Canine Circovirus

Overview and Taxonomy of Canine Circovirus

Taxonomic Position and Genomic Organization

Canine circovirus (CanineCV) is a non-enveloped, single-stranded circular DNA virus belonging to the family Circoviridae, genus Circovirus [1, 2, 37]. The family Circoviridae encompasses a group of remarkably small, highly stable viruses with a genome typically ranging from 1.8 to 2.1 kilobases, making them among the smallest known autonomously replicating mammalian viruses [35, 37]. CanineCV was first identified and characterized in the United States in 2011 from a dog presenting with severe hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, vasculitis, and granulomatous lymphadenitis [37]. This discovery marked a significant expansion of the known host range of circoviruses, which had previously been documented primarily in avian species and swine, where porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) is a well-established pathogen of major economic consequence [38, 42]. The detection of a circovirus in a second mammalian host, the domestic dog, immediately raised questions about the breadth of circovirus circulation in carnivores and the potential for cross-species transmission events [36, 37, 39].

The prototypical CanineCV genome is approximately 2,063 nucleotides in length and exhibits the characteristic genomic architecture shared among members of the genus Circovirus: two major, inversely oriented open reading frames (ORFs) encoding the replication-associated protein (Rep) and the capsid protein (Cap), separated by an intergenic region containing a conserved stem-loop structure with a nonamer motif essential for rolling-circle replication [6, 30, 37]. The Rep protein, approximately 303 amino acids in length, is the nonstructural protein responsible for viral genome replication via a rolling-circle replication mechanism [6, 19]. The Cap protein, approximately 270 amino acids, constitutes the sole structural protein of the virion and is the primary determinant of antigenicity, host immune response, and viral tropism [7, 9, 19]. Notably, certain CanineCV strains harbor a truncated Rep' protein resulting from an internal deletion, which exhibits enhanced cytotoxicity and modulates viral pathogenesis in a manner distinct from the full-length Rep protein [6]. An additional open reading frame, ORF3, has been identified in some strains, overlapping the Rep gene, and may play a role in pathogenesis, though its functional significance remains under active investigation [31].

Phylogenetic Classification and Genotype Diversity

The taxonomy and genotyping of CanineCV have undergone substantial refinement as global surveillance efforts have expanded, revealing an unexpectedly complex genetic landscape. The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) defines species demarcation within the family Circoviridae based on a genome-wide nucleotide sequence identity threshold of 80% [25, 35]. All CanineCV strains characterized to date exceed this threshold, confirming their classification as a single viral species [25, 29, 37]. However, within this species, remarkable genetic diversity exists, necessitating a robust sub-species classification system.

Early phylogenetic analyses based on complete genome sequences and the capsid gene initially delineated four major genotypes, designated CanineCV-1 through CanineCV-4 [27-29, 37]. Subsequent studies, incorporating a vastly expanded dataset of global sequences, have refined this classification to encompass five [3, 7, 15], six [8, 14], or even seven distinct genotypes or subtypes [10]. This variability in genotyping schemes reflects differences in analytical methodologies, sequence datasets, and demarcation criteria. A comprehensive study by Li et al. (2025), leveraging extensive bioinformatic analyses of publicly available sequences, proposed a five-clade structure comprising the China-I, China-II, Cosmopolitan, EA (Europe/Asia), and SEA (Southeast Asia) clades [3]. This classification captures the major phylogeographic lineages and their global distribution patterns. Simultaneously, Ji et al. (2024) proposed a seven-subtype system (CCV-1a through CCV-1e and CCV-2a through CCV-2b) based on p-distance frequency histograms and phylogenetic trees of complete genomes, with 21 newly characterized Chinese strains distributed across subtypes CCV-1b, CCV-1c, and CCV-1d [10]. The lack of a universally adopted genotyping framework remains a challenge for the field, though the consensus is converging toward the recognition of at least five to six major lineages with distinct geographical and host associations [3, 8, 10].

The capsid protein gene exhibits the highest degree of genetic variability, serving as the primary target for phylogenetic discrimination and evolutionary analysis [7, 10]. Entropy analyses have identified multiple hypervariable regions within the Cap gene, with 19 variable sites and four codons (positions 24, 50, 103, and 111) evolving under positive diversifying selection [7, 10]. This positive selection is concentrated within predicted T-cell and B-cell epitopes, strongly suggesting that host immune pressure is a major driving force in CanineCV evolution [7]. In contrast, the Rep gene is generally more conserved, consistent with its essential enzymatic function in viral replication, though recombination breakpoints frequently occur within this region [27, 31]. Two amino acid substitutions in the Rep protein (N39S and T71A) have been associated with specific Chinese genotypes, further illustrating the genetic signatures that differentiate lineages [27].

