5, 20]. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have recognized the importance of studying animal coronaviruses, including BCoV, as part of a One Health approach to understanding and mitigating the risk of future coronavirus outbreaks.

Molecular Pathogenesis of Bovine Coronavirus

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV), a member of the genus Betacoronavirus within the family Coronaviridae, represents a pathogen of profound complexity, exhibiting a multifaceted molecular pathogenesis that underpins its ability to cause both enteric and respiratory disease in cattle [9, 16]. The virus possesses the largest and most complex RNA genome among RNA viruses, encoding a suite of structural, non-structural, and accessory proteins that orchestrate a sophisticated interplay with the host cellular machinery [9]. Understanding the molecular pathogenesis of BCoV requires a deep dissection of viral entry mechanisms, receptor utilization, the counteraction of host innate immunity, and the subtle genetic variations that dictate tissue tropism and disease outcome. This section provides an exhaustive analysis of these molecular events, drawing upon the most recent and comprehensive research to elucidate how BCoV establishes infection, evades immune surveillance, and causes pathology across the bovine respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts.

Viral Entry and Receptor Dynamics: The Spike and Hemagglutinin-Esterase Axis

The initial stages of BCoV infection are governed by the coordinated action of two major surface glycoproteins: the spike (S) protein and the hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) protein. The S protein is the primary determinant of host range and cell tropism, mediating both attachment to the host cell receptor and subsequent membrane fusion [8, 24]. The HE protein, a unique feature of lineage A betacoronaviruses (which includes BCoV, HCoV-OC43, and CRCoV), acts as a secondary receptor-binding protein and possesses receptor-destroying enzyme (esterase) activity [12]. The balance between the receptor-binding activities of S and HE, and the esterase activity of HE, is critical for controlling viral avidity and is a key factor in interspecies transmission and host adaptation [12].

For decades, it was widely accepted that BCoV, like other betacoronaviruses in its lineage, utilizes 9-O-acetylated sialic acids (9-O-Ac-Sia) as its primary receptor for cell entry [19]. However, recent and more nuanced investigations have challenged this dogma. While BCoV does bind to sialic acids on the cell surface, compelling evidence indicates that these moieties serve primarily as attachment factors rather than functional entry receptors [19]. A landmark study by Szczepański et al. demonstrated that enzymatic removal of sialic acids from the cell surface rendered cells non-permissive for a clinical strain of HCoV-OC43 but did not prevent infection by BCoV or canine respiratory coronavirus (CRCoV) [19]. Instead, this research identified human leukocyte antigen class I (HLA-1) as a critical entry receptor for BCoV [19]. This finding fundamentally redefines our understanding of BCoV entry, suggesting that while sialic acid binding facilitates initial attachment to the cell surface, a step crucial for overcoming the mucosal glycan barrier, a subsequent, more specific interaction with a proteinaceous receptor like HLA-1 is required for productive infection and membrane fusion [19]. This two-receptor binding motif, involving an initial low-affinity attachment to sialic acids followed by high-affinity binding to a protein receptor, is a sophisticated strategy that enhances viral tropism and infectivity [8].

The HE protein plays a dual and antagonistic role in this process. Its lectin domain binds to the same 9-O-Ac-Sia moieties, contributing to viral attachment, while its esterase domain cleaves these receptors, preventing irreversible binding and allowing the virus to detach and spread [12]. The emergence of BCoV variants with mutations in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the HE gene has been a subject of intense investigation. Recent surveillance in both the United States and China has identified novel BCoV variants harboring a 12-nucleotide insertion (resulting in a four-amino-acid insertion) or a 12-nucleotide deletion in the HE RBD [1, 12]. Molecular docking studies have revealed that the insertion of four additional amino acids between residues F211 and L212 in the HE protein significantly increases its affinity for O-acetylated sialic acid [1]. This enhanced binding capability may be favorable for virion-particle attachment, potentially altering tissue tropism or increasing viral fitness [1]. Conversely, the deletion variant, while maintaining esterase activity and the ability to bind bovine submaxillary mucin, exhibited a non-cytopathic effect and lower virus titer in cell culture, suggesting a trade-off between receptor affinity and replicative capacity [1, 12]. The presence of these structural variants in the HE RBD, which are predicted to cause significant changes in the critical R3 loop, raises the possibility of altered host range and interspecies transmission, a concern underscored by the close genetic relationship between BCoV and human coronavirus OC43 [12].

Innate Immune Evasion: The Nucleocapsid Protein as an Interferon Antagonist

A hallmark of BCoV pathogenesis is its ability to subvert the host's innate immune response, particularly the type I interferon (IFN) system. The nucleocapsid (N) protein, a highly conserved structural protein that encapsulates the viral RNA genome, has been identified as a potent antagonist of IFN-β production [17]. The RIG-I-like receptor (RLR) signaling pathway is a primary sensor of viral RNA and a critical inducer of IFN-β. Key adaptor molecules in this pathway, including MDA5, MAVS, TBK1, and the transcription factor IRF3, are essential for propagating the signal that leads to IFN-β transcription [17]. Research by Xiangbo et al. demonstrated that the BCoV N protein directly inhibits this pathway. In HEK293T cells, overexpression of the BCoV N protein dose-dependently suppressed IFN-β production induced by vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) infection [17]. Furthermore, the N protein was shown to specifically downregulate the expression levels of MDA5, MAVS, TBK1, and IRF3 mRNAs, thereby crippling the RLR signaling cascade at multiple nodes [17]. This multi-pronged suppression of the RLR pathway represents a sophisticated immune evasion strategy, allowing BCoV to replicate to higher titers before the host can mount an effective antiviral state. This finding is crucial for understanding why BCoV can cause persistent infections and severe disease, particularly in young calves with immature immune systems [17, 41].

Beyond the N protein, the virus also manipulates other host signaling pathways to its advantage. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), a ligand-activated transcription factor known to regulate immune responses, has been shown to be significantly upregulated during BCoV infection in bovine MDBK cells [32]. This upregulation is accompanied by increased expression of its downstream targets, CYP1A1 and CYP1B1 [32]. Importantly, pharmacological inhibition of AhR signaling with the selective antagonist CH223191 resulted in a significant reduction in virus yield and a downregulation of viral spike protein expression [32]. This suggests that BCoV actively hijacks the AhR pathway to promote its own replication, revealing a novel host-pathogen interaction that could be targeted for therapeutic intervention. The high structural similarity between the bovine and human AhR, particularly in the PASB and TAD domains that interact with the inhibitor, further underscores the potential for developing pan-coronavirus therapeutics targeting this pathway [32].

Cellular Signaling and Transcriptional Reprogramming

BCoV infection triggers a profound reprogramming of the host cell transcriptome. High-throughput RNA sequencing of infected HCT-8 cells revealed over 6,000 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) at 72 hours post-infection, with the most significantly affected pathways being those associated with immune signaling, including NF-κB, TNF-α, and IL-17 [35]. This massive transcriptional shift is dominated by the virus, which actively modulates the expression of chemokines and cytokines. In vivo studies using experimentally infected calves have shown that interleukin-8 (IL-8) is the most highly and consistently induced chemokine, followed by monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and macrophage inflammatory protein-1β (MIP-1β) [33]. These chemokines are potent recruiters of neutrophils and monocytes to the site of infection, and their dysregulation is a key driver of the inflammatory pathology observed in both enteric and respiratory BCoV disease [33]. The induction of an acute phase response is also a hallmark of BCoV infection. Post-weaned calves with BCoV-associated diarrhea exhibit significantly elevated serum concentrations of haptoglobin (Hp) and a concurrent monocytosis, while serum amyloid A (SAA) levels remain unchanged [37]. This specific acute phase protein profile suggests that Hp and monocyte counts could serve as useful biomarkers for diagnosing BCoV-induced diarrhea in the field [37].

The virus also exerts control over host cell processes through the manipulation of transcription factors and microRNAs (miRNAs). In silico analyses have identified key transcription factors, such as YY1, AREB6, LMO2, and NKX2-5, that are predicted to regulate the expression of genes significantly altered during BCoV infection [39]. Among these, YY1 stands out as a potential master regulator and a promising target for antiviral drug development [39]. Concurrently, a network analysis of miRNAs identified four concomitant miRNAs (bta-miR-11975, bta-miR-11976, bta-miR-22-3p, and bta-miR-2325c) that are predicted to target multiple immune-related genes, including IL-6, IRF1, and TLR9 [40]. The complete conservation of miR-22 across 14 species suggests a fundamental and shared functional role in the host response to infection, making it a prime candidate for a diagnostic biomarker or therapeutic target [40].

Genetic Determinants of Tissue Tropism and Pathogenicity

Despite causing distinct clinical syndromes, neonatal calf diarrhea, winter dysentery in adults, and respiratory disease, no definitive genetic or antigenic markers have been identified that consistently segregate BCoV strains by tissue tropism or disease outcome [9, 15]. This suggests that the virus exists as a complex quasispecies, and the clinical manifestation is likely a result of a combination of host factors (age, immune status, co-infections), environmental factors, and subtle, context-dependent viral genetic variations [9]. However, recent genomic analyses have begun to uncover potential molecular correlates of tropism. A study comparing paired respiratory and enteric BCoV isolates from the same animal identified a potential amino acid residue pattern in the spike protein: aspartic acid at position 1180 (D1180) was found in all four enteric isolates, while glycine at the same position (G1180) was present in three of four respiratory isolates [34]. This single amino acid difference in the S protein could influence receptor binding or fusion efficiency in different tissue microenvironments.

Furthermore, the S1 subunit of the spike protein, particularly its hypervariable region (HVR) and N-terminal domain (S1-NTD), is a hotspot for genetic variation and positive selection [18, 24]. Analysis of BCoV strains from Northeast China revealed that the S1-NTD of local strains differed genetically from reference strains from South Korea and Europe, and one strain (HLJ/HH-10/2020) clustered within the European GI group, exhibiting mutations (N146/I, D148/G, L154/F) predicted to affect S protein structure [18]. Selective pressure analysis identified a positively selected site (Asn509) located within the putative receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S protein, suggesting that immune pressure is driving the evolution of this critical region [18]. Recombination events, particularly within the HE gene, are another major driver of BCoV genetic diversity and have been associated with the emergence of novel strains with altered pathogenicity [25-27]. A recombinant HE gene, formed by a crossover between the esterase and lectin domains, has been detected in multiple BCoV strains circulating in China and yaks, and this recombinant was found in a strain that also contained a novel 12-nucleotide insertion of bovine origin in the RBD [25-27]. This demonstrates the remarkable plasticity of the BCoV genome and its capacity for rapid evolution through both mutation and recombination.

Pathogenesis of Co-infections and Persistent Infections

In the field, BCoV rarely acts alone. Co-infections with other viral and bacterial pathogens are the rule rather than the exception and are a critical determinant of disease severity. A sequential infection model, where calves were first inoculated with bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) followed by BCoV six days later, resulted in significantly more severe respiratory disease and lung lesions compared to infection with either virus alone [38]. This synergistic effect is likely due to BVDV's well-known immunosuppressive properties, which impair the host's ability to control the subsequent BCoV infection [38]. Similarly, co-infection with BCoV and Mycoplasma bovirhinis has been identified as a common finding in outbreaks of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) in nursing beef calves, suggesting a potential role for this bacterium in the pathogenesis of viral-induced respiratory disease [36]. At the cellular level, co-infection of HCT-8 cells with BCoV and the intracellular parasite Cryptosporidium parvum resulted in over 800 uniquely expressed DEGs that were not seen in single infections, indicating a distinct host transcriptional response to the combined insult [35]. These findings highlight that the molecular pathogenesis of BCoV in a natural setting is a complex, multi-pathogen interaction.

Another critical aspect of BCoV pathogenesis is its ability to establish persistent infections. Long-term animal experiments have demonstrated that BCoV RNA can be detected sporadically in plasma, nasal discharge, and feces of experimentally infected calves for up to 1,085 days post-inoculation [41]. Nasal shedding was more frequent than fecal shedding, and seroconversion and fluctuating antibody titers were observed throughout the study period [41]. This persistent infection in the respiratory tract provides a reservoir for the virus within a herd, allowing for intermittent shedding and transmission even in the absence of clinical disease. This phenomenon is a major challenge for disease control, as it means that clinically healthy animals can be a source of infection for naive cohorts, particularly vulnerable newborn calves [41]. The ability of BCoV to invade the central nervous system, as demonstrated by the detection of viral RNA and antigen in the brains of calves with severe pneumonia and neurological signs, adds another layer of complexity to its pathogenesis and raises questions about the full spectrum of BCoV-associated disease [4].

Genetic Diversity and Evolution of Bovine Coronavirus

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV), a member of the species Betacoronavirus 1 within the family Coronaviridae, exhibits a genetic and evolutionary dynamism that is central to its success as a pathogen of cattle and its capacity for interspecies transmission. The virus possesses one of the largest and most complex RNA genomes among coronaviruses, encoding for 16 non-structural proteins, four major structural proteins (spike [S], hemagglutinin-esterase [HE], nucleocapsid [N], and membrane [M]), and several accessory proteins [9]. This genomic architecture, combined with the inherent error-prone nature of its RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) and a high propensity for recombination, fuels a continuous process of genetic diversification that has profound implications for pathogenesis, host range, and immune evasion.

Genomic Architecture and Mechanisms of Genetic Variation

The genetic diversity of BCoV is driven by two primary mechanisms: mutation and recombination. The RdRp of coronaviruses, while possessing a proofreading exoribonuclease (nsp14) that is unusual for RNA viruses, still permits a substantial number of point mutations during replication. Studies have estimated the evolutionary rate of BCoV to be approximately 7.62 × 10⁻⁴ substitutions per site per year for certain lineages, a rate that allows for significant genetic drift over relatively short timeframes [28]. This mutational accumulation is not uniform across the genome. The spike (S) gene, particularly the S1 subunit which contains the receptor-binding domain (RBD), and the hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) gene are under intense selective pressure, leading to hypervariable regions (HVRs) that are hotspots for genetic change [44, 48]. In contrast, more conserved genes like the nucleocapsid (N) and the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) are often targeted for diagnostic assay development due to their stability [45, 49].

