Swine Influenza A Virus

Overview and Taxonomy of Swine Influenza A Virus

Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) represents one of the most complex and economically significant viral pathogens affecting global swine production, while simultaneously posing a persistent and formidable threat to public health through its well-documented zoonotic potential. The virus is a member of the family Orthomyxoviridae, genus Influenzavirus A, and is characterized by a negative-sense, single-stranded, segmented RNA genome comprising eight distinct gene segments [3, 13, 26]. This segmented architecture is the fundamental biological mechanism underpinning the virus’s remarkable capacity for genetic diversification, most notably through the process of reassortment, wherein co-infection of a single cell by two or more distinct influenza A viruses can generate progeny viruses with novel gene constellations [4, 22, 30]. The taxonomy of IAV-S is not static; rather, it is a dynamic and evolving framework that reflects the intricate interplay of viral evolution, host adaptation, and interspecies transmission events that have shaped the virus’s global landscape.

At the most fundamental taxonomic level, influenza A viruses are classified based on the antigenic properties of their two major surface glycoproteins: hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA). To date, 18 distinct HA subtypes (H1–H18) and 11 NA subtypes (N1–N11) have been identified in nature, though only a subset, specifically H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2, have become established and are enzootic in global swine populations [6, 10, 13]. This limited subtype diversity, however, belies an extraordinary level of genetic and antigenic heterogeneity within each subtype, driven by the continuous accumulation of point mutations (antigenic drift) and the periodic introduction of entirely new gene segments from other host species (antigenic shift) [2, 6, 14]. The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) recognize the global significance of IAV-S, and the World Health Organization (WHO) includes swine influenza viruses in its pandemic risk assessment frameworks, underscoring the virus’s status as a pathogen of critical importance at the human-animal interface.

The evolutionary history of IAV-S is a testament to the virus’s ability to traverse species barriers. The first isolation of a swine influenza virus occurred in 1930, shortly after the devastating 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, and the virus was identified as a classical swine H1N1 lineage that likely descended directly from the pandemic strain [13, 17]. For decades, this classical H1N1 lineage remained the dominant, and often sole, IAV-S subtype circulating in North American swine. However, the ecological landscape of IAV-S underwent a dramatic transformation in the late 1990s. In 1998, a novel triple-reassortant H3N2 virus emerged in the United States swine population, containing gene segments from human (HA, NA, and PB1), classical swine (NP, M, and NS), and avian (PA and PB2) influenza viruses [6, 18]. This event marked a pivotal shift in IAV-S evolution, as the triple-reassortant internal gene (TRIG) cassette proved to be highly permissive for further reassortment, facilitating the emergence of a diverse array of H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 genotypes that rapidly supplanted the classical H1N1 lineage in North America [6, 14, 24].

Concurrently, a distinct evolutionary trajectory was unfolding in Europe and Asia. European swine populations harbor enzootic lineages that include an avian-like H1N1 virus (Eurasian avian-like, or EA H1N1), which was introduced from wild waterfowl in the late 1970s, as well as human-like H1N2 and H3N2 viruses that resulted from reverse zoonotic spillovers of seasonal human influenza strains [6, 11, 15]. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic (pH1N1) virus, a quadruple-reassortant with gene segments derived from North American classical swine, Eurasian avian-like swine, and human seasonal influenza viruses, was a watershed event that fundamentally reshaped the global IAV-S taxonomy [17, 27, 30]. Following its emergence in humans, the pH1N1 virus was repeatedly transmitted back into swine populations worldwide, a phenomenon known as reverse zoonosis, where it reassorted extensively with existing enzootic lineages, generating a vast and expanding repertoire of novel genotypes [9, 16, 23, 28]. This has led to the contemporary situation where the genetic and antigenic diversity of IAV-S is greater than at any point in history, with multiple lineages and sub-lineages co-circulating within and across geographic regions [6, 12, 19].

The biological basis for the pig’s central role in influenza A virus ecology and evolution lies in the unique molecular architecture of its respiratory tract. For decades, the pig has been described as a “mixing vessel” for influenza viruses, a concept predicated on the presence of both avian-type (α-2,3-linked sialic acid) and human-type (α-2,6-linked sialic acid) viral receptors on the epithelial cells of the swine respiratory tract [3, 4, 26]. This dual receptor distribution theoretically allows pigs to be infected simultaneously by avian-adapted and mammalian-adapted influenza viruses, providing a cellular environment conducive to genetic reassortment. More recent research has refined this understanding, demonstrating that the distribution of these receptors is not uniform throughout the respiratory tract. The upper respiratory tract (nasal passages, trachea, bronchi) is dominated by α-2,6-linked sialic acid receptors, while α-2,3-linked receptors are more prevalent in the lower respiratory tract, particularly in bronchioles and alveolar type II epithelial cells [29]. This differential distribution has profound implications for viral tropism and reassortment dynamics. Experimental co-infection studies have demonstrated that genetic reassortment between avian and swine influenza viruses occurs preferentially in the lower respiratory tract, where both receptor types are present, and that tissue tropism is a critical selective force in the emergence of transmissible reassortant viruses [4].

Furthermore, the molecular basis for the pig’s unique susceptibility to avian influenza viruses has been elucidated at the level of host factor biology. The acidic nuclear phosphoprotein 32 family member A (ANP32A) is a host protein that acts as a critical cofactor for the influenza virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase complex. Swine ANP32A possesses a unique structural feature, specifically, a valine at amino acid position 106 and a serine at position 156, that allows it to bind with significantly higher affinity to avian influenza virus polymerases compared to the human ANP32A protein [20, 21]. This enhanced binding activity enables avian influenza viruses to replicate more efficiently in swine cells than in human cells, providing a molecular explanation for the pig’s role as an intermediate host that can facilitate the adaptation of avian viruses to mammalian hosts [20, 21]. This species-specific host factor interaction is a critical, yet often underappreciated, component of IAV-S taxonomy and ecology, as it directly influences the types of viruses that can successfully infect and become established in swine populations.

The modern taxonomic classification of IAV-S is therefore a multi-layered system that integrates subtype designation, phylogenetic lineage assignment, and genotypic characterization. For the HA gene, which is the primary target of neutralizing antibodies and the principal determinant of antigenic phenotype, a standardized nomenclature system has been developed to track the evolutionary relationships among circulating viruses. In North America, the H1 subtype is classified into multiple clades, including the classical swine H1 (1A), the human seasonal-like H1 (1B), and the pandemic H1 (1A.3.3.2), each of which contains numerous sub-clades that reflect ongoing antigenic drift [6, 7, 24]. Similarly, the H3 subtype in North American swine has evolved into distinct clades (e.g., cluster I, cluster IV, and the more recent 2010.1 clade), each with unique antigenic properties and vaccine relevance [6, 25]. In Europe, the classification system recognizes the Eurasian avian-like H1 (1C) lineage, the human-like H1 (1B) lineage, and the pandemic H1 (1A.3.3.2) lineage, with extensive reassortment among these lineages generating a complex mosaic of genotypes [11, 16, 19]. The NA gene also exhibits significant diversity, with N1 and N2 subtypes each comprising multiple phylogenetic lineages that have been introduced from human or avian sources at different points in time [6, 7, 24].

The epidemiological significance of this taxonomic complexity cannot be overstated. The continuous emergence of novel reassortant viruses, many of which possess gene segments from human seasonal influenza viruses, avian influenza viruses, and established swine lineages, creates a situation where the antigenic makeup of circulating IAV-S strains is in a state of perpetual flux [2, 6, 14]. This has profound implications for vaccine efficacy, as traditional whole-inactivated virus (WIV) vaccines induce a highly strain-specific antibody response that is often ineffective against antigenically divergent heterologous strains [1, 2, 10]. The phenomenon of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD), observed in pigs vaccinated with WIV vaccines and subsequently challenged with heterologous strains, further complicates control efforts and highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of IAV-S taxonomy and antigenic evolution [2, 6]. Surveillance programs, such as the USDA swine IAV surveillance system in the United States and the European surveillance networks, are therefore essential for tracking the emergence and spread of novel genotypes, informing vaccine strain selection, and assessing the zoonotic risk posed by circulating viruses [5, 8, 15, 19, 24]. The ISU FLUture platform, for example, provides near real-time visualization of IAV genetic trends in U.S. swine, enabling veterinarians and producers to make data-driven decisions regarding disease management and control [8]. The taxonomic framework for IAV-S is thus not merely an academic exercise; it is a practical tool for understanding viral evolution, predicting future trends, and implementing effective control strategies at the local, regional, and global levels.

Molecular Pathogenesis of Swine Influenza A Virus

The molecular pathogenesis of swine influenza A virus (IAV-S) is a multifaceted process governed by the intricate interplay between viral genetic determinants, host cellular machinery, and the unique physiological landscape of the porcine respiratory tract. Understanding these mechanisms at a granular level is essential for elucidating the capacity of IAV-S to cause disease, transmit within swine populations, and, critically, to cross the species barrier into humans, posing a persistent pandemic threat recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). The pathogenesis is not merely a consequence of viral replication but is a dynamic process shaped by host range determinants, reassortment potential, and the induction of specific immunopathological responses.

The Molecular Basis of the Swine as a "Mixing Vessel"

A cornerstone of IAV-S pathogenesis and its zoonotic risk is the well-established concept of the pig as a "mixing vessel." This phenomenon is rooted in the differential distribution of sialic acid (SA) receptors on the epithelial cells of the swine respiratory tract. Influenza A viruses initiate infection by binding to terminal SA moieties on host cell glycoproteins and glycolipids. Human-adapted influenza viruses preferentially bind to SAα2,6-galactose (SAα2,6Gal) linkages, which are abundant in the human upper respiratory tract, while avian influenza viruses exhibit a strong preference for SAα2,3Gal linkages, found predominantly in the avian intestinal and respiratory tracts [26, 29]. Pigs are uniquely susceptible because their tracheal epithelium expresses both SAα2,6Gal and SAα2,3Gal receptors, thereby permitting co-infection with both human and avian-origin influenza viruses [3, 26, 29]. This dual receptivity creates a permissive cellular environment for genetic reassortment, a process where segmented viral genomes from different parental strains are exchanged during co-infection of a single cell, leading to the emergence of novel progeny viruses with pandemic potential [3, 6, 26]. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic virus itself was a product of such reassortment, containing gene segments from North American triple-reassortant swine viruses and Eurasian avian-like swine viruses, underscoring the public health significance of this molecular mechanism [17, 27].

Recent research has refined this classical model, revealing a more nuanced molecular landscape. While SAα2,6Gal is the predominant receptor throughout the porcine respiratory tract, SAα2,3Gal receptors are not uniformly distributed. Detailed lectin-binding studies have shown that SAα2,3Gal is largely absent from the epithelial surface of the nasal passages, trachea, and major bronchi but is present in the bronchioles and, most notably, on alveolar type II epithelial cells [29]. This differential distribution dictates the tissue tropism of infecting viruses. Swine-adapted viruses (e.g., H1N1, H1N2) are found widely in the upper and lower respiratory tract, including the nasal epithelium, trachea, and bronchi, correlating with the abundant SAα2,6Gal receptors [29]. In contrast, avian influenza viruses (e.g., H4N6) show a predilection for the lower respiratory tract, specifically infecting alveolar type II cells, which aligns with the presence of SAα2,3Gal receptors in the alveoli [29]. This compartmentalization has profound implications for pathogenesis; avian viruses that successfully infect the deep lung can cause severe pneumonia, as observed in experimental infections of non-human primates with a swine H2N3 virus, which resulted in severe, chronic pneumonia [34]. Furthermore, the lower respiratory tract, with its greater diversity of viral genotypes recovered during co-infection studies, has been identified as a primary site for the generation of transmissible reassortants, as the cold temperature of the nasal cavity may select against certain reassortant viruses [4]. This spatial heterogeneity in receptor distribution and viral replication creates distinct microenvironments that shape the evolutionary trajectory and pathogenic potential of IAV-S.

Host Factors and the Molecular Determinants of Viral Replication

Beyond receptor binding, the ability of IAV-S to replicate efficiently within porcine cells is critically dependent on host factors, most notably the acidic nuclear phosphoprotein 32 family member A (ANP32A). The viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, a heterotrimeric complex of PA, PB1, and PB2 subunits, is responsible for viral replication and transcription. Avian influenza virus polymerases typically function poorly in mammalian cells, a key species barrier. However, swine ANP32A (swANP32A) possesses a unique molecular architecture that overcomes this restriction. Compared to its human or murine counterparts, swANP32A exhibits a stronger supporting activity for avian influenza viral polymerase [20, 21]. This enhanced activity has been mapped to two specific amino acid residues: valine at position 106 (106V) and serine at position 156 (156S) [20]. The 106V residue is unique to pigs among all vertebrates studied, and when combined with 156S, it creates a positive epistatic effect that strengthens the interaction between swANP32A and the avian viral polymerase complex, thereby enabling efficient replication of avian influenza viruses in swine cells [20, 21]. This molecular adaptation provides a mechanistic explanation for the pig's role as a mixing vessel, as it is not merely permissive for receptor binding but is also uniquely supportive at the level of viral genome replication. The 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus, after its introduction into humans, subsequently acquired polymerase gene mutations that enhanced its ability to utilize human ANP32A, demonstrating the ongoing evolution of this host-pathogen interface [21].