Evolutionary Origins and Dynamics

Time-scaled phylogenetic analyses have provided critical insights into the evolutionary origins and temporal dynamics of CanineCV. The most recent common ancestor of extant CanineCV strains has been estimated to have emerged around 1950.7 in Norway, with the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) proposed as the most likely ancestral reservoir host [3]. This estimated origin predates the first documented detection of the virus in domestic dogs by over 60 years, suggesting a long-standing, undetected circulation in wildlife populations before its spillover into domestic canids and subsequent global dissemination [3, 25]. This hypothesis is supported by the detection of CanineCV DNA in arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) samples collected in Svalbard as early as 1996, firmly backdating the virus's presence in wild canid populations to at least the mid-1990s [25]. Furthermore, genetic signatures of an ancient association between fox circovirus lineages and their hosts have been identified, with fox-specific clades exhibiting a long-standing co-evolutionary history predating the Last Glacial Maximum, which would explain their peculiar geographic distribution across Europe and North America [22, 32].

Recombination is a dominant and pervasive force in CanineCV evolution, contributing substantially to genetic diversity and the emergence of novel lineages [3, 4, 8, 21, 31]. Extensive inter-clade recombination events have been documented across multiple geographic regions, involving strains from different genotypes, host species, and countries [3, 10, 12]. Recombination breakpoints have been identified in both the Rep and Cap genes, as well as in the intergenic region [10, 31]. Notably, recombination has been observed between strains of domestic dog and jackal origin in Namibia, as well as between strains from distinct geographical lineages such as American and Chinese viruses giving rise to recombinant strains circulating in Thailand and Vietnam [12, 23, 31]. The high frequency of recombination underscores the dynamic nature of the viral population and the potential for the rapid generation of genetic novelty, which may facilitate host adaptation and immune evasion.

Host Range and Species Tropism

Initially considered a pathogen of domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), CanineCV is now recognized to infect a remarkably broad range of wild and domestic carnivores, highlighting its capacity for cross-species transmission and its ecological complexity. The virus has been molecularly detected in a diverse array of hosts, including red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus), golden jackals (Canis aureus), gray wolves (Canis lupus), Eurasian badgers (Meles meles), raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides), and stone martens (Martes foina) [4, 5, 21, 25, 26, 32, 34, 36, 39, 41]. The host range has expanded even further with the first detection of CanineCV in domestic cats (Felis catus), demonstrating that cross-species transmission is not limited to canids [13, 18]. A cat-derived CanineCV strain was classified within genotype 3, and phylogenetic analysis revealed its close relationship to strains circulating in dogs, suggesting a recent spillover event [13]. The detection of CanineCV in the serum of cats further implies active viral replication capable of sustaining viremia, rather than mere passive viral passage [18]. This expanding host range is a major concern from a One Health perspective, as it indicates the virus's adaptability to multiple mammalian species and its potential to establish new reservoir hosts [1, 94. The detection of CanineCV in feline populations is particularly significant given the close proximity of cats and humans in domestic environments.

Wild canids, particularly golden jackals and red foxes, play a pivotal role in the epidemiology and evolution of CanineCV, functioning as bridge hosts between wildlife and domestic animal populations [4, 5, 12]. In Serbia, a high prevalence of CanineCV (31.6%) was documented in wild carnivores, with golden jackals harboring strains typically circulating in domestic dogs, while red foxes carried a distinct, wildlife-associated variant [4]. The simultaneous detection of both variants in jackal samples suggests these animals may serve as mixing vessels for viral recombination and genetic exchange [4]. Similarly, studies in Namibia reported a 43.75% prevalence in jackals and 27.13% in domestic dogs, with molecular evidence of strain exchange between these populations through recombination events [12]. Wolves in Canada and Italy also exhibit high CanineCV prevalence (45.3% and 47.8%, respectively), with sequencing revealing that the majority of strains in wolves belong to the "fox circovirus" lineage, indicating that wolves may serve as reservoir hosts for these viruses [32, 41]. The close genetic relatedness of viruses circulating in wolves and domestic dogs suggests frequent bidirectional transmission events [41]. In contrast, foxes in the Alps of Italy harbor an exclusively fox-specific clade, with no evidence of recent transmission to domestic dogs, implying that ecological or biological barriers may sometimes limit cross-species spillover [22, 39]. This genetic isolation may be attributable to host-specific adaptations that have evolved over long-standing co-existence. The long-term association between fox circoviruses and their hosts is further supported by the mixing of European and North American fox-derived sequences within the same phylogenetic lineages, suggesting that the divergence of these lineages predates the geographic separation of wolf and fox populations across continents [32].