Recombination is a second, and arguably more powerful, engine of BCoV evolution. As a positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus, BCoV can undergo homologous recombination when two distinct viral genomes co-infect the same host cell. During replication, the RdRp can template-switch between the two RNA molecules, generating a chimeric progeny virus. This process has been definitively documented in BCoV, particularly within the HE gene. A landmark study identified a novel BCoV strain circulating in Chinese dairy calves that carried a recombinant HE gene, with the recombination breakpoints located between the esterase and lectin domains [25]. This event was not an isolated occurrence; subsequent research confirmed the widespread circulation of these recombinant strains and even identified further evolution within them, including the acquisition of insertions [26]. The emergence of these recombinant HE variants demonstrates that recombination can rapidly assemble new genetic combinations, potentially conferring novel phenotypic traits such as altered receptor binding or host tropism.

The Hemagglutinin-Esterase (HE) Gene: A Hotspot for Adaptive Evolution

The HE glycoprotein is a defining feature of betacoronaviruses of lineage A (which includes BCoV and human coronavirus OC43). It acts as a secondary receptor-binding protein, complementing the S protein by facilitating attachment to O-acetylated sialic acids on the host cell surface. The balance between the receptor-binding activity of the S protein and the receptor-destroying esterase activity of the HE protein is critical for viral entry and host range determination [12]. Consequently, the HE gene, and particularly its receptor-binding domain (RBD), is a major focus of evolutionary change.

Recent global surveillance has revealed the emergence and spread of BCoV variants with distinct structural alterations in the HE RBD. In 2022, Workman et al. reported the detection of BCoV genomes from U.S. cattle that contained either a 12-nucleotide insertion or a 12-nucleotide deletion in the HE RBD [12]. These variants were identified in samples collected between 2020 and 2022 from multiple states, including Nebraska, Colorado, California, and Wisconsin. Concurrently, independent research groups in China identified similar variants with a 12-nucleotide insertion in the same region of the HE gene [1, 3]. The insertion, which adds four amino acids between residues F211 and L212 in the R3 loop of the HE protein, was shown via molecular docking to increase the binding affinity of the HE protein for its ligand, 9-O-acetylated sialic acid [1]. This enhanced affinity could theoretically improve viral attachment and entry, potentially increasing fitness.

The biological consequences of these HE variants are complex. While the insertion variant appears to enhance receptor binding, the deletion variant, which removes four amino acids, was associated with a non-cytopathic effect and lower virus titers in cell culture, suggesting a potential attenuation of virulence [1]. The co-circulation of these insertion and deletion variants, which do not share a common recent ancestor with those from the U.S., indicates that these are independent evolutionary events occurring under similar selective pressures [1, 12]. The emergence of these HE structural variants raises significant concerns. As the HE protein is a key determinant of host range, alterations in its RBD could facilitate adaptation to new hosts, potentially increasing the risk of interspecies transmission, a phenomenon already documented for BCoV-like viruses in humans (HCoV-OC43) [12].

Phylogenetic Structure and Global Lineages

Phylogenetic analyses of BCoV, based primarily on the S and HE genes, have consistently delineated two major genetic groups: GI (classical/European lineage) and GII (American-Asian lineage). This division reflects a fundamental evolutionary split that is correlated with geographic origin. The GI group includes the prototype enteric strain Mebus and many older European isolates, while the GII group encompasses the vast majority of contemporary circulating strains from Asia and the Americas [3, 14, 24]. Within the GII group, further subdivision into GIIa and GIIb has been proposed, with GIIa currently representing the dominant circulating lineage in many parts of the world, including South Korea, China, and Kazakhstan [3, 6, 14, 42].

The global phylogeography of BCoV is strongly influenced by international cattle trade. A comprehensive phylodynamic study by Franzo et al. (2020) revealed a clear pattern: a European cluster with a dense and complex migration network, and an American-Asian cluster dominated by the United States as a primary source of viral export [24]. This pattern mirrors global cattle movement, with the U.S. acting as a major hub for the dissemination of BCoV strains to other regions. For instance, Korean BCoV strains isolated before 2000 belonged to the GI group, but all strains isolated after 2000 belong to the GIIa group, suggesting a lineage replacement event likely linked to the importation of cattle from North America [14, 15]. Similarly, the introduction of BCoV into Uruguay was traced to two independent events from neighboring Argentina and Brazil, both occurring around 2013 [47]. These findings underscore the role of animal movement in shaping the genetic landscape of BCoV and highlight the need for robust biosecurity and surveillance programs to monitor the introduction of novel strains.

Selective Pressures and Host Adaptation

The evolution of BCoV is not a neutral process; it is shaped by strong selective pressures, primarily from the host immune system. The S protein, being the major target of neutralizing antibodies, is under constant positive selection to escape immune recognition. Analyses of the S gene have identified numerous positively selected sites, many of which are located within the S1 subunit’s hypervariable region and the putative receptor-binding domain [18, 28]. These sites are prone to amino acid substitutions that can alter antigenicity, allowing the virus to evade pre-existing immunity in a population. This immune-driven selection is a major challenge for vaccine development, as it can lead to the emergence of antigenic variants that are not effectively neutralized by vaccine-induced antibodies. The fact that circulating field strains, particularly those in the GII group, are genetically distinct from the GI-group vaccine strains (e.g., Mebus, BC94) may contribute to the limited efficacy of some current vaccines [6, 46].

Beyond immune pressure, the virus also faces selective pressures related to host and tissue tropism. While BCoV is primarily associated with enteric and respiratory disease, no definitive genetic markers have been identified that consistently distinguish between strains causing these two clinical syndromes [9, 15]. This suggests that the virus possesses an inherent plasticity that allows it to replicate efficiently in both the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts. However, some studies have identified subtle genetic associations. For example, a comparison of paired respiratory and enteric BCoV isolates from the same animal revealed a potential amino acid residue pattern at position 1180 of the S protein, with aspartic acid (D1180) found in enteric strains and glycine (G1180) in respiratory strains [34]. While such correlations require further validation, they hint at the existence of tissue-specific genetic determinants that may influence pathogenesis. The ability of BCoV to infect a wide range of hosts, including wild ruminants like the Greater Kudu in Namibia [43], yaks on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [27], and even rodents such as the Daurian ground squirrel [11], is a testament to its genetic adaptability and highlights the potential for spillover events into new ecological niches. The close genetic relationship between BCoV and human coronavirus OC43, which is thought to have originated from a bovine-to-human spillover event centuries ago, serves as a stark reminder of the zoonotic potential inherent in this virus [4, 9, 19].

Epidemiology and Environmental Transmission of Bovine Coronavirus

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV) represents one of the most pervasive and economically consequential viral pathogens affecting cattle operations worldwide, exhibiting a truly global distribution that spans every major livestock-producing continent. The epidemiological landscape of BCoV is characterized by near-ubiquitous seroprevalence, complex multi-factorial transmission dynamics, and an evolving understanding of the virus’s capacity for environmental persistence and interspecies spillover. As a member of the species Betacoronavirus 1 within the subgenus Embecovirus, BCoV is genetically and antigenically related to human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43) and has been implicated in zoonotic transmission events, underscoring its relevance to both veterinary and public health frameworks as recognized by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and the World Health Organization (WHO) [8, 9, 22]. The epidemiology of BCoV is not static; it is shaped by the continuous emergence of genetic variants, particularly in the hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) and spike (S) glycoprotein genes, which may alter host range, tissue tropism, and transmissibility [1, 12, 26].

Global Prevalence and Regional Seroprevalence Patterns

Comprehensive cross-sectional and longitudinal studies consistently demonstrate that BCoV is endemic in cattle populations across the globe, with seroprevalence rates frequently exceeding 80% at the herd level. A nationwide cross-sectional study in Kazakhstan, involving 2,237 clinically healthy cattle from 390 farms, reported an animal-level seroprevalence of 88.2% and a herd-level seroprevalence of 89.6%, confirming endemicity even in regions with historically limited surveillance [42]. Similarly, a pan-European investigation of 125 dairy farms across 17 countries detected BCoV antibodies in bulk tank milk from 100% of herds, with active viral shedding identified in 80% of those herds via RT-PCR [51]. In the western region of Thailand, a cross-sectional survey of 617 dairy cattle from 30 herds found an extraordinary individual seroprevalence of 97.89%, with every herd containing at least one seropositive animal [59]. These figures are echoed in the Campania region of southern Italy, where 30.8% of individual animals and 76% of herds tested seropositive [7], and in Poland, where 72.6% of 296 cattle across 51 herds were seropositive [57].

A meta-analysis of 57 studies encompassing 15,838 samples from China estimated an overall BCoV prevalence of 30.8%, with significant geographic variation ranging from 60.5% in South China to 15.6% in Central China [52]. This meta-analysis identified sample source, detection method, breeding system, and the presence of diarrhea as significant risk factors for BCoV detection [52]. In Northeast China, a targeted survey of 1,016 diarrheic cattle found a 15.45% BCoV-positive rate, with nasal swabs (21.53%) yielding significantly higher detection rates than fecal samples (12.20%), suggesting that respiratory shedding may be a primary driver of within-herd transmission [18].

The disparity between seroprevalence and active viral shedding is a critical epidemiological feature. While seropositivity often exceeds 80-90%, the proportion of animals actively shedding virus at any given time is typically much lower. In Kazakhstan, only 2.4% of sampled animals were shedding BCoV RNA, although this represented 7.8% of cattle operations [42]. In the European study, 24% of neonatal calves, 23% of weaned calves, and 5% of fresh cows were actively shedding [51]. This pattern indicates that BCoV circulates primarily through intermittent shedding from persistently infected or recently infected animals, often in the absence of overt clinical signs, and that a large proportion of the herd is immune due to prior exposure.

Transmission Routes and Shedding Dynamics

BCoV is a pneumoenteric virus capable of infecting both the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts, and the interplay between these two anatomical sites governs its transmission dynamics [9, 33, 56]. Fecal-oral transmission has historically been considered the primary route, particularly for the neonatal calf diarrhea and winter dysentery syndromes [8, 9]. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that respiratory transmission, via aerosolized droplets and direct nasal contact, is equally, if not more, important for the rapid dissemination of BCoV within herds.

Experimental inoculation studies have been instrumental in elucidating shedding kinetics. In a controlled study using Korean native calves challenged via either the intranasal or oral route, viral RNA was detected in nasal swabs before it appeared in feces, regardless of the inoculation route [33]. Nasal shedding preceded fecal shedding by at least 24-48 hours, and while nasal shedding resolved by 8-12 days post-infection, fecal shedding persisted for a longer duration, extending up to 15 days [33]. This temporal pattern suggests that the respiratory epithelium serves as the initial site of viral replication following natural exposure, with subsequent gastrointestinal involvement occurring via swallowed respiratory secretions or viremic spread [33, 56]. The detection of BCoV RNA in the blood of two orally challenged calves at 7 and 9 days post-infection using digital RT-PCR further supports the possibility of a hematogenous phase that could contribute to systemic dissemination [33].

Longitudinal studies in naturally infected beef calves have revealed that persistent or recurrent shedding episodes are common, with the same animals testing positive for BCoV in nasal swabs at multiple time points from birth through weaning [48]. In a landmark long-term experimental study, three colostrum-deprived calves inoculated with BCoV strain Kumamoto/1/07 and housed in isolation exhibited sporadic detection of viral RNA in plasma, nasal discharge, and feces for up to 1,085 days post-inoculation [41]. Nasal discharge showed a higher viral positivity rate than feces, and positive detection in plasma was temporally associated with nasal shedding, strongly suggesting that BCoV can establish a persistent infection in respiratory tissues [41]. The existence of a carrier state in the upper respiratory tract has profound implications for the maintenance of BCoV within herds between outbreaks and for the introduction of virus into previously unaffected populations through the movement of subclinically infected animals.

The respiratory tract is not merely a shedding site; it also manifests significant pathology. In a challenge study where calves were inoculated intranasally with virulent BCoV, the virus was isolated from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, and immunohistochemistry and histopathology confirmed lesions in both upper and lower respiratory tissues, establishing BCoV as a genuine respiratory pathogen contributing to the bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC) [56]. Furthermore, RNA in situ hybridization using RNAscope technology detected BCoV within respiratory epithelium in tracheal and lower airway tissues from calves with BRD, with the presence of the virus correlated with tracheal epithelial attenuation [55].

Environmental Contamination and Fomite Transmission

The capacity of BCoV to persist on environmental surfaces is a critical determinant of its transmission efficiency, particularly in intensive management systems where animals are housed in close proximity. A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, encompassing 2,703 initial articles and culminating in three studies that met strict inclusion criteria, evaluated the presence of BCoV on environmental surfaces [50]. The review concluded that BCoV can remain infectious on fomites for up to 24 hours, with viral RNA detectable for up to 81 hours depending on surface material [50]. These findings underscore that contaminated surfaces represent a viable route of indirect transmission, especially in calf housing areas, milking parlors, and transport vehicles.

Experimental studies comparing the survival of BCoV and SARS-CoV-2 on common surfaces found that BCoV maintained relatively high infectious titers on non-porous substrates such as stainless steel and plastic, but its titer decreased more rapidly on porous materials like nitrile rubber [58]. Notably, the time to reach the limit of detection on non-woven masks, a porous substrate, was longer than for non-porous surfaces, indicating that the relationship between surface structure and viral survival is not straightforward [58]. This study also highlighted a critical methodological point: viral RNA, as detected by real-time PCR, persisted on surfaces far longer than infectious virus, meaning that molecular detection alone may overestimate the true risk of environmental contamination [58].