Reassortment, Genetic Diversity, and the Emergence of Virulent Strains

The segmented nature of the IAV genome is the primary driver of its genetic diversity and pathogenic evolution. Reassortment is a pervasive and rapid process within co-infected swine, leading to the generation of genetically distinct within-host subpopulations [22]. Studies have demonstrated that reassortment is less frequent in swine than in ferrets or guinea pigs, but it is still a major force in generating viral diversity [22]. The spatial compartmentalization of viral replication within the host, where distinct viral genotypes are found in different anatomical sites like the nasal tract versus the lower respiratory tract, further shapes the evolution and onward transmission of these novel reassortants [22]. The consequences of this reassortment are profound, as evidenced by the emergence of numerous novel genotypes with altered pathogenic and zoonotic potential.

For instance, a Eurasian avian-like H1N1 (EA H1N1) reassortant virus, designated genotype 4 (G4), emerged in China and became predominant in swine populations since 2016. This virus acquired internal genes from the 2009 pandemic H1N1 (pdm/09) and triple-reassortant (TR) lineages [35]. The G4 virus possesses all the molecular hallmarks of a candidate pandemic virus: it binds to human-type SAα2,6Gal receptors, replicates efficiently in human airway epithelial cells, and transmits via aerosol in ferrets [35]. Critically, serological surveillance of swine workers in China revealed a 10.4% seropositivity rate for G4 virus, with rates as high as 20.5% in young adults aged 18-35, indicating that this reassortant has already acquired increased human infectivity [35]. Similarly, in Europe, intensive reassortment between endemic swine viruses and the pdm/09 virus has generated a novel repertoire of at least 31 distinct genotypes and 12 distinct HA/NA combinations in swine populations [19]. Some of these European reassortants have acquired resistance to the human antiviral MxA protein, a critical prerequisite for zoonotic transmission and stable introduction into human populations [19]. The emergence of a triple-reassortant H1N2r virus in the United Kingdom, incorporating the internal gene cassette of pdm/09 and the surface glycoproteins from a swine H1N2 virus, further illustrates how reassortment can generate viruses with documented interspecies transmission capabilities in both pigs and ferrets [31]. These examples underscore that reassortment is not a random event but a directed evolutionary process that can rapidly generate viruses with enhanced virulence, transmissibility, and zoonotic risk.

Molecular Determinants of Virulence and Transmission

Specific molecular signatures within the viral genome directly modulate the severity of disease and the efficiency of transmission. The hemagglutinin (HA) protein is a primary determinant of both receptor binding and antigenicity. A single-amino-acid substitution at position 225 in the HA1 subunit of EA H1N1 swine influenza virus can completely alter its transmissibility in guinea pigs. The presence of glutamic acid (E) at position 225 (225E) is critical for respiratory droplet transmission, whereas a glycine (G) at this position (225G) abolishes it [36]. Mechanistically, the 225E variant enhances the efficiency of viral assembly and budding, rather than altering receptor binding affinity, highlighting that transmission is a polygenic trait influenced by steps beyond initial attachment [36]. In the context of the 2010.1 H3N2 lineage circulating in US swine, a single mutation at amino acid residue 145 within a major antigenic motif of the HA protein was sufficient to cause a significant antigenic change, potentially impairing the efficacy of existing vaccines [25]. This demonstrates how minor genetic changes can have outsized effects on both viral fitness and immune evasion.

The internal genes, particularly the polymerase genes, are also critical determinants of virulence. Mutations in the PA gene of an EA H1N1 reassortant virus were shown to be responsible for its acquisition of pathogenicity in mice and transmissibility in ferrets [33]. These PA mutations, which were found to be predominant in the pdm/09 viruses circulating in humans and progressively increasing in swine, enhanced viral polymerase activity and allowed the virus to overcome the host's innate immune response [33]. Furthermore, the neuraminidase (NA) protein, while primarily known for its role in viral release, also contributes to pathogenesis. The balance between HA receptor-binding affinity and NA receptor-cleaving activity is essential for efficient replication and transmission. The emergence of novel HA/NA combinations through reassortment, such as the H1N2r virus, can disrupt this balance, leading to altered tissue tropism and pathogenesis [31].

Host-Pathogen Interactions: Cell Death and Innate Immunity

At the cellular level, IAV-S infection triggers a complex cascade of host responses that can be both protective and pathogenic. A recently elucidated mechanism is the induction of ferroptosis, a non-apoptotic, iron-dependent form of regulated cell death. Proteomic analysis of human A549 cells infected with H1N1 swine influenza virus revealed a significant enrichment of proteins involved in iron homeostasis and the ferroptosis signaling pathway [32]. Infection disrupts the system Xc-/GPX4 axis, leading to glutathione (GSH) depletion and the accumulation of lipid peroxidation products, ultimately causing cell death [32]. Importantly, this ferroptotic cell death is not merely a consequence of infection but actively promotes viral replication. Treatment with the ferroptosis inhibitor ferrostatin-1 (Fer-1) significantly decreased viral titers and the associated inflammatory response, suggesting that ferroptosis is a proviral host pathway that could be targeted therapeutically [32]. This finding adds a new dimension to the understanding of IAV-S pathogenesis, moving beyond classical apoptosis and necrosis.

The innate immune response, particularly the interferon (IFN) system, is a primary barrier to viral replication. However, IAV-S has evolved sophisticated countermeasures. The NS1 protein is a potent antagonist of the host IFN response, and its efficacy varies among strains. The ability of certain European swine reassortants to resist the antiviral effects of the human MxA protein is a critical molecular adaptation that facilitates zoonotic transmission [19]. Additionally, the interaction between the virus and host microRNAs (miRNAs) represents another layer of regulation. Computational analyses have identified several pig-encoded miRNAs, such as ssc-miR-124a, ssc-miR-136, and ssc-miR-145, that have putative targets within the swine influenza virus genome, and these interactions appear to be conserved throughout viral evolution [37]. Human-encoded miRNAs, including hsa-miR-145 and hsa-miR-92a targeting the HA gene and hsa-miR-150 targeting the PB2 gene, may also play a role in restricting cross-species infection [37]. The dysregulation of these miRNA networks during infection can alter viral replication kinetics and contribute to pathogenesis.

Finally, the host's adaptive immune response, while essential for clearance, can paradoxically contribute to disease severity. Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) is a well-documented phenomenon in swine, where vaccination with a whole inactivated virus (WIV) vaccine followed by challenge with a heterologous strain leads to exacerbated lung pathology [2, 6]. This is thought to be driven by a non-neutralizing, cross-reactive antibody response that fails to block infection but promotes a Th2-biased, eosinophilic inflammatory response in the lungs [2]. This immunopathological mechanism highlights a critical challenge in IAV-S vaccine development: the induction of a robust, broadly cross-reactive, and appropriately balanced immune response is essential to avoid causing more harm than benefit. The molecular pathogenesis of IAV-S is therefore a complex equilibrium between viral replication, host restriction, and immune-mediated damage, the outcome of which is determined by the specific genetic constellation of the infecting virus and the immunological history of the host.

Epidemiology and Zoonotic Potential of Swine Influenza A Virus

Global Distribution and Endemic Complexity of Swine Influenza A Virus

Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) represents one of the most economically burdensome and publicly consequential pathogens affecting global swine production. Since its first isolation in 1930, IAV-S has become entrenched as an endemic pathogen in swine populations across virtually all pig-producing regions of the world [13]. The epidemiological landscape of IAV-S is characterized by a remarkable and continually evolving diversity of subtypes, genotypes, and lineages that vary considerably not only between continents but also within individual countries and even among production systems within the same geographic region [6, 15]. Currently, three principal hemagglutinin (HA) subtypes, H1N1, H3N2, and H1N2, co-circulate in swine globally, yet the genetic origins, antigenic properties, and ecological dynamics of these viruses are profoundly region-specific [6, 10]. This heterogeneity is not a static phenomenon; rather, it is driven by a constellation of factors including repeated introductions of human seasonal influenza viruses into swine (reverse zoonoses), spillover of avian influenza viruses from wild waterfowl and poultry, and the subsequent reassortment events that occur when these diverse viral lineages converge within the porcine host [3, 15, 23].

The epidemiological significance of swine as a reservoir for influenza A virus is amplified by the unique physiological and molecular characteristics of the porcine respiratory tract. Pigs have long been considered a critical "mixing vessel" for influenza viruses, a concept rooted in the presence of both α-2,3-linked sialic acid receptors (preferred by avian influenza viruses) and α-2,6-linked sialic acid receptors (preferred by human and swine influenza viruses) within their respiratory epithelium [3, 26, 29]. This dual receptor tropism theoretically permits the simultaneous infection of a single pig cell with viruses of avian and mammalian origin, creating a cellular environment permissive for genetic reassortment. However, contemporary research has refined this classical view. Detailed lectin-binding studies have demonstrated that α-2,6-linked sialic acid receptors are the predominant receptor type throughout the porcine respiratory tract, constituting 80-100% of epithelial cell surface receptors in the nose, trachea, and bronchi, whereas α-2,3-linked receptors are largely restricted to the bronchioles and alveoli [29]. This distribution suggests that while pigs are indeed susceptible to avian viruses, the infection of avian strains is more likely to occur in the lower respiratory tract, a finding corroborated by experimental infections showing avian influenza virus (H4N6) preferentially infects alveolar type II epithelial cells [29]. This anatomical compartmentalization has profound implications for the emergence of reassortant viruses. A landmark study investigating co-infection dynamics revealed that the lower respiratory tract serves as the primary site for the generation of genetically diverse reassortants, while the cooler temperatures of the upper respiratory tract (nasal turbinates) exert a selective pressure that filters which reassortant genotypes are ultimately shed and transmitted [4]. This tissue-specific selection mechanism is a critical, yet often underappreciated, driver of IAV-S epidemiology, as it dictates which viral genotypes have the opportunity to disseminate within and between swine populations.

The Molecular Basis of the Swine "Mixing Vessel" Phenotype

Recent advances in molecular virology have elucidated the host factors underpinning the unique susceptibility of swine to avian influenza viruses. The ANP32A protein is an essential host cofactor for the influenza virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase complex. Critically, swine ANP32A (swANP32A) possesses a unique structural configuration that confers a superior ability to support the polymerase activity of avian-origin influenza viruses compared to the ANP32A proteins of humans or other mammals [20, 21]. This enhanced proviral activity has been mapped to two specific amino acid residues, valine at position 106 (106V) and serine at position 156 (156S), within the leucine-rich repeat and central domains of swANP32A [20, 21]. Remarkably, 106V is unique to pigs among all vertebrate species studied, and the combination of 106V and 156S exhibits positive epistasis, meaning their combined effect is greater than the sum of their individual contributions [20]. These residues enhance the binding affinity of swANP32A to the avian influenza virus polymerase complex, thereby facilitating more efficient replication of avian viruses in porcine cells [21]. This molecular adaptation provides a mechanistic explanation for the long-observed phenomenon of pigs acting as efficient intermediate hosts for the adaptation of avian influenza viruses to mammals. The implications for zoonotic risk are profound: by lowering the species barrier for avian viruses, swine populations serve as a crucible in which avian influenza viruses can acquire mammalian-adapting mutations, potentially generating variants with pandemic potential for humans.

Reassortment Dynamics and the Genesis of Pandemic Threats

The capacity for genetic reassortment is the most dangerous epidemiological feature of IAV-S. The segmented nature of the influenza A virus genome allows for the exchange of entire gene segments when two distinct viruses co-infect the same cell, a process that can generate progeny viruses with novel antigenic and biological properties [4, 22]. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic (pH1N1) stands as the definitive example of this phenomenon. This virus possessed a novel constellation of gene segments: the HA, NP, and NS genes derived from classical swine H1N1 (North American lineage); the NA and M genes from Eurasian avian-like H1N1; and the PB2 and PA genes from avian-origin viruses, with the PB1 gene originating from a human seasonal H3N2 virus [17, 27]. This specific reassortment event, which likely occurred in pigs, produced a virus that was not only transmissible among humans but also capable of causing a global pandemic [17, 27].