The expanding host range and high genetic plasticity of CanineCV raise legitimate concerns about its zoonotic potential. Bioinformatic analyses of codon usage bias and host adaptability indices have suggested that CanineCV exhibits greater adaptability to human hosts compared to its documented canine and wildlife hosts, implying that the virus may possess the molecular prerequisites for human infection [3]. While no confirmed cases of CanineCV infection in humans have been reported to date, the capacity of circoviruses to infect multiple mammalian species, the detection of related cycloviruses and CRESS DNA viruses in human clinical specimens, and the close phylogenetic relationship between CanineCV and cycloviruses found in humans underscore the need for vigilant surveillance within a One Health framework [1, 3, 18, 43]. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) have increasingly emphasized the importance of monitoring emerging pathogens at the human-animal interface, and CanineCV represents a compelling candidate for such integrated surveillance programs. The virus's environmental resilience, its ability to persist in feed ingredients and on fomites under simulated transboundary shipping conditions, and its detection in apparently healthy animals further complicate risk assessment and control efforts [11, 16, 40]. The frequent co-infection of CanineCV with other highly pathogenic canine viruses, such as canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2), canine adenovirus, and canine distemper virus, and its demonstrated capacity to exacerbate clinical disease through immunosuppression (via suppression of the type I interferon response and promotion of co-infecting virus replication) position CanineCV as an opportunistic pathogen of considerable veterinary and ecological significance [1, 6, 17, 20, 23, 24, 32, 33].

Molecular Pathogenesis and Genetic Variability of CanineCV

The Genomic Architecture and Functional Interplay of Viral Proteins

CanineCV, a member of the Circoviridae family, possesses a small, circular, single-stranded DNA genome of approximately 2.0–2.1 kb. The archetypal genome organization includes two major open reading frames (ORFs) encoded in opposite orientations: ORF1, which encodes the replication-associated protein (Rep), and ORF2, which encodes the capsid protein (Cap). This bipartite structure belies a sophisticated molecular machinery that underpins the virus’s pathogenic potential. The Rep protein is the enzymatic core of viral replication, facilitating rolling-circle replication (RCR) through conserved motifs, while the Cap protein orchestrates host-cell attachment, immune evasion, and virion assembly. Critically, a third, smaller ORF, alternatively referred to as ORF3 or the Rep’ protein, has been identified in some CanineCV strains and is emerging as a key determinant of pathogenesis [6].

The Rep protein of CanineCV is a multifunctional phosphoprotein that not only initiates and elongates viral DNA synthesis but also modulates the host cellular environment. Recent work has demonstrated that the Rep protein exerts a broad inhibitory effect on host protein expression, effectively shutting down cap-dependent translation [17]. This translational arrest is thought to free cellular resources for viral replication while simultaneously dampening the production of antiviral effector proteins. However, the Rep protein’s effects extend beyond simple resource allocation. In co-infection contexts, the Rep protein has been shown to promote the replication of other pathogens, most notably canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2). Mechanistic studies using infectious clone technology in F81 cells revealed that the Rep protein enhances CPV-2 replication to a significantly greater degree than the truncated Rep’ protein [6]. This differential effect is linked to the Rep protein’s superior capacity to suppress the type I interferon (IFN-I) response, particularly by downregulating the expression of IFN-α, IFN-β, MxA, and ISG15 genes. By crippling the innate antiviral sentinel system, CanineCV creates a permissive intracellular niche for co-infecting viruses, a phenomenon that has profound implications for disease severity in naturally infected animals.