The role of fomites and human personnel in mechanical transmission was directly investigated in a unique experiment where swabs were collected from the nasal mucosa of personnel and their clothing, boots, and equipment after contact with BCoV-shedding calves [62]. Thirty minutes after exposure, 46% of human nasal mucosa swabs were positive for BCoV RNA by RT-qPCR, but this carriage was short-lived, declining to 15% at two hours and 0% at six hours. Critically, no infectious virions were detected in any of the human mucosal swabs tested [62]. However, 97% of fomite swabs collected 24 hours post-exposure were positive for high levels of viral RNA, and infectious BCoV was isolated from two of three swabs tested for infectivity [62]. This demonstrates that while human nasal mucosa may act as a short-term mechanical vector of limited epidemiological significance, contaminated clothing, boots, and equipment represent a substantial risk for indirect transmission between herds, particularly when biosecurity protocols are lax.

Further evidence of environmental stability comes from studies evaluating novel decontamination technologies. Radiofrequency (RF) irradiation in the 6-12 GHz range reduced BCoV infectivity by up to 77%, although this reduction was not deemed clinically significant [53]. Photocatalytic titanium dioxide materials, when activated by visible light, reduced BCoV titers by up to 2.8 log TCID50/0.1 mL, suggesting that such technologies could be deployed for environmental decontamination in cattle facilities [21]. Cationic photosensitizers like methylene blue and octakis(cholinyl)zinc phthalocyanine, combined with red light at low doses of 1.5-4.0 J/cm², achieved a four-log reduction in BCoV titers, with morphological changes including loss of spikes, envelope destruction, and viral disintegration observed by electron microscopy [13]. Toluidine blue O, another photosensitizer, demonstrated an EC50 of just 0.005 μM against BCoV, with complete abolition of cytopathic effects at concentrations between 0.02 and 0.3 μM [54].

Risk Factors for Infection and Shedding

The probability of BCoV infection and shedding is modulated by a complex interplay of host, management, and environmental factors. Age is consistently the most robust individual-level risk factor. In Thailand, cattle older than three years were 81.96 times more likely to be seropositive compared to those under one year of age [59]. This pattern is driven by cumulative exposure and the long duration of antibody persistence. However, active shedding shows a different age distribution. In Korean native calves, the prevalence of BCoV in diarrheic pre-weaned calves aged 31-60 days was significantly higher than in those aged 1-10 days (odds ratio: 2.69), suggesting that waning maternal antibody protection and increased social contact predispose older pre-weaned calves to infection [15]. In contrast, a European study found that neonatal calves (<21 days) and weaned calves had similar shedding rates of approximately 24% and 23%, respectively, while fresh cows shed at a much lower rate of 5% [51].

Herd size and stocking density are powerful risk factors at the population level. In Poland, seropositivity for BCoV increased with herd size, and the probability of detecting viral RNA was highest in medium-sized herds [57]. In Kazakhstan, seropositivity correlated with the proportion of cattle kept in backyards, cattle density, and farm size [42]. Seasonal effects are also prominent. In Uruguay, BCoV detection was 9.05 times more likely in colder months (11.8%) compared to warmer months (1.5%) [47]. Cold, damp conditions are thought to favor viral survival in the environment and may also stress animals, increasing susceptibility.

Management practices exert a powerful influence on shedding. Vaccination of dry cows with a commercial BCoV vaccine was associated with reduced shedding in neonatal calves in the European study, but paradoxically, it was linked to increased shedding in weaned calves on the same farms [51]. This apparent contradiction may reflect the interplay between maternal antibody interference and delayed exposure to natural infection. Calf husbandry factors, including the feeding of transition milk (the milk produced between colostrum and full milk), the volume of milk fed, group housing, and age at weaning, were all significantly associated with BCoV shedding in both neonatal and weaned calves [51]. In Uruguay, calves born to vaccinated dams had a significantly lower BCoV detection rate (3.3%) compared to calves from unvaccinated dams (12.2%), an odds ratio of 0.25 [47]. In Argentina, calves with high titers of specific BCoV IgG1 antibodies from colostrum (≥1024) were mostly protected against infection, while those with lower titers were frequently infected [64].

Biosecurity on dairy farms is generally suboptimal. In the European study, the average external biosecurity score was 71%, while the internal biosecurity score was only 47%, indicating that while farms are moderately protected from virus introduction, they have very poor control of virus spread once it has entered the herd [51]. The Norwegian control program for BRSV and BCoV provides a model for how population-level biosecurity can be implemented. This voluntary program, launched by the national cattle industry, classifies herds based on antibody testing and prevents virus introduction through strict external biosecurity measures, including regulations on animal trade and indirect transmission routes [60]. Herds that test negative are protected from reintroduction, and positive herds are believed to gain freedom over time if new introductions are prevented, without the use of vaccination [60, 63].

Interspecies Transmission and Host Range

BCoV exhibits a remarkably broad host range, with documented infection in domestic and wild ruminants, companion animals, and even rodents. The virus has been detected in water buffalo in Italy, where seroprevalence was 5.3% overall but significantly higher in animals cohabiting with cattle, demonstrating that management practices that mix species promote interspecies transmission [7]. In sub-Saharan Africa, a study in Namibia detected BCoV in 5.98% of domestic cattle and, notably, in 25% of sampled greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros), including animals showing clinical signs [43]. Phylogenetic analysis of Namibian strains revealed a unique clade resulting from a single introduction event around 2010, followed by local evolution, suggesting sustained transmission within wildlife populations in the absence of further cattle introductions [43].

Wild water deer (Hydropotes inermis) in Korea have also been found to carry BCoV, with three of 77 nasal swab samples testing positive and full genomic sequences showing >98% identity to bovine coronaviruses [30]. The identification of BCoV in a Daurian ground squirrel (Spermophilus dauricus) in China expands the host range to rodents, raising concerns about the existence of wildlife reservoirs that could facilitate viral persistence and spillback into cattle populations [11]. In Ghana, BCoV RNA was detected in both goats and cattle, with the goat sequences clustering together within the same clade as bovine sequences, indicating spillover in mixed husbandry systems [23]. Seroprevalence studies in Ghana further confirmed that sheep and goats kept without strict separation from cattle are frequently seropositive for BCoV [61].

The detection of BCoV in the brain of a calf exhibiting neurological signs in Turkey represents a significant expansion of our understanding of BCoV pathogenesis [4]. BCoV RNA was detected not only in the brain but also in the lungs, spleen, liver, and intestine of the affected calf, and the S1 gene product was identified specifically in the brain by gel electrophoresis. The strain belonged to the GIb-European lineage and shared 98.72% nucleotide identity with the HECV 4408 and L07748 strains of human coronavirus OC43, raising important questions about the zoonotic potential of circulating strains [4].

Genetic Variants and Their Epidemiological Implications

The emergence of BCoV variants with insertions or deletions in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the HE gene represents one of the most significant epidemiological developments in recent years. In 2020-2022, isolates from four U.S. states (Nebraska, Colorado, California, and Wisconsin) were found to contain a 12-nucleotide insertion in the HE RBD that was remarkably similar to one previously reported in China [12]. Concurrently, a single Nebraska isolate from 2020 contained a novel 12-nucleotide deletion in the same domain [12]. Isogenic HE proteins bearing either the insertion or deletion maintained esterase activity and could still bind 9-O-acetylated-sialic acid, the primary receptor for BCoV, despite predicted structural changes in the critical R3 loop [12]. The emergence of these structural variants raises the possibility of altered receptor specificity and interspecies transmission [12].

In China, surveillance of 1646 bovine fecal samples from 2020 to 2023 identified a BCoV-positive rate of 34.02%, and molecular characterization revealed that two strains, HBSJZ2202 and JSYZ2209, harbored four-amino-acid insertions in the HE protein, placing them within the GIIb subgroup [3]. A detailed study of 47 diarrheal and 47 nasal swab samples from five farms in Ningxia, China, isolated eight BCoV strains, including three with a 12-nucleotide insertion and one with a novel 12-nucleotide deletion in the HE RBD [1]. Molecular docking simulations demonstrated that the insertion of four amino acids between residues F211 and L212 increased the binding affinity of the HE protein to O-acetylated sialic acid, potentially enhancing virion attachment [1]. However, growth kinetics revealed that the deletion variant had a noncytopathic effect and produced lower viral titers, suggesting a trade-off between replicative fitness and transmissibility [1].

A recombinant HE gene, arising from a recombination event between the esterase and lectin domains, has been identified in multiple BCoV strains from China, and this recombinant HE was found in 10 of 13 strains analyzed from dairy calves with diarrhea across six provinces [25]. This same recombinant HE gene was also detected in a BCoV strain isolated from a yak (Bos grunniens) on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, representing the first description of BCoV in this species and demonstrating the wide geographic and host distribution of this recombinant lineage [27].

Phylodynamic analyses have revealed two major global clusters: a European cluster and an American-Asian

Clinical Manifestations and Pathological Features of Bovine Coronavirus

Bovine coronavirus (BCoV) is a highly pleomorphic, enveloped, positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus belonging to the genus Betacoronavirus, family Coronaviridae, and is recognized by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) as a significant pathogen of cattle with a global distribution [9, 16]. The clinical manifestations of BCoV infection are remarkably diverse, encompassing three primary disease syndromes: neonatal calf diarrhea (NCD), winter dysentery (WD) in adult cattle, and bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC) in cattle of all ages [8, 9, 65]. This spectrum of disease, coupled with the virus’s ability to establish persistent infections and its potential for interspecies transmission, underscores its profound impact on both animal welfare and the global cattle industry, resulting in substantial economic losses due to mortality, reduced growth performance, decreased milk production, and treatment costs [1, 9, 43, 52].

Enteric Manifestations: Neonatal Calf Diarrhea and Winter Dysentery

The most well-characterized clinical presentation of BCoV is acute enteritis, which manifests in two distinct epidemiological forms. In neonatal calves, typically within the first three weeks of life, BCoV is a primary etiological agent of severe diarrhea [9, 64, 67]. The clinical course is often acute and can be devastating. Affected calves present with profuse, watery to hemorrhagic diarrhea, which rapidly leads to dehydration, metabolic acidosis, electrolyte imbalances, depression, and anorexia [2, 9, 37]. The severity of diarrhea is frequently exacerbated by co-infections with other enteropathogens, most notably bovine rotavirus A (BoRVA), Cryptosporidium parvum, and enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K99, a scenario that is the rule rather than the exception in field conditions [35, 67]. Meta-analyses have demonstrated that the prevalence of BoRVA-BCoV mixed infections is higher than would be expected based on the individual prevalence of each pathogen, suggesting a synergistic interaction that amplifies disease severity [67]. Transcriptomic analyses of co-infected cells reveal a unique host response, with over 800 differentially expressed genes exclusive to co-exposed cells, indicating that the host-pathogen interplay during co-infection is distinct from single infections and is dominated by the virus while also involving unique immune pathways [35].

In adult cattle, BCoV is the causative agent of winter dysentery (WD), a highly contagious, epidemic diarrheal disease that typically occurs in housed dairy cattle during the colder months [9, 70, 71]. The hallmark of WD is the sudden onset of explosive, often hemorrhagic diarrhea within a herd, accompanied by a dramatic drop in milk production, which can range from 20% to 60% [2, 70, 72]. Affected cows may exhibit anorexia, depression, and mild pyrexia, but mortality is generally low, with most animals recovering within a few days to a week [9, 70]. However, the economic impact is severe due to the loss of milk yield and the cost of supportive care. In some outbreaks, particularly those complicated by concurrent infections or environmental stressors, the disease can be fatal. A report from southern Italy documented a WD outbreak in a high-production dairy herd that was complicated by a severe respiratory syndrome, resulting in a 9.6% mortality rate, with cows dying from acute respiratory distress within 3–4 days of the onset of respiratory signs [72]. This highlights the potential for BCoV to cause severe, multisystemic disease.

Respiratory Manifestations and the Role in Bovine Respiratory Disease Complex

The role of BCoV as a primary respiratory pathogen has been a subject of considerable debate, but a growing body of evidence, including experimental challenge studies and molecular pathology, has firmly established its significance in the bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC) [9, 55, 56]. BCoV is now recognized as a pneumoenteric virus, capable of infecting both the upper and lower respiratory tracts [33, 56]. Clinical signs of respiratory BCoV infection are often subtle and non-specific, particularly in the early stages, and include serous nasal discharge, mild cough, and increased respiratory rate [33, 56, 68]. However, the virus can predispose animals to severe secondary bacterial pneumonia, which is the hallmark of BRDC [36, 55].

Experimental intranasal challenge of colostrum-deprived calves with virulent BCoV has unequivocally demonstrated its ability to cause respiratory disease. In a landmark study, challenged calves developed clinical signs including nasal discharge and diarrhea, with viral RNA detected in nasal swabs before fecal shedding, confirming the respiratory route of infection [33]. More importantly, the virus was isolated from bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid, and histopathological examination of respiratory tissues revealed characteristic lesions, including tracheal epithelial attenuation and interstitial pneumonia, with BCoV antigen detected within these lesions via immunohistochemistry (IHC) and RNA in situ hybridization (ISH) [55, 56]. These findings provide direct evidence that BCoV is not merely a commensal of the respiratory tract but an active pathogen capable of causing tissue damage.

The pathogenesis of BCoV-associated BRD is complex and often involves sequential or concurrent infections with other viral and bacterial agents. A particularly severe disease model involves dual infection with bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) followed by BCoV. In a controlled study, calves inoculated with BVDV followed by BCoV six days later developed significantly more pronounced lung lesions, consistent with moderate interstitial pneumonia, compared to calves infected with either virus alone [38]. This suggests that BVDV-induced immunosuppression may potentiate BCoV pathogenicity, leading to more severe respiratory disease. Furthermore, field studies have demonstrated a high frequency of co-detection of BCoV with bacterial pathogens such as Mycoplasma bovirhinis, Pasteurella multocida, and Histophilus somni in calves with BRD, indicating that BCoV often acts as a viral initiator, damaging the respiratory epithelium and creating a niche for opportunistic bacterial invaders [36, 46, 48].