Since the 2009 pandemic, the pH1N1 lineage has been repeatedly introduced back into swine populations worldwide through reverse zoonosis (human-to-swine transmission), where it has continued to evolve and reassort with enzootic swine viruses [23, 28, 30]. This has generated an increasingly complex and expanding repertoire of genotypes. In the United States alone, systematic surveillance has documented hundreds of separate human-to-swine spillover events of the pH1N1 lineage between 2010 and 2021, with the frequency of these events correlating directly with the burden of seasonal influenza in the human population [23]. While most of these spillovers resulted in dead-end infections, a subset led to sustained transmission and the establishment of novel, swine-adapted pH1N1 clades that are genetically and antigenically distinct from contemporary human seasonal vaccine strains [23, 28]. This evolutionary divergence is of critical concern. A comprehensive study in France identified the emergence of a swine-specific genogroup within the H1N1pdm lineage, estimated to have diverged around 2011, which continued to circulate in pigs without corresponding circulation in humans [28]. Such swine-adapted lineages represent a reservoir of viruses against which the human population may have little to no pre-existing immunity, a scenario that mirrors the conditions preceding the 2009 pandemic.

The scale of reassortment in European swine populations is equally alarming. In-depth passive surveillance across nearly 2,500 European swine holdings identified the year-round circulation of up to four major IAV-S lineages on more than 50% of farms, with intensive reassortment involving the H1pdm virus generating at least 31 distinct genotypes and 12 different HA/NA combinations [19]. In Denmark, surveillance from 2011 to 2018 identified 17 different circulating genotypes, including six novel reassortants harboring gene segments from human seasonal IAVs [16]. A particularly notable example is the emergence of a triple-reassortant virus in Danish pigs containing an H3 HA derived from a human seasonal virus from 2004-2005, an N2 NA from an established swine virus, and the internal gene cassette from pH1N1 [9]. This virus, which spread through multiple Danish herds, exemplifies how human viruses that have since been replaced in the human population by antigenically distinct strains can be preserved and perpetuated in swine, creating a "time capsule" of viral antigens to which younger human cohorts are immunologically naïve [9, 28].

Zoonotic Transmission Events and Human Infection

The zoonotic potential of IAV-S is not merely a theoretical concern; it is a documented and recurring reality. Sporadic human infections with swine-origin influenza viruses have been reported for decades, but the frequency and diversity of these events have increased markedly since the 2009 pandemic [13, 18, 26]. These infections, termed "variant" viruses (e.g., H1N1v, H1N2v, H3N2v), are typically acquired through direct or indirect contact with infected swine, with agricultural fairs, livestock exhibitions, and occupational exposure in swine production facilities representing the most common points of human-swine interface [5, 41, 43, 46].

Agricultural fairs in the United States have been repeatedly identified as hotspots for zoonotic IAV-S transmission. In 2012, more than 300 human cases of H3N2v influenza were documented, primarily among children who had attended agricultural fairs, where they were exposed to infected swine [43]. The risk of IAV-S infection at these events is directly correlated with the size of the swine exhibition; a study of 40 junior fair market swine shows in Ohio found that the adjusted odds of having IAV-infected pigs at a fair increased by 27% for every additional 20 pigs in the show [43]. Furthermore, the viruses circulating at these fairs are often genetically distinct from those included in current human seasonal vaccines. A landmark field surveillance study conducted at a large swine exhibition used portable Nanopore sequencing to characterize 13 IAV genomes in real-time, identifying a cluster of H1N2 viruses with more than 30 amino acid differences in the HA1 domain compared to the closest existing candidate vaccine virus (CVV) [5]. This virus subsequently caused 14 human infections and became the dominant variant virus in the United States in 2018, demonstrating the predictive power of genomic surveillance at the human-swine interface [5].

Occupational exposure represents another major route of zoonotic IAV-S transmission. Swine workers, veterinarians, and abattoir employees are at significantly elevated risk of infection. A prospective cohort study conducted across six swine farms in China found that 31.5% of all participants (521 swine-exposed and 137 unexposed) seroconverted against at least one swine influenza virus subtype (H1N1 or H3N2) over the study period [44]. Critically, workers at confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) had significantly greater odds of seroconverting against swine H1N1 (odds ratio 19.16) and swine H3N2 (odds ratio 2.97) compared to unexposed individuals or those with less intense swine exposure [44]. These findings indicate that even in the presence of elevated pre-existing antibodies from prior exposure, swine workers remain at high risk of reinfection with enzootic swine viruses, highlighting the challenge of achieving protective immunity against a continuously evolving pathogen.

The geographic scope of zoonotic IAV-S is global. In the Netherlands, a pig farmer was infected with a Eurasian avian-like H1N1 (EA H1N1) virus that was also detected in the farmed pigs, with antigenic characterization revealing significant divergence from human vaccine strains [38]. In Australia, a 15-year-old female adolescent was infected with an H3N2 variant virus containing HA and NA genes derived from 1990s-era human seasonal viruses and internal genes from pH1N1, underscoring the risk posed by the persistence of "archived" human viruses in swine [39]. In Chile, an H1N2 virus isolated from a backyard pig farm was found to have an HA gene most similar to human H1 viruses from the early 1990s, and hemagglutination inhibition assays demonstrated that antibody titers to this virus were decreased in persons born after 1990, indicating a lack of population immunity in younger age groups [42]. In China, a genotype 4 (G4) reassortant EA H1N1 virus, which has become predominant in swine since 2016, was shown to bind to human-type receptors, replicate efficiently in human airway epithelial cells, and transmit via aerosol in ferrets [35]. Alarmingly, serological surveillance among occupational exposure populations in China revealed that 10.4% of swine workers were seropositive for this G4 virus, with the rate reaching 20.5% among participants aged 18-35 years, indicating that this virus has acquired increased human infectivity [35].

Bidirectional Transmission and the Role of Reverse Zoonosis

The flow of influenza viruses between humans and swine is not unidirectional. Reverse zoonosis, or anthroponosis, the transmission of human influenza viruses to swine, is a frequent and epidemiologically critical event. The pH1N1 virus has been repeatedly introduced into swine populations globally, and these introductions have been a primary driver of the genetic diversification of IAV-S over the past decade [23, 28, 30]. A compelling case study from France in 2018 documented a chain of bidirectional transmission: a veterinarian became ill shortly after swabbing sows exhibiting respiratory signs, and genetic analyses confirmed consecutive human-to-swine and then swine-to-human transmission of the same pH1N1 virus, despite the presence of some biosecurity measures [40]. This case illustrates the difficulty of preventing interspecies transmission in occupational settings and underscores the recommendation from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) that swine industry workers should receive the annual seasonal influenza vaccine to reduce the risk of introducing human viruses into swine herds and to protect themselves from zoonotic infection [15, 40].

The consequences of reverse zoonosis extend beyond the immediate spillover event. Once introduced into swine, human seasonal viruses undergo genetic drift and reassortment, evolving in an environment that is immunologically distinct from the human population. This can lead to the emergence of viruses that are antigenically divergent from the human strains from which they originated. A comprehensive analysis of the pH1N1 lineage in US swine identified that human-to-swine spillovers from the 2018-19 and 2019-20 seasons persisted in swine during the 2020-21 season, a period when pH1N1 circulation in humans was markedly reduced due to COVID-19-related non-pharmaceutical interventions [23]. These persisting swine viruses exhibited significant reductions in cross-reactivity to one or more human seasonal vaccine strains in hemagglutination inhibition assays, and phylogenetic evidence identified 17 swine-to-human transmission events of pH1N1 from 2010 to 2021, 11 of which had not been previously classified as variant infections [23]. This demonstrates that the persistence of human-origin viruses in swine creates a reservoir of antigenically novel viruses that can re-emerge to infect humans, potentially evading pre-existing immunity.

Surveillance Infrastructure and Pandemic Preparedness

The complexity and global nature of IAV-S epidemiology necessitate robust, integrated surveillance systems that span the human-animal interface. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has maintained a passive surveillance system for IAV in US swine since 2009, focusing on subtyping clinical respiratory submissions and sequencing HA and NA genes [24]. This system has provided invaluable data on the spatial and temporal patterns of IAV-S genetic diversity. However, passive surveillance alone is insufficient. Active surveillance programs, such as the one conducted in the Midwestern United States from 2009-2011, have revealed a higher prevalence of IAV-S than passive systems detect, and have identified the co-circulation of multiple subtypes within the same production system [45]. The Iowa State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory (ISU VDL) has developed the ISU FLUture platform, a web-based tool that provides near real-time visualization of IAV trends from diagnostic submissions, integrating epidemiological and evolutionary data from over 6,000 positive cases since 2003 [8]. Such platforms are critical for enabling veterinarians and producers to make informed decisions regarding vaccine selection and disease management.

The need for enhanced surveillance is particularly acute in regions with rapidly intensifying swine production, such as Southeast Asia. A comprehensive genomic survey in Cambodia, involving more than 4,000 nasal swabs and 4,000 sera, unmasked the co-circulation of multiple lineages of genetically diverse IAV-S of pandemic concern [12]. Genomic analyses revealed a novel European avian-like H1N2 swine reassortant variant with North American triple reassortant internal genes that had emerged approximately seven years before its first detection in pigs in 2021, indicating a significant period of cryptic circulation [12]. Phylogeographic reconstruction identified south central China as the dominant source of swine viruses disseminated to other regions in China and Southeast Asia, and the study identified nine distinct IAV-S lineages in Cambodia that had diverged from their closest ancestors between two and 15 years ago [12]. This hidden diversity mirrors the cryptic circulation of swine viruses that occurred in the decades before the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, reinforcing the urgent need for expanded genomic surveillance at the human-swine interface in these high-risk regions.

The development of candidate vaccine viruses (CVVs) for pandemic preparedness is a key component of the global response to the threat posed by IAV-S. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) maintains a library of CVVs representing the major lineages of swine-origin influenza viruses that have caused human infections. The rapid identification and characterization of novel zoonotic viruses, as demonstrated by the real-time sequencing at a US swine exhibition, allows for the expedited development and testing of new CVVs [5]. However, the current pace of viral evolution and reassortment in swine often outstrips the capacity of the CVV pipeline, as evidenced by the >30 amino acid mismatches between the exhibition H1N2 viruses and the most closely related CVV [5]. This highlights the need for more broadly protective vaccines, such as computationally optimized epitope-based immunogens, which have shown promise in preclinical swine models by inducing broader antibody and cell-mediated immune responses compared to traditional whole-inactivated virus vaccines [1, 2].

Factors Enhancing Zoonotic Risk: Receptor Binding, Polymerase Adaptation, and Antiviral Resistance

The zoonotic potential of a swine influenza virus is determined by a constellation of molecular traits that govern its ability to infect, replicate in, and transmit among humans. The first barrier is receptor binding specificity. The HA protein of influenza viruses must bind to sialic acid receptors on the surface of human respiratory epithelial cells. Most avian influenza viruses preferentially bind α-2,3-linked sialic acids, which are scarce in the human upper respiratory tract, whereas human and swine-adapted viruses bind α-2,6-linked sialic acids [29]. A single amino acid substitution at position 225 in the HA1 protein (E225G) has been shown to completely abolish respiratory droplet transmission of an EA H1

Diagnostic Approaches for Swine Influenza A Virus

The accurate and timely diagnosis of Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) is a cornerstone of both effective herd management and robust public health surveillance. Given the virus's propensity for rapid genetic drift and shift, its capacity for cross-species transmission, and the significant economic burden it imposes on the swine industry, a diagnostic armamentarium that is both deep and versatile is non-negotiable [1, 2, 47]. Diagnostic approaches must not only confirm the presence of the virus but must also characterize its subtype, genetic lineage, and antigenic profile to inform vaccine selection, biosecurity interventions, and pandemic risk assessment [5, 10, 14]. The following sections detail the exhaustive suite of diagnostic tools, from traditional virological methods to cutting-edge molecular and surveillance platforms, that comprise the modern diagnostic landscape for IAV-S.

Virological Detection and Isolation

The fundamental pillar of IAV-S diagnosis remains the direct detection of the virus or its components. Traditional virus isolation in embryonated chicken eggs or susceptible cell lines (e.g., MDCK cells) remains a valuable, albeit slower, gold standard for obtaining a live virus isolate for subsequent antigenic and genetic characterization [50, 51]. However, this method is labor-intensive and time-consuming, often requiring several days to yield results. The isolation of IAV from air samples collected inside and outside swine barns using cyclonic or filter-based bioaerosol samplers has been demonstrated, confirming that pigs are a source of infectious aerosols that can be transported downwind, a finding critical for understanding transmission dynamics and designing air filtration interventions [50]. Furthermore, isolation of novel reassortants, such as those combining genes from pandemic H1N1 and enzootic H1N2 viruses, is essential for assessing their pathogenic and zoonotic potential [23, 31].