Immunomodulatory Strategies and the Suppression of Host Antiviral Defenses

The capacity of CanineCV to subvert the host immune response is a cornerstone of its pathogenesis. The virus employs a multi-pronged strategy to neutralize the IFN-I axis, the primary innate defense against viral invasion. The Rep protein appears to be the principal effector of this immunosuppression. Mechanistic dissection has shown that Rep inhibits the activation of the IFN-β promoter, thereby blocking the transcriptional cascade that leads to interferon-stimulated gene (ISG) expression [17]. This suppression is not merely a passive consequence of viral replication but is an active, targeted process. The consequent reduction in ISG expression, including key antiviral effectors like MxA, leaves infected cells vulnerable not only to CanineCV but also to secondary viral invaders.

Strikingly, the capsid protein also contributes to immunomodulation, though its effects are more nuanced and species-dependent. Comparative studies of Circoviridae capsid proteins have revealed that while nuclear localization is a conserved feature, the impact on IFN-β signaling varies markedly by viral species [38]. The CanineCV Cap protein is capable of modulating this pathway, adding an additional layer of complexity to the virus’s immunosuppressive arsenal. This dual-hit mechanism, involving both Rep and Cap, ensures a robust suppression of the host’s first line of defense. The immunological consequence is a state of transient, local immunosuppression, which is thought to underlie the frequent observations of co-infections in clinical cases. Studies have documented that CanineCV infection is associated with a 7.5-fold increase in the risk of acquiring CPV-2 infection in wild wolves, underscoring the in vivo significance of this immunomodulatory capacity [32]. In domestic dogs, the exacerbation of clinical signs during co-infections with CPV-2, canine adenovirus (CAdV), or canine coronavirus (CCoV) is well-documented, and the molecular basis for this synergy is now being elucidated at the level of IFN-I suppression [1, 17, 33].

The Molecular Basis of Pathogenesis: Cytotoxicity, Vasculitis, and Cell Tropism

At the tissue level, the pathogenesis of CanineCV is characterized by a striking tropism for lymphoid and endothelial tissues, culminating in vasculitis and hemorrhagic disease. The virus has been detected in a wide array of tissues, including the small intestine, mesenteric lymph nodes, spleen, lung, kidney, and even the brain [9, 44]. Histopathological hallmarks include granulomatous inflammation, fibrinoid vasculitis, and hemorrhagic foci, particularly within the intestinal tract [44, 45]. The presence of characteristic intracytoplasmic amphophilic inclusion bodies in histiocytic cells within granulomatous lesions is a distinctive pathological feature [44]. Ultrastructural examination has revealed aggregates of 15–18 nm viral particles within damaged crypt cells and the endothelium of small blood vessels, providing direct evidence of the virus’s ability to infect and injure the vascular endothelium [45]. This endothelial tropism is the proximate cause of the vasculitis and subsequent hemorrhagic infarction that characterize severe CanineCV enteritis.

The molecular drivers of this cellular tropism and cytotoxicity are multifactorial. The Rep’ protein, a truncated variant of Rep, has been shown to significantly enhance the cytotoxicity of CanineCV against permissive cell lines, such as F81 cells, outperforming the full-length Rep protein in this regard [6]. This suggests that alternative splicing or truncated translation products play a distinct role in inducing cell death. The Cap protein itself is a major target of host immune selection and a mediator of cellular entry. Immunohistochemical studies using anti-Cap polyclonal antibodies have localized the Cap protein predominantly to immune cells, particularly lymphocytes and macrophages, in the spleen, lung, and lymph nodes, as well as to pneumocytes in the lung and renal tubular epithelial cells in the kidney [9]. This broad cellular distribution highlights the virus’s ability to infect both immune effector cells and parenchymal cells, facilitating systemic dissemination and multi-organ pathology. The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) recognizes that emerging circoviruses, including CanineCV, pose a significant diagnostic and surveillance challenge due to their ability to cause systemic disease in synergy with other pathogens, a pattern that mirrors the pathobiology observed in PCV2-associated disease in swine.

Genetic Variability as a Driver of Emergence and Adaptation

The genetic landscape of CanineCV is remarkably dynamic, characterized by high variability, frequent recombination, and ongoing evolutionary adaptation. This genetic plasticity is a primary driver of the virus’s ability to emerge across diverse geographic regions and host species. Phylogenetic analyses have resolved CanineCV into a minimum of five to seven distinct genotypes or clades, with the exact number depending on the dataset and analytical methods employed [3, 8, 10]. Globally circulating strains have been classified into major clades, including the Cosmopolitan, East Asian (EA), Southeast Asian (SEA), and China-specific clades (China-I, China-II) [3]. The capsid gene, in particular, is a hotspot of genetic variation. Entropy analyses have revealed high nucleotide and amino acid variability across the Cap region, with selection pressure analyses identifying specific codons, notably at positions 24, 50, 103, and 111, that are evolving under diversifying (positive) selection [7]. Crucially, these positive selection sites are located within predicted T-cell and B-cell epitopes, providing compelling evidence that host immune pressure is a major force driving viral evolution [7, 19]. The virus is effectively engaged in a molecular arms race with the canine immune system, continually altering its antigenic landscape to evade recognition.