Neurological Manifestations and Evidence of Brain Invasion

Perhaps the most alarming and emerging clinical manifestation of BCoV infection is its potential to invade the central nervous system (CNS). While historically considered an enteric and respiratory pathogen, recent molecular evidence has demonstrated the presence of BCoV RNA in the brains of calves exhibiting severe neurological signs, including ataxia, recumbency, and convulsions [4]. In a detailed case study from Türkiye, an outbreak of diarrhea and respiratory disease in a group of calves was complicated by neurological signs in two animals, both of which died. Necropsy of one calf revealed BCoV RNA not only in the intestine and lung but also in the brain, spleen, and liver. Crucially, a 622 bp fragment of the S1 gene was amplified specifically from brain tissue, and immunostaining confirmed the presence of viral antigen in the brain, providing definitive evidence of neuroinvasion [4]. Phylogenetic analysis of the brain-derived strain showed it belonged to the GIb-European lineage and shared high sequence homology with human coronavirus OC43 strains, raising important questions about the zoonotic potential of neurotropic BCoV strains [4]. This finding challenges the conventional understanding of BCoV tropism and suggests that the virus may be capable of causing encephalitis, a complication that is likely underdiagnosed.

Pathological Features: Gross and Histopathological Lesions

The pathological changes induced by BCoV are largely confined to the epithelial surfaces of the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts, reflecting the virus’s primary tropism for differentiated enterocytes and respiratory epithelial cells [9, 66].

Gastrointestinal Pathology: In cases of enteric disease, gross lesions are most prominent in the small and large intestines. The intestinal wall may appear thin, edematous, and hyperemic, with the lumen containing copious amounts of watery to hemorrhagic fluid [9, 71]. Histopathological examination reveals the hallmark lesion: villous atrophy and fusion in the small intestine, particularly in the jejunum and ileum [6, 9]. The columnar absorptive epithelial cells (enterocytes) lining the villi are infected, leading to cell death and sloughing, which results in the blunting and fusion of the villi. This dramatic reduction in absorptive surface area is the primary pathophysiological mechanism driving the severe malabsorptive diarrhea. Crypt epithelial cells are typically spared, allowing for rapid regeneration and recovery in uncomplicated cases [9]. In the large intestine, similar degenerative changes and necrosis of colonic epithelial cells can be observed [14].

Respiratory Pathology: In the respiratory tract, BCoV infection causes a rhinitis, tracheitis, and interstitial pneumonia [55, 56]. Grossly, the lungs may appear mottled and fail to collapse, with areas of consolidation, particularly in the cranioventral lobes, which are often complicated by secondary bacterial bronchopneumonia [38, 72]. Histologically, the earliest lesions are observed in the trachea and bronchi, where the pseudostratified columnar epithelium undergoes attenuation, loss of cilia, and necrosis [55]. In the lower airways, the virus infects type I and type II pneumocytes, leading to thickening of the alveolar septa due to infiltration of mononuclear cells and proliferation of type II pneumocytes, a pattern consistent with interstitial pneumonia [55, 72]. IHC and ISH techniques have localized BCoV antigen within these lesioned respiratory epithelial cells, confirming the direct cytopathic role of the virus in the pathogenesis of BRD [55, 56].

Host Immune Response and Immunopathogenesis

The host immune response to BCoV is a critical determinant of disease outcome. The virus has evolved sophisticated mechanisms to subvert the innate immune response, most notably through its nucleocapsid (N) protein. The BCoV N protein has been shown to act as a potent antagonist of type I interferon (IFN-β) production by inhibiting the RIG-I-like receptor (RLR) signaling pathway [17]. Specifically, the N protein suppresses the activity of key signaling molecules, including MDA5, MAVS, TBK1, and IRF3, thereby dampening the antiviral state of the host cell and facilitating viral replication [17]. This immune evasion strategy likely contributes to the virus’s ability to establish persistent infections, as demonstrated by long-term animal experiments where BCoV RNA was detected sporadically in plasma, nasal secretions, and feces for up to 1,085 days post-inoculation [41].

The adaptive immune response, particularly the humoral arm, plays a crucial role in protection. Colostral-derived maternal antibodies, specifically IgG1, are essential for protecting neonatal calves from BCoV infection. Calves with high titers of BCoV-specific IgG1 in their serum (≥1:1024) are largely protected from infection, whereas those with low or inadequate passive transfer are highly susceptible [64, 74]. This underscores the critical importance of vaccinating dams in late gestation to boost colostral antibody levels. However, the protection afforded by maternal antibodies is not absolute and can wane over time, leaving calves susceptible to infection as they age [51]. Furthermore, the virus can induce a robust inflammatory response. Studies have shown that BCoV infection leads to a significant acute phase response, characterized by elevated serum haptoglobin (Hp) concentrations and monocytosis in post-weaned calves with diarrhea [37]. Additionally, chemokines such as interleukin-8 (IL-8), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), and macrophage inflammatory protein-1β (MIP-1β) are significantly upregulated during infection, suggesting their potential as biomarkers for predicting BCoV infection [33].

Viral Shedding, Persistence, and Transmission Dynamics

BCoV is shed in high concentrations in both feces and nasal secretions from infected animals, regardless of whether they are clinically ill or asymptomatic [33, 51, 73]. Viral shedding typically begins within 2–3 days post-infection and can persist for several weeks, with fecal shedding often outlasting nasal shedding [33, 69]. This prolonged shedding is a key factor in the virus’s high transmissibility within and between herds. Importantly, BCoV can survive on environmental surfaces, such as rubber boots, clothing, and equipment, for up to 24 hours while retaining infectivity, and viral RNA can be detected for up to 81 hours [50, 62]. This fomite transmission is a major route of indirect spread between farms, highlighting the critical need for stringent biosecurity measures [50, 60, 62]. The virus is also shed by apparently healthy animals, with studies showing that a significant proportion of asymptomatic calves can be BCoV-positive, acting as silent shedders that perpetuate the infection cycle within a herd [3, 73]. This subclinical shedding is particularly problematic in calf rearing units, where the introduction of a single infected animal can lead to a rapid and widespread outbreak, as observed in a Brazilian dairy calf rearing unit where the attack rate exceeded 50% within one week [74].

Genetic and Antigenic Variability and Its Impact on Clinical Disease

The clinical manifestations of BCoV are not solely determined by host factors; the genetic diversity of the virus itself plays a significant role. BCoV exists as a quasispecies, and its genome, particularly the spike (S) and hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) genes, is subject to continuous genetic drift and recombination [9, 24, 25]. The S protein is the major determinant of cell tropism and a primary target for neutralizing antibodies, while the HE protein, a unique feature of betacoronavirus lineage A, functions as a secondary receptor-binding protein and receptor-destroying enzyme, modulating viral attachment and release [1, 12, 19].

Recent global surveillance has identified the emergence of novel BCoV variants with distinct mutations in the HE gene’s receptor-binding domain (RBD). Specifically, a 12-nucleotide (4-amino acid) insertion in the HE RBD has been reported in strains circulating in the United States and China [1, 12]. Molecular docking studies suggest that this insertion increases the affinity of the HE protein for its receptor, 9-O-acetylated sialic acid, potentially enhancing viral attachment and infectivity [1]. Conversely, a 12-nucleotide deletion in the same region has also been identified, which is associated with a non-cytopathic effect and lower virus titers in cell culture [1]. The emergence of these structural variants in the HE RBD raises concerns about altered host range and tissue tropism, potentially facilitating interspecies transmission [1, 12]. Furthermore, recombination events in the HE gene, particularly between the esterase and lectin domains, have been documented in Chinese BCoV strains, generating novel genotypes that may have altered pathogenic potential [25-27]. These findings underscore the dynamic nature of BCoV evolution and the need for continuous molecular surveillance to monitor the emergence of strains with enhanced virulence or zoonotic potential.

Diagnostics and Detection Methods for Bovine Coronavirus

The accurate and timely diagnosis of bovine coronavirus (BCoV) infection is paramount for implementing effective control strategies, mitigating economic losses associated with neonatal calf diarrhea, winter dysentery in adults, and bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC), and for conducting robust epidemiological surveillance. The diagnostic landscape for BCoV has evolved considerably, encompassing a spectrum of techniques that range from traditional virus isolation and serological assays to highly sensitive molecular platforms and novel point-of-care tests. As a pathogen with global economic significance, recognized by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), the selection of an appropriate diagnostic method must be guided by the clinical objective, whether for individual animal diagnosis, herd-level screening, export certification, or molecular characterization for research and vaccine development. The following sections provide an exhaustive analysis of the principal diagnostic modalities used for BCoV detection.

Molecular Detection Methods: The Cornerstone of Contemporary Diagnostics

The advent of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based technologies has revolutionized the detection of BCoV, offering unparalleled sensitivity, specificity, and speed compared to classical methods. Reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and its quantitative variants (real-time RT-PCR or qRT-PCR) are now considered the gold standard for detecting BCoV RNA in clinical specimens, including feces, nasal swabs, and tissues [34, 73].

Real-Time RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) and Conventional RT-PCR. The high sensitivity of qRT-PCR, often targeting conserved regions of the nucleocapsid (N) gene or the spike (S) gene, enables the detection of low viral loads, which is critical for identifying subclinical shedders and early infections [16, 18, 49]. Several groups have developed highly specific TaqMan probe-based qRT-PCR assays. For instance, an assay targeting the N gene demonstrated a minimum detection limit of 4.72 × 10¹ copies/μL, a 100-fold improvement over conventional gel-based PCR, with excellent reproducibility and no cross-reactivity with other major bovine enteric or respiratory pathogens like bovine rotavirus (BRV), bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), or bovine herpesvirus-1 (BHV-1) [49]. The diagnostic utility of these assays is underscored by their widespread use in prevalence studies. In a large-scale European survey across 125 dairy farms, RT-PCR was used to establish that 80% of herds and 24% of neonatal calves were shedding BCoV, demonstrating the pathogen's endemic nature [51]. Similarly, a nationwide study in Kazakhstan employed nested RT-PCR on pooled nasal and rectal swabs from 2,237 clinically healthy cattle, identifying a 2.4% animal-level shedding rate and providing critical baseline data for a region with previously unknown BCoV epidemiology [42]. The N gene is a frequent target due to its high conservation among BCoV strains, making it ideal for broad-spectrum detection [18, 23]. However, the S gene, particularly the hypervariable region (HVR) of S1, is preferred for phylogenetic analyses and strain differentiation, as it encodes the major neutralizing epitopes and is subject to significant genetic drift [24, 78].

Multiplex and High-Throughput Molecular Assays. Given that neonatal calf diarrhea and BRDC are often polymicrobial, there is a pressing clinical need for assays capable of simultaneous detection of multiple pathogens. Multiplex qRT-PCR platforms have been developed to address this. A triplex probe-based qRT-PCR assay was optimized for the synchronous detection of bovine parvovirus (BPV), BCoV, and bovine parainfluenza virus (BPIV), demonstrating detection limits of 2.0 × 10² copies/μL for BCoV and BPV and 2.0 × 10¹ copies/μL for BPIV, with 1000-fold greater sensitivity than conventional uniplex PCR and excellent intra- and inter-assay reproducibility (CV < 2%) [79]. This approach is invaluable for differential diagnosis in clinical settings. Going a step further in quantification, digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) has emerged as a superior technology for absolute quantification without the need for standard curves. A multiplex ddPCR assay for BCoV, BRV, and bovine enterovirus (BEV) was shown to have drastically lower limits of detection (1 copy/μL for BCoV) compared to qPCR (1000 copies/μL) [75]. Importantly, in clinical sample testing, ddPCR consistently identified a higher proportion of positive samples and co-infections than conventional qPCR, underscoring its superior sensitivity for detecting low-abundance targets, which is crucial for understanding mixed infections and their role in disease severity [67, 75]. The use of droplet digital RT-PCR (RT-ddPCR) has also proven invaluable in pathogenesis studies, such as detecting BCoV RNA in the blood of experimentally infected calves, where conventional methods failed [33].

Isothermal Amplification and Point-of-Care Molecular Tests. To circumvent the need for expensive thermocyclers and specialized laboratory infrastructure, isothermal amplification techniques have been developed for field-deployable BCoV detection. A multienzyme isothermal rapid amplification (MIRA) assay combined with a lateral flow dipstick (LFD) was designed to target the N gene. This MIRA-LFD assay can be completed within 30 minutes at a constant temperature (37–42°C) and read by the naked eye. Its diagnostic performance was excellent, with a κ value of 0.982 compared to a reference RT-qPCR assay when testing 192 clinical samples [45]. Such tests represent a significant advancement for on-farm diagnostics, allowing for rapid culling or isolation decisions without the delays inherent in sample transport to centralized laboratories. This capability is particularly relevant for controlling outbreaks on farms with limited biosecurity infrastructure, where the potential for fomite transmission, BCoV can remain infectious on surfaces for up to 24 hours and its RNA detectable for 81 hours, requires swift intervention [50, 62].

Genomic Sequencing and Phylogenetic Analysis: Unraveling Viral Evolution and Epidemiology

Beyond mere detection, molecular characterization of BCoV strains through sequencing is indispensable for understanding viral evolution, tracking transmission pathways, and monitoring the emergence of variants with altered pathogenicity or host range. Sanger sequencing and, increasingly, next-generation sequencing (NGS) of complete genomes or specific genes (S, HE, and N) provide the granularity needed to map the phylodynamics of BCoV [24, 34, 76].