The use of swine primary respiratory epithelial cells (PRECs) has emerged as a superior in vitro model for studying IAV-S biology and pathogenesis. These cells, derived from the nasal turbinates, trachea, and lungs, maintain an epithelial phenotype and express tissue-site-dependent tight junction proteins and the appropriate distribution of sialic acid receptors (Siaα2-6Gal >> Siaα2-3Gal), closely mimicking the in vivo environment [54]. PRECs support the replication of influenza A, B, C, and D viruses (IAV-D) and are highly suitable for comparative pathobiology studies, including assessing the replication competence of different virus types at physiologically relevant temperatures (33°C and 37°C) [54, 55]. The use of such differentiated cell cultures allows for a more nuanced investigation of viral tropism and host-pathogen interactions than traditional immortalized cell lines.

Molecular Diagnostics: Real-Time RT-PCR and Genomic Sequencing

The advent of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RRT-PCR) has revolutionized IAV-S diagnostics, offering rapid, sensitive, and specific detection of viral RNA directly from clinical specimens such as nasal swabs, oral fluids, and lung tissue [45, 49]. RRT-PCR assays are the frontline tool for active and passive surveillance programs globally, capable of detecting and subtyping IAV-S (e.g., differentiating H1N1, H1N2, H3N2, and pandemic H1N1) in a matter of hours [45, 49]. The quantitative nature of RRT-PCR also allows for the estimation of viral load, which is a useful correlate of shedding and transmission potential; for instance, in air samples, average viral loads inside barns have been quantified at 3.20 x 10⁵ RNA copies/m³, decreasing to 4.65 x 10³ RNA copies/km downwind [50]. This technique is indispensable for large-scale surveillance, such as the active monthly sampling of growing pigs in the Midwestern United States, which led to the detection of multiple co-circulating subtypes and reassortants [45].

Beyond simple detection, genomic sequencing, particularly using next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms like Nanopore, has become a transformative diagnostic tool. The development of the Mobile Influenza Analysis (Mia) platform demonstrated the ability to perform real-time, on-site whole-genome sequencing of IAV-S at a large swine exhibition [5]. Within 18 hours of sample collection, this portable system identified three distinct genetic lineages (H1N1, H3N2, H1N2) and revealed that a cluster of H1N2 viruses possessed >30 amino acid differences in the HA1 domain compared to the closest candidate vaccine virus (CVV) [5]. This real-time genomic characterization enabled a rapid risk assessment and the initiation of a synthetically derived CVV development by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a process that subsequently proved prescient as the detected virus became the dominant variant virus in humans in 2018 [5]. This case study underscores the critical role of field-deployable sequencing in bridging the gap between animal and human influenza surveillance, a core tenet of pandemic preparedness as advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH).

The resulting sequence data are then analyzed using sophisticated bioinformatic pipelines. The octoFLU pipeline, for example, is an automated classification system that assigns evolutionary lineage and genetic clade to each of the eight gene segments of IAV detected in US swine, a critical step given the complex genetic diversity arising from repeated introductions from human and avian sources [7]. Similarly, the ISU FLUture platform, a web-based tool from the Iowa State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, integrates sequence data with epidemiological metadata (e.g., collection date, specimen type, geographic origin) from over 6,000 IAV-S positive diagnostic cases, providing near real-time visualization of temporal and spatial genetic patterns [8]. These platforms are invaluable for veterinarians and researchers, enabling them to track the emergence of novel genotypes, such as the G4 Eurasian avian-like H1N1 reassortant in China, which possesses pandemic potential due to its human-type receptor binding and efficient aerosol transmission in ferrets [35]. Such surveillance data are vital for updating vaccine strains, which are often infrequently updated due to the rapid evolution of the virus [1, 10].

Serological Approaches

While molecular diagnostics detect active infection, serology provides a retrospective picture of exposure and immunity, which is critical for understanding herd-level epidemiology and vaccine efficacy. The hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay remains the standard method for serotyping and antigenic characterization of IAV-S [14, 23, 42]. By testing serum antibodies against a panel of reference viruses, the HI assay identifies the subtype and clade of the infecting virus and can detect antigenic drift. This is particularly important as contemporary 2010.1 H3N2 strains circulating in US swine since 2012 have been shown to be antigenically distinct from earlier H3N2 strains and human seasonal H3N2 viruses, with a single mutation at amino acid 145 in the HA associated with a significant antigenic change that could impair vaccine efficacy [25]. HI data from ferret antisera have been used to quantify the antigenic cross-reactivity between human seasonal vaccine strains and persistent swine pdm09 lineages, revealing significant reductions in reactivity that support zoonotic risk [23].

The microneutralization (MN) assay is a more sensitive but technically challenging alternative to HI for detecting functional antibodies that neutralize viral infectivity [44]. In a prospective cohort study in China, MN titers against swine H1N1 and H3N2 viruses were significantly higher in swine-exposed workers, particularly those on confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), with seroconversion rates as high as 31.5% [44]. This assay is thus a powerful tool for occupational risk assessment. However, a major challenge in serology is the interference of maternally derived antibodies (MDAs) in piglets, which can suppress the humoral response to vaccination or natural infection and confound serological surveys [6, 11]. The duration of this interference is influenced by the age of the piglet and the serological status of the dam, necessitating careful timing of sample collection and interpretation of results [11].

Alternative and Environmental Sampling

Traditional nasal swabbing, while effective, is labor-intensive, stressful for the animal, and logistically challenging, especially at agricultural fairs or in large commercial facilities. Consequently, alternative sampling strategies have been developed to enhance surveillance coverage and reduce animal handling. Oral fluid sampling using rope or cotton swabs is a widely adopted, non-invasive method for herd-level surveillance, and it shows high detection rates for IAV-S RNA (~71%) [48]. Surface swabbing of pen railings and other environmental fomites is equally effective, with a detection rate of 70.8%, and results from both oral fluids and surface swabs have been shown to significantly correlate with and predict the presence of IAV in air samples [48].

Bioaerosol sampling has emerged as a highly valuable "hands-off" surveillance tool. Using low-volume polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) filter samplers, researchers have demonstrated that air sampling is as effective as oral fluid sampling for detecting IAV RNA within swine barns, with a 71.1% detection rate [48]. This approach is particularly advantageous because it requires no animal contact, can be deployed remotely, and captures virus that has been aerosolized, providing a direct measure of the environmental risk of transmission [48]. Moreover, IAV RNA has been detected in air samples collected inside barns, at exhaust fans, and up to 2.1 km downwind from infected facilities [50]. The ability to isolate live virus from these air samples further validates the biological relevance of this sampling method [50]. For exhibition swine, snout wipe samples have been proposed as a faster, less stressful alternative to nasal swabs, further expanding the toolkit for rapid point-of-care surveillance [52].

Surveillance Networks and Integrated Data Analysis

The ultimate power of diagnostics is realized when data are aggregated and analyzed within comprehensive surveillance frameworks. In the United States, the USDA passive surveillance system collects and sequences HA and NA genes from clinical submissions, providing a spatiotemporal view of genetic diversity [24]. However, passive surveillance alone is insufficient, as it is biased toward clinically ill animals. Active surveillance programs, such as the monthly sampling of growing pig groups in the Midwest, provide a more complete picture of virus circulation, including the detection of subclinical infections and co-circulation of multiple subtypes [45].

Integrated platforms like ISU FLUture and the publicly available USDA database are essential for translating raw diagnostic data into actionable intelligence for veterinarians and producers [8, 24]. These systems allow for the tracking of specific genetic clades (e.g., the 2010.1 H3N2 lineage or the pdm09 swine-specific genogroup in France) and the detection of novel reassortants, such as those arising from the widespread use of live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV) that have been shown to reassort with endemic field strains [25, 28, 53]. The detection of LAIV genes in diagnostic cases from 11 US states underscores the need for continuous surveillance to monitor the emergence of vaccine-derived or vaccine-reassorted viruses [53].

At the global level, the need for enhanced surveillance in high-priority regions, particularly China and Southeast Asia, is critical, as these areas harbor significant undetected genetic diversity and are considered hotspots for pandemic emergence [12, 15]. The discovery of a novel European avian-like H1N2 reassortant in Cambodia that had been circulating cryptically for approximately seven years before detection highlights the critical gaps in current surveillance efforts [12]. The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations have consistently called for increased investment in surveillance infrastructure to meet the threat of IAV-S [6, 15]. The integration of diagnostic data across human and animal health sectors, as exemplified by the rapid data sharing during the 2018 exhibition outbreak [5], is the cornerstone of a One Health approach to influenza pandemic preparedness, a strategy that is central to the missions of the WHO, WOAH, and FAO.

Current Vaccination Strategies and Their Inherent Limitations

The control of Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) remains one of the most formidable challenges in veterinary virology and swine production medicine. Vaccination is universally recognized as the cornerstone of prevention, yet the currently deployed strategies are beset by a constellation of biological, logistical, and evolutionary constraints that render them perpetually one step behind the pathogen. The primary goal of any IAV-S vaccine is to reduce clinical disease severity, curtail viral shedding, and minimize transmission, thereby mitigating economic losses and, critically, reducing the zoonotic threat to human populations [2, 6, 10, 47]. However, the current armamentarium, dominated by whole inactivated virus (WIV) vaccines, modified live virus (MLV) vaccines, and, more recently, RNA-vectored platforms, consistently falls short of achieving broad, durable, and sterilizing immunity. This deficiency stems not from a lack of effort, but from the fundamental biological complexity of the virus itself and the immunological constraints of the swine host.

The Landscape of Licensed Vaccines: WIV, MLV, and RNA-Vectored Platforms

The vast majority of commercially available and widely used IAV-S vaccines are adjuvanted, whole inactivated virus (WIV) preparations [6, 10, 14]. These vaccines are typically multivalent, containing a mixture of inactivated H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 strains selected based on regional epidemiological data. Their mode of action is heavily reliant on the induction of humoral immunity, specifically neutralizing antibodies directed against the globular head of the hemagglutinin (HA) protein [10, 14]. When a challenge virus is antigenically homologous, or nearly identical, to the vaccine strain, WIV vaccines are demonstrably effective, reducing clinical signs, lung pathology, and viral replication [6]. This homologous protection is their one clear strength. In contrast to the WIV approach, a bivalent intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; Ingelvac Provenza®) was approved for use in the United States, offering the theoretical advantage of inducing a more comprehensive immune response, including mucosal IgA and cell-mediated immunity, that more closely mimics natural infection [6, 53]. A third platform, an RNA-vectored vaccine expressing the HA of a specific H3N2 clade, represents a newer generation of technology seeking to overcome some of the safety and efficacy concerns of WIV and MLV platforms [6]. Despite these technological advances, the fundamental limitations of all current strategies revolve around the same core issues: antigenic diversity, maternal antibody interference, and the risk of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD).

The Paralyzing Challenge of Antigenic Diversity and Mismatch

The single most significant limitation of current IAV-S vaccination strategies is the profound and dynamic antigenic diversity of the circulating virus population [2, 10, 13]. IAV-S is not a static entity; it is a continuously evolving, genetically heterogeneous swarm. The co-circulation of multiple subtypes (H1N1, H1N2, H3N2), each containing numerous phylogenetic clades and lineages that vary dramatically by geography, renders fixed-duration, multivalent vaccines obsolete almost as soon as they are formulated [6, 10, 13, 15]. For instance, in the United States alone, the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) genes of IAV-S are assigned to a complex array of clades (e.g., 1A, 1B, 1C for H1; 2010.1, 1990.4 for H3) that undergo continuous antigenic drift [24, 25]. This genetic divergence is not merely a phylogenetic curiosity; it translates directly into antigenic mismatch. Vaccine strains, which may be years old by the time they are produced and deployed, often bear little antigenic resemblance to the field viruses that pigs actually encounter.

The consequences of this mismatch are severe. WIV vaccines, with their primary focus on HA-specific neutralizing antibodies, are exquisitely strain-specific [2, 10]. When a challenge virus is heterologous, belonging to a different clade or lineage, the vaccine-induced antibodies fail to bind effectively, and protection collapses [2, 6, 14]. This is not a theoretical concern; it is a recurring reality documented in active surveillance. During an outbreak at a large swine exhibition, field sequencing revealed that circulating H1N2 viruses differed by over 30 amino acids in the HA1 domain from the closest pre-pandemic candidate vaccine virus, rendering existing vaccines ineffective [5]. Similarly, the rapid emergence and global spread of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic lineage (pdm09) and its subsequent reassortment with endemic swine viruses has created a mosaic of novel genotypes that are poorly covered by pre-existing vaccines [16, 23, 35]. The human seasonal vaccine strains, which are sometimes used as a baseline, also show significant antigenic reduction in cross-reactivity against swine-adapted pdm09 clades that have persisted and evolved in pigs [23]. This failure to keep pace with antigenic drift forces producers into a reactive, rather than proactive, posture, often relying on expensive and logistically complex autogenous (custom) vaccines derived from a farm's own circulating strain, an approach that is still only a temporary fix [14].