Recombination is a second, equally potent mechanism for generating genetic diversity. Extensive inter-clade recombination has been documented globally, and it plays a pivotal role in viral evolution [3, 31]. Recombination breakpoints are frequently mapped to the Rep gene, and parental strains are often derived from distinct geographic origins, for example, American and Chinese viruses serving as parents for recombinant Thai strains [31]. These recombination events can generate novel chimeric viruses with altered host tropism, pathogenicity, or transmission dynamics. The existence of recombination between strains from domestic dogs and wild carnivores, such as jackals and foxes, has been demonstrated, suggesting that wildlife populations act as crucibles for genetic exchange [4, 12]. The time-scaled phylogenetic reconstruction has traced the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of CanineCV to approximately 1950 in Norway from red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), indicating a long and complex evolutionary history that predates its first detection in dogs by several decades [3, 5]. This ancient origin is consistent with the finding of endogenous circoviral elements in carnivore genomes, which suggest an ancient co-evolutionary relationship [46].

Host Range Expansion, Zoonotic Potential, and Codon Usage Adaptation

The genetic flexibility of CanineCV has been laid bare by its expanding host range. Initially considered a pathogen of domestic dogs, CanineCV has now been detected in a remarkable array of wild and domestic carnivores, including red foxes, arctic foxes, golden jackals, wolves, Eurasian badgers, and, critically, domestic cats [4, 13, 21, 22, 25, 36]. The first detection of CanineCV in cats, and the successful whole-genome sequencing of a cat-derived strain (CanineCV-3), represents a major milestone in understanding the virus’s host adaptability [13]. This cross-species transmission is not a rare anomaly; studies in Serbia found that 31.6% of wild carnivores were positive, with golden jackals harboring strains typically found in domestic dogs, as well as evidence of co-infection with both dog- and fox-associated variants [4]. The detection of a “fox-only” clade in Alpine foxes suggests that some lineages have undergone independent evolution in wildlife, potentially leading to host-specific adaptation and reduced transmission back to domestic dogs [22]. Conversely, other studies have found CanineCV in red foxes that is closely related to canine strains, implying bidirectional transmission [26].

Perhaps the most concerning implication of the genetic variability of CanineCV is its potential zoonotic threat. While no confirmed cases of human disease have been reported, multiple lines of evidence warrant vigilance. A comprehensive host adaptability analysis, based on codon usage bias, demonstrated that CanineCV exhibits greater adaptability to human hosts compared to its previously documented animal hosts [3]. This analysis suggests that the virus’s codon usage patterns are more closely aligned with human cellular translational machinery, a factor that could facilitate replication in human cells should the opportunity for cross-species transmission arise. The detection of circoviruses and cycloviruses in human serum samples, coupled with the repeated identification of CanineCV-related sequences in a variety of mammals, underscores the fluidity of the host-virus interface [18]. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) emphasize the importance of a One Health approach to monitor emerging pathogens with high genetic plasticity, as such viruses are more likely to overcome species barriers. The ongoing genetic diversification of CanineCV, driven by recombination, positive selection, and environmental compartmentalization, ensures that the virus will remain a dynamic and challenging pathogen, demanding continuous molecular surveillance to preempt potential public health risks.

Epidemiology of Canine Circovirus in Domestic and Wild Canids

Global Prevalence and Geographic Distribution

Since its initial identification in the United States in 2012 [37, 47], Canine circovirus (CanineCV) has demonstrated a remarkably rapid global dissemination, establishing itself as a ubiquitous pathogen with a presence now documented across all continents where surveillance has been conducted. This emergence is not merely a consequence of improved diagnostic capabilities; rather, the accumulating body of evidence, particularly from the past five years, indicates a genuine and expanding viral circulation that transcends domestic and wild canid populations. The virus has been molecularly confirmed in domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus), golden jackals (Canis aureus), grey wolves (Canis lupus), raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides), and Eurasian badgers (Meles meles), among others [2, 4, 5, 21, 22, 25, 32, 34, 36]. This broad host range, particularly its repeated detection in multiple wild carnivore families, underscores a complex epidemiological landscape where the virus moves across ecological boundaries.