Gene Targets for Sequencing. The spike glycoprotein gene is the most frequently sequenced target due to its critical role in receptor binding, host cell entry, and immune evasion. The S1 subunit, particularly the N-terminal domain (S1-NTD) and the hypervariable region (HVR), shows the highest degree of genetic diversity and is a primary target for phylogenetic classification. Studies have consistently demonstrated that BCoV strains cluster into distinct lineages, notably the GI (classical/European) and GII (American-Asian) groups, with further subdivisions (e.g., GIa, GIb, GIIa, GIIb) often correlating with geographic origin and time of isolation [3, 10, 15, 18]. Analysis of partial S1 sequences from Brazilian calves with BRD revealed a novel genotype (designated #15), highlighting the existence of geographically distinct lineages that may differ in antigenicity from vaccine strains [46]. Similarly, sequencing of the S gene from Turkish isolates identified multiple amino acid changes previously associated with altered tissue tropism, blurring the line between enteric and respiratory strains [78].

The hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) protein, unique to betacoronaviruses in lineage A, is another critical target. The HE gene encodes a receptor-destroying enzyme and a secondary receptor-binding domain, and its balance with the S protein activity governs viral avidity and interspecies transmission [1, 12]. Dramatic structural variants in the HE receptor-binding domain (RBD) have recently been identified. An analysis of 78 US genomes sequenced directly from clinical samples between 2013 and 2022 revealed 11 isolates with a 12-nucleotide insertion and one with a 12-nucleotide deletion in the HE RBD [12]. Concurrently, Chinese researchers isolated strains with identical 12-nucleotide insertions, demonstrating a global emergence of these HE variants [1, 26]. Molecular docking studies indicated that the resulting four-amino-acid insertion between F211 and L212 increases the affinity of the HE protein for O-acetylated sialic acid, potentially enhancing virion attachment and interspecies transmission risk [1]. Sequencing of the HE gene from a human coronavirus-like BCoV detected in a calf brain (strain GIb-European lineage) showed 98.72% identity with HCoV-OC43 strains 4408 and L07748, raising provocative questions about the zoonotic potential and neurotropism of certain BCoV lineages [4].

Phylodynamics and Recombination Analyses. Phylogenetic analyses have been instrumental in reconstructing the global dispersal of BCoV. A comprehensive phylodynamic study using complete genome and S protein sequences revealed high mutation and recombination rates, with significant episodic positive selection acting on the spike protein surface, likely driven by host immune pressure [24]. The study identified two major global clusters, a European cluster with a dense migration network and an American-Asian cluster dominated by the US as a primary source of viral export, a pattern that mirrors international cattle trade routes [24]. Recombination is a powerful evolutionary force in BCoV. Evidence of homologous recombination in the HE gene, specifically between the esterase and lectin domains, has been documented in Chinese dairy calves and yaks ( Bos grunniens ) [25, 27]. One such recombinant strain isolated from a yak exhibited 26 unique amino acid variations in the S gene compared to 150 other BCoV sequences, suggesting that recombination in novel hosts can generate significant genetic diversity [27]. The detection of a potential recombination event between two Chinese strains (HLJ/HH-20/2020 and HLJ/HH-10/2020) leading to the generation of a new recombinant (BCV-AKS-01) further emphasizes the dynamic nature of the BCoV genome and the necessity of continuous genomic surveillance [18]. This is of paramount concern from a public health perspective, given the close genetic and antigenic relationship between BCoV and human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43) and the historical evidence suggesting a zoonotic origin of OC43 from a bovine ancestor [9, 19, 22].

Serological Diagnostics: A Window into Population-Level Exposure and Immune Status

Serological assays, while generally less sensitive than PCR for detecting active infection, are indispensable tools for herd-level surveillance, determining the prevalence of exposure, evaluating vaccine efficacy, and assessing the humoral immune response in individual animals. The most widely used serological platform is the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

ELISA Platforms for Antibody Detection. Commercial indirect ELISAs, often based on whole-virus lysates or purified structural proteins, are routinely employed for seroprevalence studies. A recent study in Thailand using a commercial indirect ELISA found an astonishingly high animal-level seroprevalence of 97.89% (604/617) in dairy cattle, indicating that virtually all animals in the western region had been exposed to BCoV [59]. Seropositivity was strongly age-dependent, with cattle >3 years old having 82 times higher odds of being seropositive compared to calves <1 year old, reflecting cumulative exposure over time [59]. A similar pattern was observed in Italy, where an overall seroprevalence of 30.8% was found in 720 cattle and water buffalo, with higher rates in older and purchased animals [7].

To improve specificity and reduce production costs, researchers have developed recombinant protein-based ELISAs. A notable advancement is the establishment of an indirect ELISA (iELISA) based on the recombinant nucleocapsid (N) protein expressed in CHO cells [2]. This iELISA, using rabbit polyclonal antibodies, was highly specific, showing no cross-reactivity with BHV-1, BVDV, BRV, or bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV). When validated against a commercial kit using 58 bovine serum samples, the concordance rate was 94.83%, demonstrating its utility as a cost-effective diagnostic tool for large-scale epidemiological surveys [2]. For herd-level surveillance, bulk tank milk (BTM) ELISA is an exceptionally efficient and practical approach. In a comprehensive study validating a multiplex immunoassay (Enferplex BCV/BRSV) against a commercial BTM ELISA (SVANOVIR®), the multiplex assay showed a sensitivity of 99.9% and specificity of 93.7% for BCoV at the recommended cut-off, making it a powerful tool for classifying herd status in control programs [82]. The Norwegian BRSV/BCoV control program, a pioneering population-based biosecurity initiative, relies entirely on BTM antibody testing to classify herds as positive or negative, then uses this classification to implement strict external biosecurity measures to prevent viral introduction [60, 63].

Virus Neutralization Test (VNT) and Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI). While ELISAs are convenient for screening, the virus neutralization test (VNT) remains the gold standard for detecting functional, neutralizing antibodies, which are a key correlate of protection. VNTs were used in the evaluation of a modified-live BCoV vaccine in horses, showing that neutralizing antibody titers against equine coronavirus (ECoV) increased in all vaccinated animals, albeit at lower levels than against BCoV [29, 81]. Similarly, VNT was critical in characterizing the humoral immune response in BCoV-infected calves with persistent BVDV co-infection, demonstrating high antibody titers persisting for up to 8 weeks post-infection [69]. The hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, which measures antibodies that block the attachment of BCoV to sialic acid receptors, is another specific serological tool. HI was used in a long-term study demonstrating persistent BCoV infection in cattle, where fluctuating HI titers along with sporadic viral RNA detection by RT-PCR confirmed the existence of a carrier state in the respiratory tract [41]. Serological evidence is also crucial for inferring past exposure in wildlife, as demonstrated by the detection of BCoV antibodies in sheep and goats in Ghana, suggesting cross-species transmission from cattle in mixed-farming systems [61].

Antigen Detection and Classical Virology

Despite the dominance of molecular methods, classical virological techniques remain relevant, particularly for virus isolation, pathogenesis studies, and the production of inactivated vaccines.

Virus Isolation. The gold standard for virus isolation is the use of human rectal tumor-18 (HRT-18) cells or Madin-Darby bovine kidney (MDBK) cells. BCoV can be isolated from fecal or nasal samples, but the process is labor-intensive, time-consuming, and less sensitive than PCR due to the presence of inhibitors and the lability of viral particles [6, 34]. Nevertheless, isolation remains essential for detailed biological characterization. For example, the KBR-1 strain, a BCoV circulating in South Korea, was isolated in HRT-18 cells and subsequently attenuated by 120 serial passages in MDBK cells, yielding a promising live vaccine candidate [6]. Isolation was also critical for confirming the infectivity and biological properties of novel HE variants. Chinese researchers successfully isolated a strain with a recombinant HE containing a 12-nucleotide insertion (SWUN/A10/2018), showing it replicated to a titer of 10⁴·⁷³ TCID₅₀/mL and could be propagated in cell culture [26]. Similarly, contemporary US strains were isolated from fecal samples collected from farms in Ohio and Georgia using HRT-18 cells, with the resulting isolates used to study the genetic basis of respiratory versus enteric tropism at the amino acid level [34].

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and In Situ Hybridization (ISH). For definitive diagnosis of BCoV involvement in tissue lesions, particularly in the lungs of calves with BRD, direct visualization of the virus within affected cells is critical. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) using monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies against BCoV antigens has been employed to detect the virus in the respiratory epithelium of calves with BRD, confirming a causal role in pneumonia [55, 56]. However, RNA in situ hybridization (ISH), using techniques like RNAscope®, has proven to be more sensitive than IHC. In a study of 104 calves with BRD, RNAscope ISH detected BCoV in respiratory epithelium in substantially more cases than IHC, and was particularly effective at demonstrating the virus within tracheal epithelial cells undergoing attenuation, a key histopathologic lesion [55]. This direct detection method provides incontrovertible evidence of viral replication within lesioned tissue, distinguishing BCoV from commensal or transient organisms. These methods have also been applied to confirm BCoV infection in the brain, providing evidence for neuroinvasion in calves with severe pneumonia and neurological signs [4].

Rapid Antigen Tests (Immunochromatography). For rapid, point-of-care diagnosis, immunochromatographic (ICG) or lateral flow assays are available. These tests detect viral antigens in feces within minutes. However, their sensitivity is generally far lower than that of RT-PCR. A comparative study in Turkey found that a commercial rapid test kit had only 7.6% sensitivity for detecting BCoV compared to RT-PCR, while a similar kit for rotavirus had 83% sensitivity [80]. A separate study evaluating ELISA, ICG, and RT-PCR concluded that while ICG tests offered speed and convenience, the Ag-ELISA (sensitivity and specificity both ~94.3% compared to RT-PCR) was preferred for its more accurate results [77]. The low sensitivity of rapid antigen tests, especially in later stages of infection when viral shedding wanes, limits their reliability as a standalone diagnostic tool and emphasizes that negative results from such tests should be confirmed by PCR if clinical suspicion is high [77, 80]. The MIRA-LFD combination assay represents a significant leap forward, as it combines isothermal amplification of viral RNA with LFD detection, achieving PCR-like sensitivity in a rapid, field-ready format [45].

Immunity and Vaccination Strategies for Bovine Coronavirus

The intricate interplay between bovine coronavirus (BCoV) and the host immune system dictates the outcome of infection, ranging from subclinical shedding to severe enteric and respiratory disease. A comprehensive understanding of both the innate and adaptive immune responses, coupled with the virus’s sophisticated immune evasion strategies, is fundamental to the rational design of effective vaccination protocols. Given the endemic nature of BCoV in cattle populations worldwide, with seroprevalence rates often exceeding 80% in unvaccinated herds [42, 57, 59], vaccination strategies must be tailored to bolster immunity in the face of constant antigenic exposure and to overcome the unique challenges posed by neonatal immunocompetence.

Innate Immune Recognition and Viral Countermeasures

The initial host response to BCoV infection is mediated by pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) that detect viral pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). The retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I)-like receptors (RLRs), specifically MDA5, play a crucial role in recognizing BCoV RNA and initiating signaling cascades that culminate in the production of type I interferons (IFN), particularly IFN-β. However, BCoV has evolved potent mechanisms to subvert this first line of defense. A landmark study demonstrated that the BCoV nucleocapsid (N) protein functions as a dose-dependent antagonist of IFN-β production by directly inhibiting the RLR signaling pathway [17]. Specifically, BCoV N protein suppresses IFN-β transcription induced by MDA5, MAVS, TBK1, and IRF3(5D), effectively dampening the antiviral state in infected cells [17]. This interferon antagonism likely contributes to the virus’s ability to replicate efficiently despite the host’s innate sensing mechanisms.

Further complexity in the innate response is revealed by investigations into the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR). This ligand-activated transcription factor, known to modulate immune and inflammatory responses, is significantly upregulated during BCoV infection of bovine cells. Notably, pretreatment of cells with a selective AhR inhibitor, CH223191, led to a significant reduction in virus yield and a downregulation of viral spike protein expression, suggesting that BCoV hijacks the AhR pathway to enhance its own replication [32]. This identifies AhR as a potential druggable target for antiviral therapy, though its role in the natural immune response to BCoV in vivo remains an active area of investigation [32]. The early inflammatory response is characterized by the significant upregulation of chemokines. In experimental infections, interleukin-8 (IL-8) emerged as the most robustly induced chemokine, along with monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and macrophage inflammatory protein-1β (MIP-1β), suggesting these molecules may serve as reliable biomarkers for predicting BCoV infection and are central to the recruitment of neutrophils and monocytes to sites of viral replication [33]. Transcriptomic analyses of co-infections, such as BCoV with Cryptosporidium parvum, reveal that over 6000 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) are modulated at 72 hours post-infection, with the virus dominating the host transcriptional landscape and activating pathways such as NF-κB, TNF-α, and IL-17 [35].

Humoral Immune Response: The Antibody Arsenal

The humoral immune response constitutes the primary adaptive defense against BCoV, with antibodies targeting multiple viral structural proteins. The spike (S) glycoprotein, responsible for receptor binding and membrane fusion, is a major target for virus-neutralizing (VN) antibodies. Similarly, the hemagglutinin-esterase (HE) protein, a secondary receptor-binding protein, elicits antibodies that can inhibit viral attachment and esterase activity. The nucleocapsid (N) protein, while internal, is highly immunogenic and serves as an excellent antigen for serological diagnostic assays, such as the indirect ELISA based on recombinant N protein expressed in CHO cells, which demonstrates high specificity (no cross-reactivity with BVDV, BRSV, or BHV-1) and concordance with commercial kits [2]. Naturally acquired antibodies following infection are long-lasting; neutralizing antibody titers can persist for at least eight weeks post-infection, with high titers correlating with protection from reinfection [69].