The Specter of Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Respiratory Disease (VAERD)

Beyond simple lack of efficacy, a more alarming limitation of the dominant WIV platform is the risk of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) [2, 6, 47]. This paradoxical phenomenon occurs when pigs vaccinated with a WIV vaccine are subsequently infected with a heterologous IAV-S strain that is antigenically mismatched. Instead of being protected, these pigs can develop more severe pulmonary pathology than unvaccinated, infected controls. The mechanistic underpinnings of VAERD are complex but are linked to the induction of a non-neutralizing, cross-reactive antibody response that fails to block infection but is capable of forming immune complexes that drive a robust, pro-inflammatory response in the lung [2, 6]. This pathology is characterized by severe, widespread microscopic lesions and an exaggerated clinical syndrome. The incidence of VAERD is a direct function of the degree of antigenic mismatch between the vaccine and the challenge virus, a scenario that is increasingly common given the high diversity of contemporary IAV-S [2]. This risk fundamentally undermines the risk-benefit calculus of using WIV vaccines in populations where the circulating strain is unknown or likely to be heterologous. It forces a difficult decision: vaccinate with a potentially mismatched product that could cause harm, or leave the animals susceptible to natural infection.

Interference from Maternally Derived Antibodies (MDAs)

A third major constraint on vaccination efficacy is the well-documented interference from maternally derived antibodies (MDAs) [2, 6, 11]. Piglets are born immunologically naive and rely on colostrum from the sow for passive immunity. While this passive transfer of antibodies, including those against IAV-S, is critical for protecting the neonate in the first weeks of life, it creates a profound window of susceptibility for active vaccination. High titers of MDA present in the piglet’s circulation at the time of vaccination can bind to and neutralize the vaccine antigens, effectively blocking the induction of an active, long-lasting immune response [6]. This is particularly problematic for WIV vaccines, which are already poor inducers of cell-mediated immunity. As a result, piglets may receive a vaccine but fail to seroconvert or develop a memory response, leaving them unprotected when MDA wanes. The timing of vaccination is therefore a delicate balancing act: too early, and it is blocked by MDAs; too late, and the piglets may be infected by field virus during the intervening gap [11]. The consequence is that many piglets, despite being vaccinated, remain susceptible to infection during the critical weaning and early grower phases, perpetuating the cycle of infection on the farm. Mathematical models of IAV-S dynamics within farrow-to-finish farms confirm that this interference, combined with the constant influx of new susceptible piglets, leads to endemic circulation that is incredibly difficult to eliminate even with routine vaccination [56, 57].

The Double-Edged Sword of Live Attenuated Vaccines and Reassortment Risk

While LAIVs offer theoretical advantages over WIVs, including better mucosal immunity and potentially less VAERD risk, they introduce a unique and serious limitation: the risk of genetic reassortment with wild-type IAV-S field strains [53]. LAIVs, by their very nature, are replication-competent viruses that can infect the host. In a production setting where both the LAIV and a heterologous field IAV-S are co-circulating, co-infection of the same cell can theoretically lead to the exchange of gene segments. This is not merely a theoretical risk; surveillance data from diagnostic laboratory submissions in the United States has identified LAIV HA genes in clinical specimens and, more critically, demonstrated that reassortment has occurred between the vaccine virus and endemic field strains [53]. Whole genome sequencing of field isolates revealed that over 90% of those with LAIV-related HA sequences also contained internal gene segments derived from contemporary, wild-type IAV, confirming active reassortment in the field [53]. This has profound implications. The resulting reassortant viruses could possess a novel combination of genes, perhaps the surface antigens (HA/NA) of a vaccine strain with the internal gene cassette of a more virulent or transmissible field strain, creating a novel virus with unpredictable pathogenicity, host range, and zoonotic potential. This risk mandates careful and ongoing surveillance to monitor the fate of LAIV genes in the swine population [53].

Economic and Logistical Barriers to Real-World Efficacy

Finally, the limitations of current vaccination are not solely biological; they are heavily influenced by economic and logistical realities. The IAV-S vaccine market is driven by cost-effectiveness. The vaccine must be affordable for producers, which curtails investment in more complex, broadly protective platforms [2, 47]. The requirement for regular, strain-specific reformulation is not only scientifically challenging but also prohibitively expensive and slow, leading to the "infrequent update" cycle that perpetuates mismatch [1, 2]. Furthermore, the diverse and regionally distinct nature of IAV-S means that a "one-size-fits-all" vaccine is impossible; formulations must be tailored geographically, creating a fragmented market with high development costs for each new combination [10, 15]. The fact that IAV-S infection has a relatively low mortality rate, despite causing significant production losses, also creates a financial disincentive for producers to fully invest in comprehensive vaccination protocols, especially when the benefits may not be immediately apparent in terms of reduced mortality [47]. This reluctance, combined with the practical difficulties of administering vaccines to large populations of swine and the need for proper cold-chain storage, further compromises the real-world impact of even the most theoretically sound vaccination strategy. In the field, the most sophisticated vaccine is only as good as its delivery and its ability to match the ever-shifting target presented by the virus.

Novel Vaccine Platforms and Epitope-Optimized Immunogens

The persistent burden of swine influenza A virus (IAV-S) on global pork production and its documented potential as a source of pandemic influenza strains have rendered the development of broadly protective, next-generation vaccines a paramount objective in veterinary and public health. The conventional vaccinology paradigm, predominantly reliant on whole inactivated virus (WIV) formulations, has proven insufficient against the antigenic heterogeneity and rapid evolutionary dynamics of IAV-S. WIV vaccines, while safe and capable of inducing robust humoral responses against homologous strains, are frequently associated with several critical shortcomings: (i) an inability to elicit substantial cross-reactive immunity against heterologous or drifted variants, (ii) vulnerability to interference from maternally derived antibodies (MDAs), and (iii) the potential for vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) upon challenge with mismatched field strains [2, 6, 10, 14]. These deficiencies are not merely academic concerns; they manifest as unpredictable vaccine efficacy in the field, necessitating frequent reformulation and revaccination, which is economically and logistically unsustainable. The high diversity and varied spatiotemporal distribution of IAV-S subtypes and genotypes globally, a product of continuous antigenic drift and reassortment events that occur with alarming frequency in swine populations, underscore the urgent need for a paradigm shift toward rationally designed, computationally driven vaccine platforms that target conserved, immunodominant epitopes [13, 15, 16, 19, 23].

The Imperative for Epitope-Focused Design: Overcoming Antigenic Drift and Reassortment

The fundamental challenge in IAV-S vaccinology lies in the virus’s capacity for rapid evolution, driven by the error-prone nature of its RNA-dependent RNA polymerase and the segmented genome’s propensity for reassortment. In swine, which serve as a “mixing vessel” due to the presence of both avian-type (α-2,3-linked sialic acid) and human-type (α-2,6-linked sialic acid) receptors in their respiratory tract, co-infection with multiple IAV lineages is a frequent occurrence, facilitating the emergence of novel reassortant viruses with unpredictable antigenic profiles [4, 20, 21, 26, 29]. The hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoproteins, the primary targets of neutralizing antibodies, are under intense selective pressure, accumulating mutations in antigenic sites that allow escape from vaccine-induced immunity. This antigenic drift is documented across all major circulating lineages, including H1N1, H3N2, and H1N2 subtypes, and is compounded by repeated introductions of human seasonal viruses into swine populations (reverse zoonoses), which then undergo further diversification [16, 23, 28, 40, 59]. Consequently, a vaccine based on a single, wild-type HA sequence is almost invariably rendered obsolete against contemporaneous circulating strains within a short timeframe. The WHO, CDC, and WOAH have all emphasized the critical need for surveillance and vaccine strain selection that accounts for this dynamic genetic landscape in swine reservoirs [15, 23]. Epitope-optimized immunogens represent a direct response to this antigenic arms race, moving away from whole-protein-based immunity toward a precision-focused strategy aimed at the most conserved and functionally constrained regions of viral proteins.

The Epigraph Platform: Computationally Derived, Broadly Protective Immunogens

Among the most promising and rigorously evaluated novel platforms is the computationally optimized Epigraph immunogen design strategy, which has recently demonstrated exceptional efficacy in a controlled swine challenge model [1]. In contrast to traditional approaches that rely on consensus or ancestral sequence reconstruction, which can introduce artificial sequences not found in nature, the Epigraph algorithm employs a graph-based approach to computationally derive a set of immunogens that maximizes the inclusion of potential T-cell and B-cell epitopes from a diverse panel of circulating IAV-S strains. The central hypothesis underpinning this strategy is that by presenting a curated array of epitopes that represent the breadth of variation within a defined population, the vaccine will prime the immune system to recognize conserved viral regions, thereby conferring protection against both contemporary and future drifted variants.

In the seminal study by Petro-Turnquist et al. (2025), pigs immunized with an Epigraph-optimized HA immunogen set, administered via a replication-defective adenovirus vector, exhibited a statistically significant improvement in both the breadth and magnitude of antibody responses compared to animals receiving wild-type (WT) immunogens or a commercial WIV vaccine (FluSure XP®) [1]. Critically, the humoral response was not merely quantitatively superior; it was qualitatively distinct, demonstrating enhanced cross-reactivity against heterologous IAV-S subtypes and lineages not explicitly represented in the immunogen design. This expanded breadth is of paramount importance in a production system where multiple, antigenically distinct IAV-S lineages coexist and circulate simultaneously within the same farm or region [11, 16, 45]. Beyond humoral immunity, the Epigraph platform induced markedly more robust and broadly cross-reactive cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses, as measured by interferon-γ (IFN-γ) ELISpot assays targeting a wide array of viral peptides [1]. These T-cell responses, particularly those directed against conserved internal proteins like nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix protein (M1), are increasingly recognized as critical for controlling heterologous viral challenge and reducing viral shedding, a key metric for herd-level immunity and zoonotic risk reduction. In an experimental infection model, the Epigraph-vaccinated cohort demonstrated a dramatic reduction in clinical disease severity, significantly lower titers of infectious virus shed in nasal secretions, a marked decrease in macroscopic and microscopic lung lesions, and attenuated pulmonary immunopathology [1]. This combination of attenuated clinical disease and reduced transmission potential represents the ideal vaccine profile for controlling IAV-S at both the individual animal and population level.

Vector-Based and Replicating Platforms Expanding the Immunological Arsenal

While computationally optimized immunogens represent a leap in antigen design, the platform used for their delivery is equally crucial. The Epigraph study utilized a non-replicating adenovirus vector, which offers a favorable safety profile while inducing potent cellular and humoral responses in the absence of adjuvant [1]. This platform is not alone in the vanguard of novel delivery systems. The RNA-based vaccine platform has also been explored in swine, leveraging the ability to encode for optimized HA antigens. A commercial RNA-vectored vaccine, expressing the HA of a H3N2 cluster IV virus, has been licensed in the United States, providing proof-of-concept for non-inactivated technologies in the swine market [6]. The advantage of RNA platforms lies in their rapid, synthetic manufacture, which is inherently scalable and does not require the cultivation of live virus, a critical feature for responding to emerging pandemic threats.

Another significant advancement is the development and application of modified live influenza virus (MLV) vaccines. The first bivalent MLV for swine (Ingelvac Provenza®) is now commercially available in the US, containing H1N2 and H3N2 backbones [6, 53]. MLVs have the theoretical advantage of inducing a more comprehensive immune response that parallels natural infection, including mucosal IgA and robust CMI. However, they are not without risk. Data from ongoing surveillance has revealed that the LAIV vaccine strains can reassort with endemic wild-type IAV circulating in the US swine population [53]. This phenomenon, documented by the Iowa State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, has led to the detection of novel reassortant viruses containing LAIV gene segments (e.g., HA from A/swine/Minnesota/37866/1999 or A/swine/Texas/4199-2/1998) and internal genes from contemporary field strains [53]. This underscores a critical biosafety and regulatory consideration: live replicating vaccines can contribute to the very genetic diversity they are intended to control, necessitating robust post-marketing surveillance to monitor for unintended ecological consequences. Reverse genetics systems have also been employed to create rationally attenuated vaccine candidates, such as those with deleted NS1 or modified hemagglutinin cleavage sites, which aim to reduce pathogenicity while preserving immunogenicity [2, 10, 14].