Prevalence rates for CanineCV are highly variable, ranging from less than 1% to over 45%, influenced by geographic region, host species, sample type (fecal, blood, tissue), health status of the animal, and the diagnostic assay employed. In a meta-analysis of global sequences, the virus was found to have an ancient origin, with time-scaled phylogenetic reconstructions placing its most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) in an arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) in Norway around 1950 [3]. This long-standing circulation in wildlife populations prior to its discovery in domestic dogs fundamentally alters our understanding of its epidemiology; it is not a truly emerging pathogen of dogs, but rather a previously undetected virus that has likely co-evolved with canids for decades.

Epidemiology in Domestic Dog Populations

The prevalence of CanineCV in domestic dog populations varies significantly, with rates ranging from 1% to 30% in different studies [11]. In China, a large-scale study of 1,666 serum samples from 11 provinces reported a prevalence of 5.82%, with notably higher rates in southern and eastern regions [8]. Similarly, a study in Guangxi Province detected CanineCV DNA in 8.7% of 926 serum samples, while a study in Harbin reported a prevalence of 9.48% in blood samples from pet dogs [14, 29]. A separate investigation of shelter dogs in China recorded a striking 32.4% positivity rate [3]. In South America, studies in Colombia have reported prevalence rates of 16.6% in CPV-2-positive dogs and 30% in a broader population of dogs with and without diarrhea [15, 28]. A study in northern Brazil (Amazon region) found 15% of shelter dogs to be positive [48]. In Africa, a survey in Namibia reported a high prevalence of 27.13% in domestic dogs and 43.75% in black-backed jackals [12], while in Nigeria, 14% of free-ranging dogs destined for meat consumption tested positive [58]. In Iran, 6.4% of dogs were positive [50], and in Europe, a study of dogs in Romania showed a moderate prevalence [60].

Several factors contribute to this variability. First, the age of the animal is a significant risk factor. Antibody-based surveys using an indirect ELISA (iELISA) in northeastern China demonstrated that seroprevalence increases with age, with dogs older than one year showing significantly higher rates (up to 42.3%) compared to puppies under three months old [52]. This age-related pattern suggests that infection is common and that many dogs experience exposure and seroconversion later in life, or that maternal antibodies wane, leaving young animals susceptible. Second, the health status of the animal is critical. While CanineCV has been detected in healthy dogs, numerous studies have demonstrated a statistical association between the virus and clinical disease. In a case-control study from Thailand, dogs with respiratory illness were 5.6 times more likely to test positive for CanineCV than healthy controls [49, 56]. In Colombia, the highest number of positive samples was found in the subgroup of animals with diarrhea [15]. However, a study from Italy using a molecular survey argued that CanineCV infection correlated with acute gastroenteritis only when associated with other enteric viruses, suggesting that its role as a primary pathogen is limited [53]. This apparent contradiction highlights the virus's role as a complex opportunistic agent.

Epidemiology in Wild Canids and Cross-Species Transmission

The epidemiology of CanineCV in wild canids is fundamentally different from that in domestic dogs, characterized by higher prevalence rates, distinct phylogenetic segregation, and evidence of long-term endemic circulation. This pattern is particularly pronounced in foxes, wolves, and jackals.

Foxes: Red foxes and arctic foxes represent a critical reservoir for CanineCV. A study on arctic foxes from Svalbard (samples dating back to 1996) and red foxes from Northern Norway found a prevalence of 21.6% and 16.9%, respectively [25]. Critically, phylogenetic analysis revealed that these arctic and red fox strains formed two distinct, geographically isolated lineages, suggesting minimal cross-species transmission between these two fox species despite overlapping territories in some areas [25]. Furthermore, a distinct "fox-only" clade has been identified in Europe, with strains from foxes in Italy, the UK, and Scandinavia forming a monophyletic group that is genetically distinct from those circulating in domestic dogs [22]. This segregation implies that while foxes can be infected, the transmission from foxes to dogs is not a frequent event in many European ecosystems, potentially due to host-specific adaptation or low viral loads. In contrast, a study in Romania detected a CanineCV strain in a dog that clustered phylogenetically with fox-derived viruses, suggesting occasional spillover [60]. In Canada, a survey of 159 grey wolves from the Northwest Territories found a high prevalence of 45.3%, and 87.5% of the sequenced strains were identified as "fox circoviruses" [32]. This remarkable finding indicates that wolves are a major reservoir for this fox-origin lineage, challenging the idea that it is host-specific.