The critical importance of humoral immunity, particularly maternally derived antibodies (MDA), is unequivocal. Calves are born agammaglobulinemic and rely entirely on the ingestion of high-quality colostrum within the first 12-24 hours of life to acquire passive systemic immunity. Colostral antibodies, predominantly of the IgG1 isotype, provide the primary protection against BCoV diarrhea. A seminal field study in Argentina demonstrated that calves with high levels of BCoV-specific IgG1 antibodies in their serum (≥1:1024) following colostrum intake were largely protected from infection, whereas those with low antibody titers (<1:1024) were significantly more likely to become infected and seroconvert [64]. Failure of passive transfer (FPT) is a major risk factor; calves in the FPT group showed a seroconversion rate of 71% compared to 29.4% in calves with acceptable passive transfer, highlighting that adequate colostral immunity is the cornerstone of BCoV prevention in neonates [64].

However, the relationship between MDA and active immunization is complex. The presence of high titers of MDA can interfere with the replication of live attenuated vaccines and the subsequent development of an active immune response. This interference is a central challenge in vaccinating young calves. In a large European field study, dry cow vaccination against BCoV significantly reduced shedding in neonatal calves, a direct benefit of elevated MDA. Paradoxically, the same study found that dry cow vaccination was linked to increased BCoV shedding in weaned calves, a phenomenon potentially attributable to the waning of MDA creating a window of increased susceptibility or to delayed development of active immunity in calves that were not challenged early in life [51].

Vaccination Strategies: A Multifaceted Approach

The goal of BCoV vaccination is to reduce clinical disease, limit viral shedding, and ultimately decrease the economic impact of neonatal calf diarrhea, winter dysentery, and bovine respiratory disease. Several vaccine platforms are employed, each with distinct advantages and limitations.

Modified-Live Vaccines (MLVs): MLVs aim to induce a robust, balanced immune response mimicking natural infection without causing severe disease. A promising candidate is the KBR-1-p120 strain, developed from a Korean GIIa field isolate by serial passaging (120 passages) in cell culture. This process resulted in 13 amino acid mutations in the spike gene and a stable attenuation phenotype. Calves inoculated with KBR-1-p120 exhibited no diarrhea, minimal viral shedding, and no reversion to virulence upon serial back-passage, demonstrating its potential as a safe and effective live vaccine candidate for the currently circulating GIIa strains [6]. Furthermore, a commercially available intranasal live-attenuated BCoV vaccine has been shown to be safe and immunogenic when administered to calves on the day of birth, with significant reductions in viral load in both nasal and rectal swabs post-challenge, offering a critical tool for early-life protection [68].

Inactivated (Killed) Vaccines: Whole-virus inactivated vaccines provide a safer alternative, particularly for use in pregnant dams. The inactivated KBR-1 strain, when formulated with a potent adjuvant like Montanide ISA 61, generated high antibody titers in mice and goats [14]. In calves, a high-dose inactivated vaccine (10^6.0 TCID₅₀/mL) prevented the detection of viral antigen in intestinal tissues post-challenge, whereas a lower dose (10^4.0 TCID₅₀/mL) did not, underscoring the importance of antigenic mass and adjuvant selection [14]. A significant drawback of many current inactivated vaccines, however, is their antigenic mismatch with circulating field strains. Phylogenetic analyses consistently show that contemporary BCoV strains, particularly in Asia and South America, belong to the GIIa or GIIb subgroups, whereas many commercial vaccines are derived from the classic GI Mebus strain, potentially limiting their efficacy [6, 14, 47].

Novel and Recombinant Vaccine Platforms: To overcome the limitations of traditional vaccines, innovative strategies are being explored.

• Adenovirus-Vectored Vaccines: A pilot study in sheep evaluated a recombinant adenovirus (AdV) vector expressing the BCoV S and M proteins. The combination vaccine (AdV-BCoV-S+M) induced significantly higher serum neutralizing antibody titers (1:90 at 28 days) compared to vaccines expressing either S or M alone, demonstrating the synergistic immunogenicity of these glycoproteins and the promise of vectored platforms for inducing strong humoral responses [83].

• Multi-Epitope Vaccines (MEVs): Immunoinformatics approaches have been leveraged to design in silico MEVs targeting the S and N proteins. Conserved T-cell epitopes (e.g., from S and HE proteins) with high antigenicity and strong predicted binding to bovine BoLA alleles, alongside B-cell epitopes from the S glycoprotein, have been identified [84, 85]. One computationally designed MEV, incorporating these epitopes with linkers and adjuvants, was shown to be stable, highly immunogenic, and to dock stably with the bovine TLR4 receptor, paving the way for future in vitro and in vivo testing [85].

• Passive Immunization (IgY Technology): An elegant alternative to active vaccination is the oral administration of specific antibodies. Hyperimmunization of laying hens with BCoV produces large quantities of specific IgY antibodies in egg yolk. A spray-dried egg powder enriched with anti-BCoV IgY, manufactured at scale, demonstrated potent virus-neutralizing activity (correlation with ELISA, R²=0.92). In a pilot efficacy trial, colostrum-deprived calves treated with milk supplemented with this IgY powder showed a significant delay and reduction in the duration of both BCoV-associated diarrhea and viral shedding after challenge, providing a proof-of-concept for this passive immune strategy [86].

Interference, Cross-Protection, and the Path Forward

The concept of vaccine interference due to co-circulating pathogens is a genuine concern. A natural case of BCoV in a calf persistently infected with BVDV revealed prolonged viral shedding (up to three weeks) and the emergence of S gene mutations, suggesting that BVDV-induced immunosuppression may alter BCoV pathogenesis and evolution [69]. Furthermore, sequential infection with BVDV followed by BCoV resulted in the most severe respiratory lesions, highlighting that vaccination strategies must consider the broader respiratory disease complex [38].

The close antigenic relationship between BCoV and other betacoronaviruses, including human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43) and equine coronavirus (ECoV), opens intriguing possibilities. BCoV spike protein can induce cross-reactive T-cell responses capable of killing cells expressing spike protein from multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants, even in the absence of neutralizing antibodies [5]. This has led to the hypothesis that BCoV immune milk could be used as a passive therapy against COVID-19, leveraging conserved epitopes on the M and S2 proteins [20]. Similarly, horses inoculated with a modified-live BCoV vaccine developed neutralizing antibodies against ECoV, presenting a potential off-label strategy for protecting horses until a species-specific vaccine is developed [29, 81].

Future vaccination strategies must prioritize the matching of vaccine strains to locally circulating genotypes, such as the emerging GIIa/GIIb clusters and variants with HE gene insertions or deletions that may alter receptor binding and tropism [1, 12, 14]. The development of vaccines that can be administered at birth without MDA interference, the use of novel adjuvants, and the integration of vaccination with rigorous biosecurity measures (as championed by the Norwegian control program, which eschews vaccination in favor of strict biosecurity to maintain disease-free herds) will be key to sustainably managing this pervasive pathogen [51, 60].

Control and Prevention of Bovine Coronavirus Infections

The control and prevention of bovine coronavirus (BCoV) infections necessitate a comprehensive, multi-layered strategy that integrates vaccination, rigorous biosecurity protocols, environmental decontamination, and strategic diagnostic surveillance. Given the virus's endemic nature, its capacity to cause both enteric and respiratory disease across all age groups, and the substantial economic losses it inflicts on the global cattle industry, a purely reactive approach is inadequate. The pathogen's ability to persist in the environment, transmit via fomites, and potentially cross species barriers underscores the need for proactive and scientifically grounded management practices [9, 50, 62]. The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) recognizes BCoV as a significant pathogen contributing to the bovine respiratory disease complex (BRDC) and neonatal calf diarrhea, highlighting the importance of implementing internationally sound control measures. Effective control hinges on breaking the cycle of transmission, enhancing herd immunity, and minimizing the impact of clinical disease.

Vaccination Strategies: Enhancing Herd Immunity and Reducing Transmission

Vaccination remains a cornerstone of BCoV control, but its application is nuanced and must be tailored to the specific epidemiological context of the herd. The primary goals are to protect neonatal calves through maternal immunity and to reduce viral shedding from older animals, thereby decreasing environmental contamination.

Modified-Live and Inactivated Vaccines: Efficacy and Application

Several vaccine platforms exist, including modified-live virus (MLV) and inactivated (killed) vaccines. The development and selection of appropriate vaccine strains are critical, as significant genetic and antigenic diversity exists among circulating BCoV strains. For instance, phylogenetic analyses have demonstrated that many contemporary field strains in South Korea, China, and the United States belong to the GIIa subgroup, which is genetically distinct from the older GI-type vaccine strains (e.g., the Mebus strain) [3, 6, 14]. This genetic drift can potentially lead to vaccine failure if the vaccine strain does not adequately protect against circulating variants.

Research has demonstrated the potential of live-attenuated vaccines developed from contemporary strains. A prime example is the KBR-1-p120 strain, derived from a GIIa isolate that was serially passaged 120 times to achieve attenuation. When administered orally to colostrum-deprived calves, this candidate vaccine induced minimal viral shedding and no diarrhea, yet it was able to replicate sufficiently to induce an immune response. Crucially, reversion to virulence was not observed after passaging in calves, indicating a favorable safety profile [6]. This highlights a key principle: effective MLV vaccines must balance attenuation with immunogenicity. The use of an inactivated KBR-1 strain, when formulated with an appropriate adjuvant like Montanide, has also shown promise, demonstrating the ability to prevent viral antigen detection in the intestines of challenged calves at higher vaccine doses [14].

The route of administration is another critical variable. Intranasal vaccination is particularly advantageous for inducing local mucosal immunity in the respiratory tract, which is the primary portal of entry for many BCoV infections. A live-attenuated BCoV vaccine was found to be safe and immunogenic when administered intranasally to calves on the very day of birth, which is a critical window for protection against early-life infections. Although the study did not show a statistically significant reduction in clinical signs after challenge, the vaccinated group exhibited significantly lower viral loads in both nasal and rectal swabs, a key indicator of reduced transmission potential [68].

Maternal Vaccination and the Importance of Passive Immunity

The cornerstone of protecting neonatal calves is the adequate transfer of colostral antibodies. Dams should be vaccinated during the dry period, typically 3-8 weeks before parturition, to boost the concentration of BCoV-specific immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) in the colostrum. This strategy is profoundly effective. Calves born to vaccinated dams had a significantly lower detection rate of BCoV (3.3%) compared to those from unvaccinated dams (12.2%) in a Uruguayan study, an odds ratio of 4.02 [47]. The mechanism is quantitative: calves with high titers of BCoV-specific IgG1 from colostrum (≥1024) are largely protected from infection, while those with low titers (<1024) are highly susceptible. Seroconversion in a large proportion of calves with low passive antibody levels confirms that they are actively infected despite the presence of some maternal immunity [64]. This underscores the critical importance of ensuring a successful passive transfer by feeding high-quality colostrum within the first 6-12 hours of life.

However, maternal antibodies are a double-edged sword. While they protect the calf, they can also interfere with the development of an active immune response to vaccination. This "maternal antibody interference" is a well-documented challenge. Interestingly, a large European field study found that dry cow vaccination reduced BCoV shedding in neonatal calves, which is a direct benefit. Paradoxically, the same study found an increase in shedding among weaned calves on farms that vaccinated dry cows. This counterintuitive finding may be due to the delayed exposure of calves to the virus in a cleaner environment, leaving them immunologically naïve and more susceptible as their maternal antibodies wane [51]. This illustrates that vaccination is just one component; it must be integrated with management to ensure that immunity is built at the right time.

Novel Vaccine Platforms and Alternative Immunization Approaches

Beyond traditional vaccines, innovative technologies are being explored to address the limitations of current products. Recombinant vector vaccines, such as those using adenoviruses expressing BCoV spike (S) and membrane (M) proteins, have shown promising immunogenicity in sheep. Co-delivery of S and M proteins elicited significantly higher serum neutralizing antibody titers (1:90) than either protein alone, suggesting a synergistic effect that could be exploited for both BCoV and potentially cross-protective immunity against other betacoronaviruses [83].

Given the high rate of failure of passive transfer and the delayed onset of active immunity, alternative passive immunization strategies have been developed. One particularly successful approach is the use of hyperimmune egg powder (Immunoglobulin Y, IgY). In a large-scale, well-controlled study, laying hens were immunized with BCoV, and the resulting spray-dried egg powder, enriched with specific IgY antibodies (titer of 512), was added to the milk of colostrum-deprived calves. This passive treatment resulted in a significant delay in the onset of diarrhea and a marked reduction in the duration and severity of clinical signs following a BCoV challenge. This strategy provides immediate, pathogen-specific protection at the gut level without interfering with the calf's own developing immune system, offering a powerful tool for managing high-risk neonates [86]. Furthermore, the use of BCoV immune milk has even been proposed as a potential control measure against COVID-19 due to cross-reactive epitopes, though this remains a theoretical application [20].

Biosecurity: The First Line of Defense Against Introduction and Spread

Biosecurity is arguably the most critical and often the most neglected component of BCoV control. The virus is efficiently transmitted via the fecal-oral and respiratory routes, and its ability to survive on fomites for extended periods makes external and internal biosecurity absolutely paramount [50, 62].

External Biosecurity: Preventing Viral Introduction

External biosecurity aims to prevent the introduction of BCoV into a naïve herd. The primary risk factors for introduction are the purchase of infected animals and indirect contact via contaminated fomites. The Norwegian BRSV/BCoV control program provides a successful, large-scale example of a population-based approach. This voluntary program, launched by the cattle industry, is based on classifying herds as free from infection based on antibody testing of bulk tank milk. Herds that test negative are then protected through strict external biosecurity barriers, including regulations on animal movement and trade, to prevent direct and indirect transmission. The program does not use vaccination but relies entirely on biosecurity to maintain disease-free status, demonstrating that this approach is viable even for endemic viruses. Mathematical modeling shows that the probability of a herd remaining free from BCoV is very high immediately after a negative test, but this probability declines over time, heavily influenced by the purchase of livestock from test-positive areas [60, 63].