Balancing Breadth with Precision: The Road Ahead for Universal IAV-S Vaccines

The ultimate goal of next-generation IAV-S vaccine development is a “universal” or “broadly protective” vaccine that can be deployed across production systems with diverse circulating strains, without the need for annual reformulation. The computational epitope-optimization approaches, such as Epigraph, are arguably the most technically sophisticated route toward this goal [1, 2]. However, their success is contingent upon continuous, high-quality genomic surveillance data. The databases and phylogeographic tools developed by groups like the USDA, CDC, and academic partners (e.g., ISU FLUture, octoFLU) are essential for defining the antigenic landscape that these algorithms aim to cover [7, 8, 24]. Furthermore, the design must account not only for HA and NA but also for the more conserved internal proteins (NP, M1, PB1) to incorporate highly effective T-cell epitope targets, as cellular immunity is indispensable for controlling infection with viruses that have drifted beyond the neutralizing antibody repertoire [1, 58]. The incorporation of multiple immunogens, perhaps a cocktail of Epigraph-optimized HA, NA, and NP sequences, may be necessary to achieve truly universal coverage. The recent European surveillance data, which identified at least 31 distinct reassortant swIAV genotypes from a single region, serve as a sobering reminder of the immense antigenic complexity that any novel vaccine platform must overcome [19]. The challenge is further amplified by the unique molecular biology of swine host factors, such as the swine ANP32A protein, which renders pigs uniquely permissive to a broader range of avian and mammalian influenza polymerases, thereby facilitating a higher rate of reassortment and emergence of novel genotypes than might occur in other mammalian species [20, 21]. Any successful broadly protective vaccine must therefore be designed to anticipate and counter this ongoing viral diversification, a task for which epitope-optimized, computationally designed immunogens delivered by safe, potent platforms represent the most scientifically defensible and promising frontier in modern vaccinology.

Immune Responses and Correlates of Protection in Swine

The immune response to Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) in pigs is a multifaceted and dynamic interplay between the host’s innate and adaptive immune systems, a complexity that is profoundly shaped by the virus's inherent antigenic variability, the host's developmental stage, and the specific vaccine platform employed. Understanding what constitutes a protective immune response, the elusive "correlate of protection", is paramount for rational vaccine design and effective disease control. In swine, as in humans, the hemagglutinin (HA) protein is the primary target of neutralizing antibodies, and the induction of such antibodies has historically been considered the gold standard correlate of protection [10, 14]. However, the singular reliance on HA-specific humoral immunity has proven inadequate in the face of the remarkable genetic and antigenic diversity of IAV-S, leading to a paradigm shift towards a more holistic view that encompasses both humoral and cell-mediated arms of the adaptive immune response, as well as the critical role of innate immunity [1, 2].

The Humoral Arm: Neutralizing Antibodies and Their Limitations

The humoral immune response is dominated by antibodies directed against the globular head domain of the HA protein. These antibodies primarily function by blocking the attachment of the virus to sialic acid receptors on host respiratory epithelial cells, thereby neutralizing infectivity [10]. The hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay remains the standard serological tool for measuring these neutralizing antibodies and is widely used to assess vaccine efficacy and herd immunity. The central challenge, however, is the exquisite specificity of this response. The HA head is under intense selective pressure from the host immune system, leading to the accumulation of amino acid substitutions in antigenic sites, a phenomenon known as antigenic drift [1, 2]. This drift allows emerging viral variants to evade pre-existing antibodies, rendering vaccines that contain a single or limited number of strains ineffective against heterologous challenge [6, 14, 57]. This is starkly illustrated by the failure of whole inactivated virus (WIV) vaccines to protect against mismatched strains, a situation that has been linked to the induction of non-neutralizing or poorly cross-reactive antibodies that may, in some cases, contribute to vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) [2, 6]. The phenomenon of VAERD, particularly observed in the US with WIV vaccines and heterologous challenge, highlights a dangerous pitfall where a suboptimal antibody response can paradoxically exacerbate disease pathology upon infection [2, 6].

The antibody response is not limited to the HA head. Antibodies targeting the more conserved stalk domain of HA, as well as the neuraminidase (NA) protein, can offer broader, though less potent, neutralization and contribute to viral clearance by inhibiting viral egress [10]. Furthermore, the induction of mucosal IgA antibodies, which are critical for frontline defense at the respiratory epithelium, is a key goal for intranasally administered vaccines, such as live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV) [53]. The efficacy of these responses is heavily influenced by the presence of maternally derived antibodies (MDAs), which can interfere with the active immunization of young piglets, a significant practical challenge in herd management [2, 6, 11]. MDAs can neutralize vaccine antigens, dampening the piglet's own immune response and leaving it susceptible to infection later in life, a phenomenon that mathematical models of farm-level transmission have shown can lead to persistently high levels of infectious piglets even with vaccination [57].

The Cellular Arm: T-Cell-Mediated Immunity and Cross-Protection

Given the limitations of strain-specific humoral immunity, there is increasing emphasis on the role of cell-mediated immunity (CMI) in providing broadly cross-reactive protection against IAV-S. T cells, particularly CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), recognize conserved internal viral proteins, such as the nucleoprotein (NP), matrix protein 1 (M1), and polymerases (PB1, PB2, PA), which are presented on the surface of infected cells via major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I molecules [1, 2]. These conserved epitopes are far less prone to antigenic drift than the HA head, making CTL responses a promising target for a universal vaccine strategy. A robust, cross-reactive CTL response can clear infected cells before the virus can fully replicate, thereby reducing viral shedding and limiting clinical disease, even in the absence of perfectly matched neutralizing antibodies [1, 2].

Recent work with computationally designed, epitope-optimized vaccine immunogens (Epigraph) has demonstrated that it is possible to markedly enhance the breadth and magnitude of cross-reactive T-cell responses compared to wild-type or commercial vaccines [1]. In experimental infection models, pigs receiving Epigraph vaccines exhibited not only a broader antibody response but also a significantly more robust and wide-ranging CMI response, which correlated with a profound reduction in clinical disease, viral shedding, lung lesions, and microscopic immunopathology [1]. This underscores the critical and perhaps dominant role of T cells in mediating heterologous protection. The balance between T helper type 1 (Th1) and Th2 responses is also of consequence. A Th1-biased response, characterized by production of cytokines like IFN-γ and IL-2, is generally considered protective against intracellular viral pathogens, whereas a skew towards a Th2 response (IL-4, IL-5, IL-13) has been implicated in the immunopathology of VAERD [58]. Therefore, modern vaccine platforms are actively being designed to deliberately steer the immune response towards a protective Th1 profile [2].

Innate Immunity and the Swine Host Factor

The initial frontline defense against IAV-S is the innate immune system. Key elements include the physical barrier of the respiratory epithelium, the production of mucus and antimicrobial peptides, and the activity of alveolar macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer (NK) cells. Virus infection triggers the production of type I and III interferons (IFNs), which induce an antiviral state in neighboring cells. The inflammatory response, mediated by cytokines such as TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8, is a double-edged sword; while essential for recruiting immune cells to the site of infection, a dysregulated "cytokine storm" can contribute to severe lung pathology [34]. This was observed in nonhuman primates infected with a swine H2N3 virus which, in contrast to a human H2N2 virus, induced significantly higher plasma levels of IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, and IFN-γ, correlating with more severe pneumonia [34].

A unique aspect of the swine immune environment is the host factor ANP32A. Swine ANP32A possesses two key amino acids (106V and 156S) that allow it to bind the avian influenza virus polymerase with high affinity, thereby supporting the replication of avian-origin influenza viruses in pig cells [20, 21]. This molecular feature is a cornerstone of the swine's role as a "mixing vessel," as it provides a permissive cellular environment for the replication and reassortment of both avian and mammalian influenza viruses, a process that can generate novel pandemic threats [20, 21]. Moreover, the expression of sialic acid receptors on swine respiratory epithelium, both avian-type (SAα2,3Gal) and human-type (SAα2,6Gal), is a critical determinant of viral tropism [29]. Interestingly, the distribution of these receptors in swine is similar to humans, challenging a simplistic view of the mixing vessel hypothesis but underscoring the physiological relevance of the pig model for human influenza [29, 51]. The ability of the virus to subvert host defenses, such as by inducing ferroptosis (an iron-dependent form of programmed cell death) in epithelial cells to enhance replication, further illustrates the intricate arms race between virus and host at the innate level [32].

Correlates of Protection: A Multi-Factorial Paradigm

The accumulated evidence from decades of research clearly indicates that no single immune parameter can serve as a universal correlate of protection against IAV-S. While high titers of HI antibodies specific to the vaccine strain remain a reliable predictor of protection against homologous challenge, they fail utterly in the context of heterologous, antigenically drifted viruses [14, 57]. The data from novel vaccine platforms point to a more robust and realistic composite correlate: the combination of a broad, polyclonal antibody response capable of recognizing multiple HA and NA lineages, coupled with a strong, cross-reactive memory T-cell response targeting conserved internal epitopes [1, 2]. The induction of a balanced Th1-biased response and mucosal IgA are increasingly recognized as desirable attributes that are often lacking in conventional WIV vaccines [2, 53]. Furthermore, the duration of immunity is a critical but often overlooked component; an optimal immune response must provide enduring protection to cover the life of a production pig, which is rarely achieved with current vaccines that require frequent reformulation and revaccination [13, 57].

From a regulatory and public health perspective, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasize the need for robust surveillance to track antigenic drift and shift, which directly informs vaccine strain selection and risk assessment for zoonotic potential [15]. The detection of IAV in air samples, and the demonstration of long-distance airborne transmission in pigs, highlights the importance of mucosal immunity in preventing not just clinical disease but also environmental shedding and onward transmission [48, 50]. Ultimately, the evidence suggests that a successful vaccination strategy against IAV-S must be designed to elicit a multi-pronged, system-wide immune response, one that is not solely dependent on narrowly-focused antibody responses, but is instead built upon a foundation of broad T-cell memory and robust innate defenses to overcome the formidable evolutionary capacity of the virus.

Public Health Implications and One Health Perspectives

Swine Influenza A Virus (IAV-S) represents one of the most significant zoonotic threats to global public health, a position underscored by the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, which originated from reassortant viruses circulating in swine populations [17, 27]. The emergence of that pandemic strain, a novel constellation of gene segments with nearest known precursors in swine, demonstrated unequivocally that pigs are not merely incidental hosts but rather critical reservoirs and evolutionary reactors for influenza A viruses with pandemic potential [13, 27]. The public health implications of IAV-S extend far beyond sporadic zoonotic spillover events; they encompass the continuous generation of genetically and antigenically diverse viruses capable of breaching the species barrier, evading pre-existing human immunity, and acquiring the ability for sustained human-to-human transmission. A comprehensive One Health perspective, integrating veterinary, human, and environmental health sectors, is therefore not merely an academic exercise but an operational imperative for pandemic preparedness.

The Swine as a "Mixing Vessel": Molecular and Epidemiological Foundations

The characterization of swine as a “mixing vessel” for influenza A viruses rests on a solid foundation of molecular biology and receptor biochemistry. Pigs express both sialic acid-α-2,3-galactose (SAα2,3Gal) receptors, which are preferentially bound by avian influenza viruses, and sialic acid-α-2,6-galactose (SAα2,6Gal) receptors, which are preferentially bound by human influenza viruses, in their respiratory tract [29]. This dual receptor distribution creates a permissive cellular environment wherein co-infection with viruses of avian, human, and porcine origin can occur, facilitating genetic reassortment, the exchange of entire gene segments between different influenza A viruses [3, 4, 26]. Indeed, the epidemiology of IAV-S involves a complex interplay of viruses of human, avian, and swine evolutionary origin, and the co-circulation of multiple subtypes and genotypes within a single farm or even a single animal creates a veritable genetic workshop for the generation of novel reassortants [3, 11].

Recent research has elucidated the molecular basis for this mixing vessel phenotype at an unprecedented level of detail. The host protein ANP32A, a critical cofactor for influenza virus polymerase activity, exhibits a unique structure in swine that confers enhanced support for avian-origin viral polymerases [20, 21]. Specifically, swine ANP32A (swANP32A) possesses two key amino acid residues, 106V and 156S, that are distinct from those found in ANP32A proteins of other mammalian species, including humans [20]. These residues enable swANP32A to bind the trimeric influenza polymerase complex from avian viruses with greater avidity, thereby overcoming a major species barrier that otherwise restricts avian influenza virus replication in mammalian cells [20, 21]. This molecular adaptation explains why pigs are uniquely susceptible to infection with avian influenza viruses and why they serve as such effective intermediates for the adaptation of avian viruses to mammals, including humans [21]. The implications for public health are profound: swine populations globally act as continuous, active bioreactors for the generation of mammalian-adapted influenza viruses with novel gene constellations, many of which have unknown consequences for human virulence, transmissibility, and antigenicity [19].

Zoonotic Spillover and the Human-Animal Interface

The zoonotic transmission of IAV-S to humans is not a rare or theoretical event but a well-documented and recurring phenomenon that occurs across diverse geographic and epidemiological settings. Human infections with swine-origin influenza A viruses, termed “variant” viruses in the United States, have been reported with increasing frequency, driven by the ever-expanding genetic diversity of viruses circulating in swine populations [5, 23, 41]. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic was the most dramatic demonstration of this threat, but numerous other spillover events have been documented globally, including infections with H1N1, H1N2, H3N2, and even H2N3 subtypes [18, 34, 39, 42]. In the United States, a notable cluster of human infections occurred following exposure to swine at agricultural fairs, where large numbers of pigs and humans comingle in confined spaces, creating ideal conditions for interspecies transmission [5, 41, 43]. In one such outbreak during 2016, 18 human infections with influenza A(H3N2) variant virus were traced to agricultural fairs in Michigan and Ohio; these viruses possessed a hemagglutinin gene derived from 2010-11 human seasonal H3N2 strains, indicating a recent reverse zoonotic event followed by reassortment in swine [41]. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) documented that the variant virus causing these infections had become the dominant H3N2 variant virus in the United States in 2018, highlighting the rapidity with which such viruses can emerge and spread [5].