Wolves and Jackals: Golden jackals appear to be a particularly important bridge host. In Serbia, CanineCV was detected in 31.6% of wild carnivore samples, with jackals more commonly carrying strains typically found in domestic dogs, while foxes harbored a distinct wildlife variant [4]. Remarkably, several jackal samples contained both variants simultaneously, suggesting these animals may serve as "mixing vessels" for genetic recombination between dog- and fox-adapted strains [4, 5]. Time-calibrated phylogenetic analysis of Serbian strains identified at least four independent introduction events into the wildlife population, with genotypes linked to both northern European (fox-derived) and Italian (dog-derived) lineages [5]. In Namibia, a high prevalence of 43.75% in black-backed jackals further supports their role as a key reservoir and potential source of infection for domestic dogs [12].

Other Species: The detection of CanineCV in cats is a recent and important development. In China, 3.42% of 409 cat samples tested positive, and the first full cat-derived CanineCV genome was obtained, belonging to genotype 3 [13]. A study in Italy detected CanineCV in 18% of Eurasian badgers and 50% of wolves, but none in sympatric foxes, pointing to host-specific differences in susceptibility or exposure [34]. These data collectively illustrate a multi-host system where the virus can circulate among wild canids, occasionally spill over into domestic dogs, and even infect non-canid carnivores, highlighting significant cross-species transmission potential.

Co-infection Dynamics and Clinical Impact

A defining feature of CanineCV epidemiology is its frequent co-detection with other viral pathogens. This is not merely a statistical association but reflects a biological synergy that profoundly affects disease outcome. The most well-documented interaction is with canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2).

Synergy with CPV-2: Numerous studies have reported co-infection rates of CanineCV and CPV-2 ranging from 6.4% to 29.5% [20, 23, 28, 33, 50, 51]. Critically, co-infection is associated with more severe disease. In a study from Vietnam, the mortality rate in dogs with CPV-2 mono-infection was 22%, but this doubled to 44% in dogs co-infected with CanineCV [23]. A separate Vietnamese study confirmed that co-infected dogs exhibited more severe clinical symptoms, higher mortality, longer treatment duration, and worse recovery outcomes [33]. In a severe outbreak among service dogs in Kazakhstan, CanineCV and CPV-2 were the dominant viral agents, accounting for over 80% of all viral reads, resulting in a high mortality rate exceeding 100 juvenile dogs [24].

The mechanistic basis for this synergy is becoming clearer. CanineCV, through its Rep protein, has been shown to suppress the host's type I interferon (IFN-I) response, thereby inhibiting the expression of antiviral interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) like MxA and ISG15 [6, 17]. This immunosuppression creates a permissive environment for co-infecting viruses. In co-infection experiments, CanineCV was shown to promote CPV-2 replication, likely through this mechanism [17]. This interaction is not limited to CPV-2. Co-infections with canine adenovirus (CAdV), canine coronavirus (CCoV), canine astrovirus (CaAstV), and canine kobuvirus (CaKoV) have all been documented, often at rates exceeding 50% in some studies of diarrheic dogs [20, 54, 55, 59]. In a study of Thai dogs with respiratory disease, CanineCV was detected in the respiratory tract alongside other viruses, and its presence was significantly associated with clinical signs [49].

Wildlife Co-infections: The co-infection dynamic is equally prevalent in wild canids. In a study of Canadian wolves, 87.5% of CanineCV-positive animals were also positive for carnivore protoparvoviruses, and CanineCV infection was associated with a 7.5-fold and 2.4-fold increase in the risk of acquiring CPV-2 or canine bufavirus infections, respectively [32]. In Italian wolves, 47.8% of the subjects were co-infected with two or three DNA viruses, including CanineCV, carnivore protoparvovirus, and CAdV [41].