The risk posed by contaminated fomites is substantial. A systematic review found that BCoV can remain infectious on environmental surfaces for up to 24 hours and be detected for up to 81 hours, depending on the surface material [50]. More specifically, high viral RNA loads were detected on 97% of fomites (clothes, boots, equipment) 24 hours after contact with infected calves, and infective virions were isolated from these surfaces [62]. Human nasal mucosa can also carry viral RNA for several hours after exposure, although infective virus was not detected, suggesting that personnel can act as mechanical vectors, but perhaps for a shorter duration than inanimate objects [62]. This highlights the absolute necessity for rigorous hygiene protocols: dedicated farm clothing and boots, disinfection of all equipment shared between groups, and strict protocols for visitors and personnel.

Internal Biosecurity: Reducing Within-Herd Amplification

Once BCoV enters a herd, internal biosecurity measures are crucial to limit its spread. The virus is shed in high concentrations in both feces and nasal secretions. In experimental infections, nasal shedding preceded fecal shedding regardless of the inoculation route, but fecal shedding persisted for a longer duration [33]. This implies that both respiratory and enteric routes contribute to the contamination of the environment and the infection of new hosts.

Several management practices are strongly associated with reduced or increased shedding. The European field study [51] identified several key factors:

• Calf Nutrition: Feeding transition milk and higher milk feeding levels were associated with reduced BCoV shedding in neonatal calves, likely reflecting improved overall health and gut integrity.
• Housing: Group housing was identified as a risk factor for increased shedding, likely due to increased contact and environmental contamination.
• Weaning: Older weaning age was associated with higher shedding rates, potentially because the stress of weaning triggers recrudescence of latent infections or increases susceptibility [51].

The physical layout of facilities is critical. A devastating outbreak in a dairy calf rearing unit in Brazil demonstrated how a centralized rearing system can act as an amplifier. The attack rate exceeded 50%, and the age range affected (5-90 days) was unusually broad. The infection spread with alarming speed, suggesting that the pooling of animals from multiple sources with varying immunological status into a common environment created a perfect storm for rapid viral dissemination. This serves as a stark warning that management systems designed for efficiency can also facilitate pathogen spread if not accompanied by robust biosecurity [74].

Additionally, wildlife can serve as a reservoir and a bridge for BCoV introduction. BCoV has been detected in non-captive wild water deer in Korea, which often approach farmhouses and livestock barns, and in greater kudu in Namibia [30, 43]. Furthermore, BCoV was identified in a Daurian ground squirrel in China, suggesting a spillover event from cattle to rodents. This expands the potential host range and highlights the complexity of maintaining biosecurity in environments where domestic livestock interact with wildlife [11, 30].

Environmental Decontamination: Inactivating the Virus in the Farm Environment

Given the virus's persistence, environmental decontamination is a non-negotiable component of an effective control program. Standard cleaning and disinfection protocols using approved virucidal agents against enveloped viruses are effective, but emerging technologies offer additional, innovative solutions. These methods are particularly valuable for high-traffic areas, equipment, and surfaces that are difficult to clean manually.

One highly innovative approach is photodynamic inactivation (PDI) using photosensitizers. Studies have shown that both toluidine blue O (TBO) and methylene blue (MB), when combined with visible light, can effectively reduce BCoV infectivity in vitro. TBO was particularly potent, with a half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) of 0.005 µM, and it achieved a complete elimination of the cytopathic effect at higher concentrations. The mechanism involves damage to the viral envelope and spike proteins, leading to loss of infectivity [13, 54]. Another study confirmed that MB, even without light, could reduce BCoV titers, suggesting a dual mechanism of action [13].

Another physical decontamination method is the use of radiofrequency (RF) irradiation. While early studies showed a modest reduction in BCoV infectivity (up to 77%) at specific frequencies in the 6-12 GHz range, the effect was not considered clinically significant [53]. However, a more recent study using a repetitively pulsed RF waveform at 5.6 GHz demonstrated a more substantial reduction (approximately 74%) in the infectivity of aerosolized BCoV. The authors suggested that a combination of thermal and non-thermal electric field effects was responsible [87]. This technology is still in its infancy but holds potential for decontaminating air and surfaces in enclosed spaces.

Photocatalytic materials represent another promising avenue. Titanium dioxide-based photocatalysts, activated by visible light, have demonstrated significant antiviral activity against BCoV, reducing viral loads by over 2.4 log TCID50, even under low light conditions [21]. Such materials could be applied as coatings on walls, floors, and equipment in calf housing and milking parlors to provide continuous, passive decontamination.

Diagnostic Surveillance and Monitoring for Targeted Control

Finally, effective control relies on accurate and timely diagnosis. The goal of surveillance is to detect the virus early, monitor the effectiveness of interventions, and identify animals that are actively shedding. The Norwegian program relies on herd-level antibody testing of bulk tank milk to classify herds as infected or free. This is a cost-effective method for population-level surveillance but does not provide real-time information on active shedding [60, 63].

For individual animal or group-level detection, rapid, sensitive, and specific diagnostic tools are essential. A variety of methods are available, each with trade-offs. While rapid immunochromatographic (ICG) kits offer the advantage of speed and simplicity for on-farm use, their sensitivity can be extremely low. One study found that while the ICG kit had 100% specificity for BCoV, its sensitivity was only 7.6% compared to RT-PCR, meaning it would miss over 90% of positive cases. In contrast, antigen-capture ELISA demonstrated much higher sensitivity (100%) and specificity (94.3%) [77, 80]. Therefore, while ICG kits can be useful for a quick initial screen, negative results should be confirmed by a more sensitive lab-based method, especially when clinical signs are suggestive.

For definitive diagnosis and research, nucleic acid-based tests are the gold standard. Real-time RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) is highly sensitive and quantitative. Novel isothermal amplification methods, such as multienzyme isothermal rapid amplification (MIRA) combined with a lateral flow dipstick (LFD), have been developed for rapid, on-site detection without the need for sophisticated thermocyclers. This assay, targeting the N gene, showed a nearly perfect agreement (κ = 0.982) with a conventional RT-qPCR assay, making it ideal for field deployment [45]. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) offers even greater sensitivity, capable of detecting single copies of the viral genome (detection limit of 1 copy/µL for BCoV) and allowing for absolute quantification. Multiplex ddPCR assays can simultaneously detect BCoV, bovine rotavirus, and bovine enterovirus with higher sensitivity than conventional qPCR, providing a more complete picture of the enteric pathogen load [75].

Furthermore, indirect ELISA tests for antibody detection, such as those based on the recombinant N protein, are valuable for serological surveys. This assay has proven to be specific, with no cross-reactivity to other common bovine viral pathogens (BHV-1, BVDV, BRSV), and offers a high concordance rate (94.83%) with commercial kits. Such tools are indispensable for understanding herd-level exposure and for herd classification in biosecurity-based control programs [2, 59].

References

[1] Zhao L, Wang D, Jiang H, Gu Q, Gao H, Zhang L, et al.. Isolation and characterization of bovine coronavirus variants with mutations in the hemagglutinin-esterase gene in dairy calves in China. BMC Veterinary Research. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04538-w

[2] Liu Q, Niu X, Jiang L, Zhang G, Wang P, Zhang S, et al.. Establishment of an indirect ELISA method for detecting bovine coronavirus antibodies based on N protein. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1530870

[3] Li S, Huang J, Cai X, Mao L, Xie L, Wang F, et al.. Prevalence and Evolutionary Characteristics of Bovine Coronavirus in China. Veterinary Sciences. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci11060230

[4] Yilmaz S, Aydin O, Tali HE, Karadağ G, Sonmez K, Bayraktar E, et al.. Brain invasion of bovine coronavirus: molecular analysis of bovine coronavirus infection in calves with severe pneumonia and neurological signs. Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4142/jvs.23261

[5] Cossu C, Franceschi V, Lorenzo AD, Bolli E, Minesso S, Cotti C, et al.. Cross-Reactive Immune Response of Bovine Coronavirus Spike Glycoprotein to SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms252111509

[6] Park G, Choe S, Song S, Kim K, Shin J, An B, et al.. Characterization and Spike Gene Analysis of a Candidate Attenuated Live Bovine Coronavirus Vaccine. Animals. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030389

[7] Ferrara G, Iovane V, Improda E, Iovane G, Pagnini U, Montagnaro S. Seroprevalence and Risk Factors for Bovine Coronavirus Infection among Dairy Cattle and Water Buffalo in Campania Region, Southern Italy. Animals. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13050772

[8] Zhu Q, Li B, Sun D. Advances in Bovine Coronavirus Epidemiology. Viruses. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v14051109

[9] Vlasova A, Saif L. Bovine Coronavirus and the Associated Diseases. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.643220

[10] Glotov A, Nefedchenko AV, Yuzhakov A, Koteneva S, Glotova T, Komina A, et al.. [Genetic diversity of Siberian bovine coronavirus isolates (Coronaviridae: Coronavirinae: Betacoronavirus-1: Bovine-Like coronaviruses)].. Voprosy virusologii. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36233/0507-4088-141

[11] Xu L, Liu W, Bie M, Hu T, Yan D, Xiao Z, et al.. Identification of bovine coronavirus in a Daurian ground squirrel expands the host range of Betacoronavirus 1. Virologica Sinica. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virs.2023.02.002

[12] Workman AM, McDaneld T, Harhay G, Das S, Loy JD, Hause B. Recent Emergence of Bovine Coronavirus Variants with Mutations in the Hemagglutinin-Esterase Receptor Binding Domain in U.S. Cattle. Viruses. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v14102125

[13] Zhukhovitsky V, Shevlyagina N, Zubasheva M, Russu LI, Gushchin V, Meerovich G, et al.. Infectivity and Morphology of Bovine Coronavirus Inactivated In Vitro by Cationic Photosensitizers. Viruses. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v14051053

[14] Shin J, Choe S, Park G, Song S, Kim K, An B, et al.. Isolation and Genetic Characterization of a Bovine Coronavirus KBR-1 Strain from Calf Feces in South Korea. Viruses. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v14112376

[15] Kim E, Cho H, Shin S, Park J, Choi K. Prevalence and genetic characterization of bovine coronavirus identified from diarrheic pre-weaned native Korean calves from 2019 to 2021.. Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2022.105263

[16] . bovine coronavirus infection. CABI Compendium. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.91704

[17] Xiangbo Z, Zhaofang Y, Jinjing G, Zhuandi G, Suocheng W. Bovine coronavirus nucleocapsid suppresses IFN-β production by inhibiting RIG-I-like receptors pathway in host cells. Archives of Microbiology. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-022-03149-5

[18] Zhu Q, Su M, Li Z, Wang X, Qi S, Zhao F, et al.. Epidemiological survey and genetic diversity of bovine coronavirus in Northeast China.. Virus Research. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2021.198632

[19] Szczepański A, Owczarek K, Bzowska M, Gula K, Drebot I, Ochman M, et al.. Canine Respiratory Coronavirus, Bovine Coronavirus, and Human Coronavirus OC43: Receptors and Attachment Factors. Viruses. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v11040328

[20] Arenas A, Borge C, Carbonero A, García‐Bocanegra I, Cano‐Terriza D, Caballero J, et al.. Bovine Coronavirus Immune Milk Against COVID-19. Frontiers in Immunology. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.637152

[21] Yoshizawa N, Ishihara R, Omiya D, Ishitsuka MO, Hirano S, Suzuki T. Application of a Photocatalyst as an Inactivator of Bovine Coronavirus. Viruses. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v12121372

[22] Virant MJ, Černe D, Petrovec M, Paller T, Toplak I. Genetic Characterisation and Comparison of Three Human Coronaviruses (HKU1, OC43, 229E) from Patients and Bovine Coronavirus (BCoV) from Cattle with Respiratory Disease in Slovenia. Viruses. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v13040676

[23] Burimuah V, Sylverken A, Owusu M, El-Duah P, Yeboah R, Lamptey J, et al.. Molecular-based cross-species evaluation of bovine coronavirus infection in cattle, sheep and goats in Ghana. BMC Veterinary Research. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-020-02606-x

[24] Franzo G, Drigo M, Legnardi M, Grassi L, Pasotto D, Menandro ML, et al.. Bovine Coronavirus: Variability, Evolution, and Dispersal Patterns of a No Longer Neglected Betacoronavirus. Viruses. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v12111285

[25] Keha A, Xue L, Yan S, Yue H, Tang C. Prevalence of a novel bovine coronavirus strain with a recombinant hemagglutinin/esterase gene in dairy calves in China. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13228

[26] Abi K, Zhang Q, Zhang B, Zhou L, Yue H, Tang C. An emerging novel bovine coronavirus with a 4-amino-acid insertion in the receptor-binding domain of the hemagglutinin-esterase gene. Archives of Virology. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-020-04840-y

[27] He Q, Guo Z, Zhang B, Yue H, Tang C. First detection of bovine coronavirus in Yak (Bos grunniens) and a bovine coronavirus genome with a recombinant HE gene. Journal of General Virology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1099/jgv.0.001254

[28] Shin J, Tark D, Le V, Choe S, Cha R, Park G, et al.. Genetic characterization of bovine coronavirus in Vietnam. Virus genes. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11262-019-01647-1

[29] Prutton J, Barnum S, Pusterla N. Evaluation of safety, humoral immune response and faecal shedding in horses inoculated with a modified‐live bovine coronavirus vaccination. Equine Veterinary Education. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eve.13175

[30] Kim JH, Jang J, Yoon S, Noh JY, Noh JY, Ahn M, et al.. Detection of bovine coronavirus in nasal swab of non‐captive wild water deer, Korea. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.12847

[31] Castells M, Victoria M, Colina R, Musto H, Cristina J. Genome-wide analysis of codon usage bias in Bovine Coronavirus. Virology Journal. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-017-0780-y