The risk to humans is particularly acute for individuals with occupational exposure to swine. Swine workers, including farm hands, veterinarians, and slaughterhouse personnel, are at the front line of the human-animal interface and face a substantially elevated risk of infection with IAV-S [35, 40, 44]. A prospective cohort study conducted in China revealed that swine-exposed participants had significantly higher odds of seroconversion against swine H1N1 (odds ratio 19.16) and swine H3N2 (odds ratio 2.97) compared to unexposed controls, even after controlling for exposure to human influenza strains [44]. This suggests that occupational exposure to swine directly results in infection with enzootic swine viruses, not merely cross-reactive antibody responses from human influenza infection. Similarly, serological surveillance in China identified that 10.4% of swine workers were seropositive for the G4 genotype of Eurasian avian-like (EA) H1N1 virus, a recently emerged reassortant bearing internal genes from the 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus (pdm/09) and triple-reassortant (TR) swine viruses [35]. Of particular concern, younger swine workers (18-35 years old) showed a seropositive rate of 20.5%, indicating that the G4 virus has acquired increased human infectivity, a finding with alarming implications for pandemic potential [35].

The documented cases of human infection represent only a fraction of the true zoonotic burden, as many infections are likely subclinical or mild and thus undetected by surveillance systems [5, 26]. However, even subclinical infections are epidemiologically significant, as they provide opportunities for the virus to adapt to the human host through serial passage, accumulating mutations that enhance replication efficiency, immune evasion, and transmissibility. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) have both emphasized that gaps in surveillance and data sharing impede our understanding of the true impact of swine IAV on human health and our ability to assess pandemic risk [15].

Evolutionary Dynamics and Pandemic Potential

The evolutionary trajectories of IAV-S in swine populations have profound implications for public health, as they directly influence the likelihood of a future pandemic. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic virus, after being introduced into swine populations worldwide, has continued to evolve in pigs through ongoing reassortment and antigenic drift, generating genetically and antigenically distinct lineages that differ from the human seasonal vaccine strains [23, 28]. This phenomenon, known as reverse zoonosis or spillback, creates a reservoir of viruses in swine that are poorly recognized by human immunity and that can subsequently reinfect humans, a potentially dangerous feedback loop [23, 28]. Indeed, phylogenetic analysis has identified at least 17 swine-to-human transmission events of the pdm09 lineage from 2010 to 2021 in the United States alone, many of which were previously unclassified as variant infections [23]. These reverse-zoonotic events are not random; they are driven by the frequency of human-to-swine spillovers, which correlates with the burden of human influenza in the population. When human pdm09 circulation is high, spillover into swine is more frequent, leading to the establishment of persistent, evolving lineages in pigs that then become sources for future zoonotic transmissions [23].

The capacity of IAV-S to acquire resistance to human antiviral mechanisms further elevates its pandemic threat. A comprehensive surveillance study of European swine populations identified several IAV-S isolates that were resistant to the human antiviral MxA protein, a key component of the innate immune response that represents a significant barrier to zoonotic transmission and stable introduction into human populations [19]. MxA resistance is a prerequisite for a swine influenza virus to successfully establish itself in humans, as it allows the virus to overcome an important host restriction factor. The presence of MxA-resistant viruses in European swine thus indicates that these viruses have already cleared a critical hurdle on the path to human adaptation [19].

The antigenic diversity of IAV-S is another major concern. In Denmark, comprehensive surveillance revealed 17 distinct circulating genotypes, including six novel reassortants harboring human seasonal IAV gene segments, with substantial genetic drift and evidence of positive selection occurring mainly in antigenic sites of the hemagglutinin protein [16]. Similarly, European surveillance identified a pronounced antigenic variation in IAV-S, with several H1pdm lineages circulating in swine being antigenically distinct from the current seasonal human H1pdm vaccine strains, raising the possibility that preexisting population immunity in humans would not provide protection against these swine-origin viruses [19]. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has repeatedly called for enhanced surveillance and sharing of genetic data on IAV-S to address this antigenic complexity and to inform the development and selection of candidate vaccine viruses for pandemic preparedness [15].

One Health Surveillance: Bridging the Gap

Effective management of the public health threat posed by IAV-S requires a sustained, integrated, and globally coordinated One Health surveillance system that spans the human-animal-environment interface. Historically, surveillance of IAV-S has been fragmented and underfunded, with most data coming from passive diagnostic submissions from swine with clinical respiratory disease [8, 15]. This approach underestimates the true prevalence and diversity of IAV-S, as subclinical infections are common and many farms do not routinely submit samples for diagnostic testing [15, 45]. Active surveillance programs, such as those conducted in the Midwestern United States and in Cambodia, have revealed a much higher prevalence and diversity of IAV-S than passive surveillance alone, including the detection of novel reassortants and lineages that would otherwise go unnoticed [12, 45].

Technological advances are now enabling real-time, on-site genomic characterization of IAV-S at the human-swine interface, providing actionable data for public health response. The development of portable nanopore sequencing platforms, such as the Mobile Influenza Analysis (Mia) system, allows researchers to generate full-length influenza virus genomes within hours of sample collection, even in field settings such as swine exhibitions [5]. This capability was demonstrated during a large swine exhibition in the United States, where on-site sequencing identified a novel IAV-S cluster that was genetically highly divergent from available candidate vaccine viruses (CVVs). The sequences were immediately shared with the CDC, which initiated the development of a synthetically derived CVV matched to the exhibition viruses, a process that typically takes weeks or months but was accelerated through real-time collaboration [5]. The predictive value of this approach was validated when the same virus subsequently caused 14 human infections and became the dominant variant virus in the United States in 2018 [5].

Environmental sampling represents another frontier for One Health surveillance. Influenza A virus is shed in high concentrations in swine respiratory secretions and can be detected in bioaerosols and on surfaces within swine barns [48, 50]. Air sampling using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) filters has been shown to be an effective hands-off approach for detecting influenza virus activity in swine herds, with detection rates comparable to those of oral fluid sampling [48]. Importantly, infectious influenza A virus has been detected in air samples collected inside swine barns, at exhaust fans, and even downwind at distances up to 2.1 kilometers, indicating that airborne transmission can occur over considerable distances and that swine operations can serve as point sources for environmental contamination [50]. The integration of environmental sampling into routine surveillance programs would enhance our ability to detect IAV-S circulation, assess exposure risks for workers and surrounding communities, and implement targeted biosecurity measures.

Biosecurity, Vaccination, and the Challenge of Control

From a One Health perspective, the control of IAV-S in swine populations is not merely an animal health issue but a critical component of human pandemic preparedness. Vaccination of swine is the most widely used tool for controlling IAV-S, but its effectiveness is limited by the extraordinary genetic and antigenic diversity of circulating viruses, the rapid evolution of the virus through antigenic drift and reassortment, and the interference of maternally derived antibodies (MDAs) with vaccine efficacy [1, 2, 6, 10]. Current commercially available vaccines, including whole inactivated virus (WIV) vaccines and live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV), are often based on strains that are several years out of date and provide only strain-specific or narrowly cross-reactive immunity [1, 2, 10]. This mismatch between vaccine strains and circulating field strains is a major driver of vaccine failure and contributes to the continued circulation of IAV-S in swine herds [6, 10].

A particularly concerning phenomenon associated with suboptimal vaccination is vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD), which has been documented in pigs vaccinated with WIV vaccines and subsequently challenged with heterologous IAV-S strains [2, 6]. VAERD is characterized by more severe clinical disease, increased lung pathology, and enhanced pulmonary inflammation compared to unvaccinated, challenged controls, and it is thought to result from the induction of non-neutralizing or poorly cross-reactive antibodies that facilitate viral entry into immune cells or dysregulate the immune response [2]. The occurrence of VAERD underscores the risks associated with deploying vaccines that do not adequately match circulating strains and highlights the need for improved vaccine platforms that induce broader, more durable, and more protective immune responses.

Novel vaccine strategies, including computationally optimized epitope-focused vaccines, RNA-based vaccines, and modified live vaccines, are being developed to address these challenges [1, 2, 6]. The Epigraph platform, which uses computational algorithms to design epitope-optimized immunogens that maximize coverage of conserved and cross-reactive T- and B-cell epitopes, has shown particular promise in preclinical studies. Pigs immunized with Epigraph-optimized vaccines demonstrated significantly improved breadth and magnitude of antibody responses, more robust and cross-reactive cell-mediated immune responses, and significant reductions in clinical disease, viral shedding, lung lesions, and microscopic immunopathology compared to pigs immunized with wild-type immunogens or a commercial comparator vaccine [1]. These findings support the continued investigation of computationally designed vaccines for IAV-S and their potential to provide broader and more durable protection against the diverse and rapidly evolving viruses circulating in swine [1].

Biosecurity measures at the farm level are equally important for reducing the burden of IAV-S and mitigating the risk of zoonotic transmission. Good animal husbandry practices, including all-in/all-out production systems, adequate ventilation, proper cleaning and disinfection protocols, and quarantine of newly introduced animals, can reduce the introduction and spread of IAV-S within and between herds [47]. However, mathematical modeling studies have shown that even with robust biosecurity and vaccination, IAV-S is difficult to eliminate from a farm due to the continuous introduction of susceptible piglets through the farrowing cycle and the waning of immunity over time [56, 57]. The virus can persist in a farm in a cyclical pattern, with outbreaks occurring at predictable intervals as maternal immunity wanes and new cohorts of susceptible piglets become available for infection [11, 57].

The Role of Agricultural Fairs and Exhibition Swine

Agricultural fairs and exhibitions represent a particularly high-risk interface for the transmission of IAV-S to humans, as they bring together large numbers of swine from diverse geographic origins with large numbers of human visitors, many of whom have limited or no prior exposure to swine [5, 41, 43]. The commingling of pigs from multiple farms at a single exhibition creates opportunities for the introduction and mixing of diverse IAV-S strains, while the stress of transport and exhibition may increase viral shedding and susceptibility to infection [43]. Studies have shown that the odds of influenza A virus infection in swine at agricultural fairs increase by 27% for every 20-pig increase in the size of the swine show, and that fairs hosting breeding swine shows in addition to market swine shows are at particularly high risk [43].

The public health burden associated with agricultural fairs is substantial. During 2012 alone, more than 300 human cases of H3N2 variant virus infection were documented in the United States, the majority of which were associated with exposure to swine at agricultural fairs [43]. These infections occurred predominantly in children, who may have lower pre-existing immunity to swine-origin viruses and who are more likely to have direct contact with pigs at petting zoos or livestock exhibitions [41, 43]. The CDC, in collaboration with state and local health departments, has developed specific guidelines for reducing the risk of IAV-S transmission at agricultural fairs, including recommendations for hand hygiene, prohibition of food and drink in animal areas, and early identification and isolation of sick pigs [41]. However, compliance with these recommendations varies, and many fairs lack the resources or infrastructure to implement them effectively [43].

Occupational Health and the Need for Protective Measures

Swine workers constitute a high-risk population that requires targeted public health interventions, including access to personal protective equipment (PPE), training on biosecurity and hygiene practices, and annual vaccination against seasonal human influenza [40, 44]. The annual human influenza vaccine is recommended for swine workers not only to protect them from seasonal influenza but also to reduce the risk of human-to-swine transmission of influenza viruses, which is a major driver of genetic diversity in swine populations [23, 40]. A veterinarian in France who became ill after sampling sows with respiratory disease was found to be infected with a strain of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 that was genetically identical to the virus circulating in the herd, and epidemiological data and genetic analyses revealed that the transmission event had occurred despite some biosecurity measures being in place [40]. This case illustrates the bidirectional nature of IAV-S transmission and the importance of protecting workers to protect both themselves and the animals under their care.