[32] Sorbo LD, Acconcia C, Salvatore M, Fusco G, Vasinioti V, Lucente M, et al.. Insight into the Role of the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor in Bovine Coronavirus Infection by an Integrated Approach Combining In Vitro and In Silico Methods. Microorganisms. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms13030579

[33] Cho H, Kim Y, Cho Y, Park J, Choi K. Evaluation of bovine coronavirus in Korean native calves challenged through different inoculation routes. Veterinary Research. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13567-024-01331-9

[34] Li Y, Palomares RA, Liu M, Xu J, Koo C, Granberry F, et al.. Isolation and Characterization of Contemporary Bovine Coronavirus Strains. Viruses. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v16060965

[35] Jiménez-Meléndez A, Shakya R, Markussen T, Robertson LJ, Myrmel M, Makvandi-Nejad S. Gene expression profile of HCT-8 cells following single or co-infections with Cryptosporidium parvum and bovine coronavirus. Scientific Reports. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49488-1

[36] McDaneld T, Workman AM, Chitko-McKown C, Kuehn L, Dickey A, Bennett GL. Detection of Mycoplasma bovirhinis and bovine coronavirus in an outbreak of bovine respiratory disease in nursing beef calves. Frontiers in Microbiomes. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frmbi.2022.1051241

[37] Chae J, Park J, Jung S, Kang J, Chae J, Choi K. Acute phase response in bovine coronavirus positive post-weaned calves with diarrhea. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13028-019-0471-3

[38] Ridpath J, Fulton R, Bauermann FV, Falkenberg S, Welch J, Confer A. Sequential exposure to bovine viral diarrhea virus and bovine coronavirus results in increased respiratory disease lesions: clinical, immunologic, pathologic, and immunohistochemical findings. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638720918561

[39] Morenikeji O, Strutton E, Wallace M, Bernard K, Yip E, Thomas B. Dissecting Transcription Factor-Target Interaction in Bovine Coronavirus Infection. Microorganisms. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8091323

[40] Morenikeji O, Wallace M, Strutton E, Bernard K, Yip E, Thomas B. Integrative Network Analysis of Predicted miRNA-Targets Regulating Expression of Immune Response Genes in Bovine Coronavirus Infection. Frontiers in Genetics. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.584392

[41] Kanno T, Ishihara R, Hatama S, Uchida I. A long-term animal experiment indicating persistent infection of bovine coronavirus in cattle. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.18-0050

[42] Perfilyeva Y, Zhigailov A, Malysheva A, Cherusheva AS, Ivanova KR, Berdygulova Z, et al.. Occurrence and Epidemiology of Bovine Coronavirus in Cattle in Kazakhstan.. The Veterinary Journal. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2025.106371

[43] Molini U, Coetzee L, Hemberger M, Jago M, Khaiseb S, Shapwa K, et al.. Bovine coronavirus presence in domestic bovine and antelopes sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from Namibia. BMC Veterinary Research. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04625-y

[44] Redda YT, Adamu H, Bergholm J, Lindahl JF, Blomström A, Berg M, et al.. Detection and characterization of bovine coronavirus and rotavirus in calves in Ethiopia. BMC Veterinary Research. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04563-9

[45] Ji C, Feng Y, Sun R, Gu Q, Zhang Y, Ma J, et al.. Development of a multienzyme isothermal rapid amplification and lateral flow dipstick combination assay for bovine coronavirus detection. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.1059934

[46] Frucchi APS, Agnol AMD, Bronkhorst D, Beuttemmuller EA, Alfieri A, Alfieri A. Bovine Coronavirus Co-infection and Molecular Characterization in Dairy Calves With or Without Clinical Respiratory Disease. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.895492

[47] Castells M, Giannitti F, Caffarena RD, Casaux ML, Schild C, Castells D, et al.. Bovine coronavirus in Uruguay: genetic diversity, risk factors and transboundary introductions from neighboring countries. Archives of Virology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-019-04384-w

[48] Workman AM, Kuehn L, McDaneld T, Clawson M, Loy JD. Longitudinal study of humoral immunity to bovine coronavirus, virus shedding, and treatment for bovine respiratory disease in pre-weaned beef calves. BMC Veterinary Research. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1887-8

[49] Geng J, Gong Z, Li Q, Shen X, Wei S. Specific Detection of Bovine Coronavirus N Protein with TaqMan Probe qRT-PCR. Acta Scientiae Veterinariae. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22456/1679-9216.97156

[50] Furlan CRC, Weber SH, Sanches G, Agnol AMD, Ollhoff RD, Sotomaior C. A systematic review of the presence of bovine coronavirus on environmental surfaces. Ciência Rural. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20240104

[51] Berge AC, Vertenten G. Bovine Coronavirus Prevalence and Risk Factors in Calves on Dairy Farms in Europe. Animals. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14182744

[52] Geng H, Meng X, Yan W, Li X, Jiang J, Ni H, et al.. Prevalence of bovine coronavirus in cattle in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis.. Microbial Pathogenesis. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2023.106009

[53] Cantu JC, Butterworth JW, Mylacraine KS, Ibey B, Gamboa BM, Johnson L, et al.. Evaluation of inactivation of bovine coronavirus by low-level radiofrequency irradiation. Scientific Reports. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36887-7

[54] Zaharieva M, Foka P, Karamichali E, Kroumov A, Philipov S, Ilieva Y, et al.. Photodynamic Inactivation of Bovine Coronavirus with the Photosensitizer Toluidine Blue O. Viruses. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v16010048

[55] Rahe MC, Magstadt DR, Groeltz-Thrush J, Gauger P, Zhang J, Schwartz K, et al.. Bovine coronavirus in the lower respiratory tract of cattle with respiratory disease. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10406387221078583

[56] Soules K, Rahe MC, Purtle L, Moeckly C, Stark P, Samson C, et al.. Bovine Coronavirus Infects the Respiratory Tract of Cattle Challenged Intranasally. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.878240

[57] Socha W, Larska M, Rola J, Bednarek D. Occurrence of Bovine Coronavirus and other Major Respiratory Viruses in Cattle in Poland. Journal of Veterinary Research. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jvetres-2022-0059

[58] Watanabe M, Ohnishi T, Arai S, Kawakami T, Hayashi K, Ohya K, et al.. Survival of SARS-CoV-2 and bovine coronavirus on common surfaces of living environments. Scientific Reports. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14552-9

[59] Ven S, Arunvipas P, Lertwatcharasarakul P, Ratanapob N. Seroprevalence of bovine coronavirus and factors associated with the serological status in dairy cattle in the western region of Thailand. Veterinary World. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2021.2041-2047

[60] Stokstad M, Klem T, Myrmel M, Oma V, Toftaker I, Østerås O, et al.. Using Biosecurity Measures to Combat Respiratory Disease in Cattle: The Norwegian Control Program for Bovine Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Bovine Coronavirus. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00167

[61] Burimuah V, Sylverken A, Owusu M, El-Duah P, Yeboah R, Lamptey J, et al.. Sero-prevalence, cross-species infection and serological determinants of prevalence of Bovine Coronavirus in Cattle, Sheep and Goats in Ghana. Veterinary Microbiology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2019.108544

[62] Oma V, Klem T, Tråvén M, Alenius S, Gjerset B, Myrmel M, et al.. Temporary carriage of bovine coronavirus and bovine respiratory syncytial virus by fomites and human nasal mucosa after exposure to infected calves. BMC Veterinary Research. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-018-1335-1

[63] Toftaker I, Ågren E, Stokstad M, Nødtvedt A, Frössling J. Herd level estimation of probability of disease freedom applied on the Norwegian control program for bovine respiratory syncytial virus and bovine coronavirus. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.07.002

[64] Bok M, Alassia M, Frank F, Vega C, Wigdorovitz A, Parreño V. Passive immunity to control Bovine coronavirus diarrhea in a dairy herd in Argentina. Revista Argentina de Microbiología. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ram.2017.03.007

[65] Kostanić V, Kunić V, Šimac MP, Lolić M, Sukalić T, Brnić D. Comparative Insights into Acute Gastroenteritis in Cattle Caused by Bovine Rotavirus A and Bovine Coronavirus. Veterinary Sciences. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci11120671

[66] Shakya R, Jiménez-Meléndez A, Robertson L, Myrmel M. Bovine Enteroids as an In Vitro Model for Infection with Bovine Coronavirus. Viruses. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v15030635

[67] Brunauer M, Roch F, Conrady B. Prevalence of Worldwide Neonatal Calf Diarrhoea Caused by Bovine Rotavirus in Combination with Bovine Coronavirus, Escherichia coli K99 and Cryptosporidium spp.: A Meta-Analysis. Animals. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11041014

[68] Rooij MHv, Schmitz M, Meessen JM, Wouters PAWM, Vrijenhoek M, Makoschey B. Vaccination of calves at day of birth with attenuated vaccines against bovine respiratory syncytial virus, bovine parainfluenza type 3 virus and respiratory bovine coronavirus. Veterinary Vaccine. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetvac.2023.100014

[69] Pratelli A, Lucente M, Cordisco M, Ciccarelli S, Fonte RD, Sposato A, et al.. Natural Bovine Coronavirus Infection in a Calf Persistently Infected with Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus: Viral Shedding, Immunological Features and S Gene Variations. Animals. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11123350

[70] David D, Storm N, Ilan W, Sol A. Characterization of Winter Dysentery Bovine Coronavirus Isolated from Cattle in Israel. Viruses. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v13061070

[71] Nakagawa K, Kumano H, Kitamura Y, Kuwata K, Tanaka E, Fukushi H. Complete Genome Sequence of Bovine Coronavirus in Blood Diarrhea from Adult Cattle That Died from Winter Dysentery in Japan. Microbiology Resource Announcements. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/MRA.00807-21

[72] Amoroso M, Lucifora G, Uberti BĎ, Serra F, Luca Gd, Borriello G, et al.. Fatal Interstitial Pneumonia Associated with Bovine Coronavirus in Cows from Southern Italy. Viruses. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v12111331

[73] Gomez DE, Arroyo LG, Poljak Z, Viel L, Weese J. Detection of Bovine Coronavirus in Healthy and Diarrheic Dairy Calves. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.14811

[74] Alfieri A, Ribeiro J, Balbo LdC, Lorenzetti E, Alfieri A. Dairy calf rearing unit and infectious diseases: diarrhea outbreak by bovine coronavirus as a model for the dispersion of pathogenic microorganisms. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-018-1592-9

[75] Chen J, Li D, Xu Y, Li Z, Ma S, Liu X, et al.. Establishment and application of multiplex droplet digital polymerase chain reaction assay for bovine enterovirus, bovine coronavirus, and bovine rotavirus. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1157900

[76] Dhufaigh KN, McCabe M, Cormican P, Cuevas-Gómez I, McGee M, McDaneld T, et al.. Genome Sequence of Bovine Coronavirus Variants from the Nasal Virome of Irish Beef Suckler and Pre-weaned Dairy Calves Clinically Diagnosed with Bovine Respiratory Disease. Microbiology Resource Announcements. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/mra.00821-22

[77] Hamedian-Asl M, Zakian A, Azimpour S, Davoodi F, Kahroba H. Evaluation of diagnostic methods for the Detection of Bovine Coronavirus and Rotavirus in feces of diarrheic calves. Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/jhvms.23704

[78] Temizkan SS, Alkan F. Bovine coronavirus infections in Turkey: molecular analysis of the full-length spike gene sequences of viruses from digestive and respiratory infections. Archives of Virology. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-021-05147-2

[79] Geng J, Niu Y, Wei L, Li Q, Gong Z, Wei S. Triplex qRT-PCR with specific probe for synchronously detecting Bovine parvovirus, bovine coronavirus, bovine parainfluenza virus and its applications.. Polish journal of veterinary sciences. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24425/pjvs.2020.134696

[80] Sakli GU, Bulut O, Hasöksüz M, Hadimli HH. Investigation of bovine coronavirus and bovine rotavirus by rapid diagnosis kit and RT-PCR in diarrheic calf feces. Journal of Istanbul Veterinary Sciences. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30704/http-www-jivs-net.601639

[81] Nemoto M, Kanno T, Bannai H, Tsujimura K, Yamanaka T, Kokado H. Antibody response to equine coronavirus in horses inoculated with a bovine coronavirus vaccine. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.17-0414

[82] Toftaker I, Toft N, Stokstad M, Sølverød L, Harkiss G, Watt N, et al.. Evaluation of a multiplex immunoassay for bovine respiratory syncytial virus and bovine coronavirus antibodies in bulk tank milk against two indirect ELISAs using latent class analysis. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.03.008

[83] Pratelli A, Capozza P, Minesso S, Lucente M, Pellegrini F, Tempesta M, et al.. Humoral Immune Response in Immunized Sheep with Bovine Coronavirus Glycoproteins Delivered via an Adenoviral Vector. Pathogens. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens13070523

[84] Awadelkareem EA, Hamdoun S. Insilco vaccine design of spike and hemagglutinin esterase proteins of bovine coronavirus. Translational Medicine Communications. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41231-024-00190-y

[85] Rani S, Khatoon M, Hiremath JB, Suresh KP, Anandakumar J, Barman NN, et al.. Decoding bovine coronavirus immune targets: an epitope informatics approach. Animal Diseases. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s44149-024-00118-x

[86] Bok M, Vega C, Castells M, Colina R, Wigdorovitz A, Parreño V. Development of an IgY-Based Treatment to Control Bovine Coronavirus Diarrhea in Dairy Calves. Viruses. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v15030708

[87] Hoff B, Cohick Z, Tilley B, Luginsland J, Revelli D, Cox J, et al.. Observed Reductions in the Infectivity of Bioaerosols Containing Bovine Coronavirus Under Repetitively Pulsed RF Exposure. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2022.3199333