In many regions, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, smallholder swine farming with minimal biosecurity is common, and close contact between humans, swine, and poultry is the norm [46]. In Peru, for example, observations on smallholder swine farms revealed frequent intermingling of swine and domestic birds, the feeding of poultry mortality to swine, and suboptimal hygiene practices among farmers [46]. These practices create opportunities for the interspecies transmission of influenza A viruses and highlight the need for education and outreach to improve biosecurity and hygiene in small-scale production systems [46]. The FAO has emphasized the importance of engaging with smallholder farmers and providing them with practical, low-cost solutions for reducing the risk of pathogen transmission [62

References

[1] Petro-Turnquist EM, Madapong A, Pekarek MJ, Steffen D, Weaver EA. Epitope-optimized vaccine elicits enduring immunity against swine influenza A virus. Nature Communications. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59182-7

[2] Petro-Turnquist EM, Pekarek MJ, Weaver EA. Swine influenza A virus: challenges and novel vaccine strategies. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2024.1336013

[3] Lukmanova G, Glebova T, Saktaganov N, Baimukhametova A, Hujatullah M, Sultanbekov S, et al.. SWINE INFLUENZA A VIRUS AS A ZOONOTIC INFECTION. МИКРОБИОЛОГИЯ ЖӘНЕ ВИРУСОЛОГИЯ. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53729/mv-as.2025.01.02

[4] Zhang X, Sun H, Cunningham F, Li L, Hanson‐Dorr K, Hopken MW, et al.. Tissue tropisms opt for transmissible reassortants during avian and swine influenza A virus co-infection in swine. PLoS Pathogens. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1007417

[5] Rambo-Martin BL, Keller MW, Wilson MM, Nolting J, Anderson T, Vincent A, et al.. Influenza A Virus Field Surveillance at a Swine-Human Interface. Msphere. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00822-19

[6] Gracia JCM, Pearce DS, Mašić A, Balasch M. Influenza A Virus in Swine: Epidemiology, Challenges and Vaccination Strategies. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00647

[7] Chang J, Anderson T, Zeller MA, Gauger P, Vincent A. octoFLU: Automated Classification for the Evolutionary Origin of Influenza A Virus Gene Sequences Detected in U.S. Swine. Microbiology Resource Announcements. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/MRA.00673-19

[8] Zeller MA, Anderson T, Walia RW, Vincent A, Gauger P. ISU FLUture: a veterinary diagnostic laboratory web-based platform to monitor the temporal genetic patterns of Influenza A virus in swine. BMC Bioinformatics. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-018-2408-7

[9] Krog JS, Hjulsager C, Larsen M, Larsen L. Triple‐reassortant influenza A virus with H3 of human seasonal origin, NA of swine origin, and internal A(H1N1) pandemic 2009 genes is established in Danish pigs. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12451

[10] Vincent A, Pérez D, Rajão D, Anderson T, Abente EJ, Walia RR, et al.. Influenza A virus vaccines for swine. Veterinary Microbiology. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2016.11.026

[11] Rose N, Hervé S, Eveno E, Barbier N, Eono F, Dorenlor V, et al.. Dynamics of influenza A virus infections in permanently infected pig farms: evidence of recurrent infections, circulation of several swine influenza viruses and reassortment events. Veterinary Research. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9716-44-72

[12] Zeller MA, Ma J, Wong FY, Tum S, Hidano A, Holt H, et al.. The genomic landscape of swine influenza A viruses in Southeast Asia. bioRxiv. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2301926120

[13] Ma W. Swine Influenza Virus: Current Status and Challenge. Virus Research. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2020.198118

[14] Sandbulte M, Spickler AR, Zaabel P, Roth J. Optimal Use of Vaccines for Control of Influenza A Virus in Swine. Vaccines. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines3010022

[15] Vincent A, Awada L, Brown I, Chen H, Claes F, Dauphin G, et al.. Review of Influenza A Virus in Swine Worldwide: A Call for Increased Surveillance and Research. Zoonoses and Public Health. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12049

[16] Ryt-Hansen P, Krog JS, Breum S, Hjulsager C, Pedersen A, Trebbien R, et al.. Co-circulation of multiple influenza A reassortants in swine harboring genes from seasonal human and swine influenza viruses. eLife. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60940

[17] Trifonov V, Khiabanian H, Greenbaum B, Rabadán R. The origin of the recent swine influenza A(H1N1) virus infecting humans.. Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin. 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2807/ESE.14.17.19193-EN

[18] Newman A, Reisdorf E, Beinemann J, Uyeki T, Balish A, Shu B, et al.. Human Case of Swine Influenza A (H1N1) Triple Reassortant Virus Infection, Wisconsin. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1409.080305

[19] Henritzi D, Petric PP, Lewis N, Graaf A, Pessia A, Starick E, et al.. Surveillance of European Domestic Pig Populations Identifies an Emerging Reservoir of Potentially Zoonotic Swine Influenza A Viruses.. Cell Host and Microbe. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2020.07.006

[20] Zhang H, Li H, Wang W, Wang Y, Han G, Chen H, et al.. A unique feature of swine ANP32A provides susceptibility to avian influenza virus infection in pigs. PLoS Pathogens. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1008330

[21] Peacock T, Swann O, Salvesen HA, Staller E, Leung P, Goldhill DH, et al.. Swine ANP32A Supports Avian Influenza Virus Polymerase. Journal of Virology. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00132-20

[22] Ganti K, Bagga AD, Carnaccini S, Ferreri L, Geiger G, Cáceres C, et al.. Influenza A virus reassortment in mammals gives rise to genetically distinct within-host subpopulations. bioRxiv. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-34611-z

[23] Markin A, Zanella GC, Arendsee ZW, Zhang J, Krueger KM, Gauger P, et al.. Reverse-zoonoses of 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza A viruses and evolution in United States swine results in viruses with zoonotic potential. bioRxiv. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1011476

[24] Walia RR, Anderson T, Vincent A. Regional patterns of genetic diversity in swine influenza A viruses in the United States from 2010 to 2016. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12559

[25] Powell J, Abente EJ, Chang J, Souza CK, Rajão D, Anderson T, et al.. Characterization of contemporary 2010.1 H3N2 swine influenza A viruses circulating in United States pigs.. Virology. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2020.11.006

[26] Abdelwhab EM, Mettenleiter T. Zoonotic Animal Influenza Virus and Potential Mixing Vessel Hosts. Viruses. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v15040980

[27] Peiris J, Poon L, Guan Y. Emergence of a novel swine-origin influenza A virus (S-OIV) H1N1 virus in humans. Journal of Clinical Virology. 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2009.06.006

[28] Chastagner A, Hervé S, Bonin E, Quéguiner S, Hirchaud E, Henritzi D, et al.. Spatiotemporal Distribution and Evolution of the A/H1N1 2009 Pandemic Influenza Virus in Pigs in France from 2009 to 2017: Identification of a Potential Swine-Specific Lineage. Journal of Virology. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00988-18

[29] Trebbien R, Larsen L, Viuff B. Distribution of sialic acid receptors and influenza A virus of avian and swine origin in experimentally infected pigs. Virology Journal. 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-422X-8-434

[30] Vijaykrishna D, Vijaykrishna D, Poon L, Zhu H, Zhu H, Ma SK, et al.. Reassortment of pandemic H1N1/2009 influenza A virus in swine. Science. 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189132

[31] Everett H, Nash BJ, Londt B, Kelly M, Coward V, Núñez A, et al.. Interspecies Transmission of Reassortant Swine Influenza A Virus Containing Genes from Swine Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H1N2) Viruses. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2602.190486

[32] Cheng J, Tao J, Li B, Shi Y, Liu H. Swine influenza virus triggers ferroptosis in A549 cells to enhance virus replication. Virology Journal. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-022-01825-y

[33] Meng F, Yang H, Qu Z, Chen Y, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, et al.. A Eurasian avian-like H1N1 swine influenza reassortant virus became pathogenic and highly transmissible due to mutations in its PA gene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2203919119

[34] Richt J, Rockx B, Ma W, Feldmann F, Safronetz D, Marzi A, et al.. Recently Emerged Swine Influenza A Virus (H2N3) Causes Severe Pneumonia in Cynomolgus Macaques. PLoS ONE. 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039990

[35] Sun H, Xiao Y, Liu J, Wang D, Li F, Wang C, et al.. Prevalent Eurasian avian-like H1N1 swine influenza virus with 2009 pandemic viral genes facilitating human infection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1921186117

[36] Wang Z, Yang H, Chen Y, Tao S, Liu L, Kong H, et al.. A Single-Amino-Acid Substitution at Position 225 in Hemagglutinin Alters the Transmissibility of Eurasian Avian-Like H1N1 Swine Influenza Virus in Guinea Pigs. Journal of Virology. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00800-17

[37] He T, Feng G, Chen H, Wang L, Wang Y. Identification of host encoded microRNAs interacting with novel swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus and swine influenza virus. Bioinformation. 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6026/97320630004112

[38] Parys A, Vandoorn E, King J, Graaf A, Pohlmann A, Beer M, et al.. Human Infection with Eurasian Avian-Like Swine Influenza A(H1N1) Virus, the Netherlands, September 2019. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2703.201863

[39] Deng Y, Wong F, Spirason N, Kaye M, Beazley R, Grau ML, et al.. Locally Acquired Human Infection with Swine-Origin Influenza A(H3N2) Variant Virus, Australia, 2018. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2601.191144

[40] Chastagner A, Enouf V, Péroz D, Hervé S, Lucas P, Quéguiner S, et al.. Bidirectional Human–Swine Transmission of Seasonal Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 Virus in Pig Herd, France, 2018. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2510.190068

[41] Bowman A, Walia RR, Nolting J, Vincent A, Killian M, Zentkovich MM, et al.. Influenza A(H3N2) Virus in Swine at Agricultural Fairs and Transmission to Humans, Michigan and Ohio, USA, 2016. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2309.170847

[42] Bravo-Vasquez N, Karlsson E, Jimenez-Bluhm P, Meliopoulos VA, Kaplan BS, Marvin SA, et al.. Swine Influenza Virus (H1N2) Characterization and Transmission in Ferrets, Chile. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2302.161374

[43] Bowman A, Workman JD, Nolting J, Nelson SW, Slemons R. Exploration of risk factors contributing to the presence of influenza A virus in swine at agricultural fairs. Emerging Microbes and Infections. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/emi.2014.5

[44] Borkenhagen L, Wang G, Simmons RA, Bi Z, Lu B, Wang X, et al.. High Risk of Influenza Virus Infection Among Swine Workers: Examining a Dynamic Cohort in China. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz865

[45] Corzo C, Culhane M, Juleen K, Stigger-Rosser E, Ducatez M, Webby R, et al.. Active Surveillance for Influenza A Virus among Swine, Midwestern United States, 2009–2011. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1906.121637

[46] McCune S, Arriola C, Gilman R, Romero MA, Ayvar V, Cama V, et al.. Interspecies interactions and potential Influenza A virus risk in small swine farms in Peru. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-12-58

[47] Salvesen HA, Whitelaw C. Current and prospective control strategies of influenza A virus in swine. Porcine Health Management. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-021-00196-0

[48] Prost K, Kloeze H, Mukhi S, Bozek K, Poljak Z, Mubareka S. Bioaerosol and surface sampling for the surveillance of influenza A virus in swine.. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13139

[49] Slomka M, Densham ALE, Coward V, Essen S, Brookes S, Irvine R, et al.. Original Article: Real time reverse transcription (RRT)‐polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods for detection of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza virus and European swine influenza A virus infections in pigs. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2010.00149.x

[50] Corzo C, Culhane M, Dee S, Morrison R, Torremorell M. Airborne Detection and Quantification of Swine Influenza A Virus in Air Samples Collected Inside, Outside and Downwind from Swine Barns. PLoS ONE. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071444

[51] Rajão D, Vincent A. Swine as a model for influenza A virus infection and immunity.. ILAR journal. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilv002

[52] Edwards JL, Nelson SW, Workman JD, Slemons R, Szablewski C, Nolting J, et al.. Utility of snout wipe samples for influenza A virus surveillance in exhibition swine populations. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12270

[53] Sharma A, Zeller MA, Li G, Harmon K, Zhang J, Hoang H, et al.. Detection of live attenuated influenza vaccine virus and evidence of reassortment in the U.S. swine population. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638720907918

[54] Sreenivasan CC, Thomas M, Antony L, Wormstadt T, Hildreth M, Wang D, et al.. Development and Characterization of Swine Primary Respiratory Epithelial Cells and Their Susceptibility to Infection by Four Influenza Virus Types. Virology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2018.12.016

[55] Bateman A, Karasin A, Olsen C. Differentiated swine airway epithelial cell cultures for the investigation of influenza A virus infection and replication. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2012.00371.x

[56] Etbaigha F, Willms AR, Poljak Z. An SEIR model of influenza A virus infection and reinfection within a farrow-to-finish swine farm. PLoS ONE. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202493

[57] Reynolds JJH, Torremorell M, Craft M. Mathematical Modeling of Influenza A Virus Dynamics within Swine Farms and the Effects of Vaccination. PLoS ONE. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106177

[58] Aleebrahim-Dehkordi E, Molavi B, Mokhtari M, Deravi N, Fathi M, Fazel T, et al.. T helper type (Th1/Th2) responses to SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A (H1N1) virus: From cytokines produced to immune responses. Transplant Immunology. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trim.2021.101495

[59] Nelson M, Lemey P, Tan Y, Vincent A, Lam T, Detmer S, et al.. Spatial Dynamics of Human-Origin H1 Influenza A Virus in North American Swine. PLoS Pathogens. 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002077