Evolutionary Drivers and Phylogeography

The global spread and genetic diversity of CanineCV are driven by high mutation rates, frequent recombination, and purifying selection. Phylogeographic analysis suggests that the virus likely originated in Norway from a fox host around 1950, with subsequent global dispersal [3]. This ancient origin is supported by the detection of CanineCV in arctic fox samples from 1996 [25] and its deep genetic segregation into distinct genotypes.

Genotyping and Global Clades: The current classification of CanineCV is complex and evolving. Based on complete genome analysis, the virus has been divided into between four and seven genotypes, with the number increasing as more sequences become available [3, 8, 10, 14]. The major clades include: CanineCV-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, and -6, with some authors further subdividing these into subtypes (e.g., CCV-1a through CCV-1e) [3, 10]. The most recent and comprehensive analysis identified five major clades: China-I, China-II, Cosmopolitan, EA (Euro-Asian), and SEA (Southeast Asian) [3]. The distribution of these genotypes is not uniform. The Cosmopolitan clade includes strains from North America, Europe, and parts of Asia, while the China-specific clades suggest localized, endemic circulation with limited export [3]. In China, genotypes 1, 3, and 4 have been reported, with genotype 1 being dominant [14, 29]. In Vietnam, genotypes 1 and 3 co-circulate [23], while in Thailand, genotype 4 is prevalent [31, 49]. The recently identified genotype 5 appears to be particularly associated with wildlife, especially foxes, in Europe [5, 22].

Recombination: Recombination is a major driver of CanineCV evolution. Extensive inter-clade and inter-species recombination events have been documented globally. In Thailand, a recombinant CanineCV strain was found to have an American virus as its major parent and a Chinese virus as its minor parent [31]. In Vietnam, a similar recombination event was identified [57]. In China, multiple recombination events involving strains from different hosts (dog, fox) and countries were detected within local strains [8, 10, 27]. The recombination breakpoints are often located in the Rep gene, which can facilitate the exchange of functional domains and potentially alter viral replication capacity [31, 49]. The jackals in Serbia, which carry both dog- and fox-derived strains simultaneously, are considered potential hotspots for such recombination events [4].

Selection Pressure: Despite the high genetic variability, purifying (negative) selection is the dominant evolutionary pressure acting on the CanineCV genome [14, 27]. However, positive selection has been detected at specific codons in the capsid (Cap) protein, particularly at positions 24, 50, 103, and 111 [7]. These sites are located within predicted T-cell and B-cell epitopes, suggesting that host immune pressure is driving the evolution of the virus [7]. The positive selection at these sites may facilitate immune evasion and contribute to the virus's ability to establish persistent infections or re-infect previously exposed animals. The capsid protein also features 19 variable sites, with some (T58Q, P239A) showing regional specificity [10], further supporting the concept of geographically constrained evolution.

Clinical Manifestations and the Role of Co-infections

The clinical spectrum of Canine circovirus (CanineCV) infection is remarkably broad, ranging from subclinical carriage to fatal systemic disease. A defining feature of CanineCV pathobiology is its frequent and often synergistic interaction with other canine pathogens, which profoundly alters the clinical trajectory and severity of disease. Understanding these manifestations and the mechanistic underpinnings of co-infection is critical for accurate diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic intervention.

Gastrointestinal Manifestations: The Predominant Clinical Syndrome

The most consistently reported clinical presentation associated with CanineCV is acute gastroenteritis, often manifesting as hemorrhagic diarrhea. The seminal description of CanineCV in 2012 identified the virus in a dog with severe hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, vasculitis, and granulomatous lymphadenitis [37]. Subsequent case reports and epidemiological studies have solidified this association. A landmark case from South Korea detailed a five-year-old Golden Retriever presenting with acute, watery, and bloody diarrhea persisting for three weeks [44]. Pathological examination revealed granulomatous inflammation, fibrinoid vasculitis, and hemorrhagic foci within the small intestine and mesenteric lymph nodes, alongside characteristic intracytoplasmic amphophilic inclusion bodies in histiocytic cells [44]. Similarly, a fatal case in a five-month-old Bassett Hound-Labrador Retriever cross in Connecticut presented with lethargy, inappetence, bleeding gums, and a grossly blue-black small intestine due to infarction secondary to circumferential transmural vasculitis [45]. Electron microscopy in that case confirmed aggregates of 15–18 nm viral particles in damaged crypt cells and vascular endothelium [45].

The clinical signs of CanineCV-associated enteritis are non-specific and include vomiting, diarrhea (often with frank blood or melena), anorexia, and lethargy [1, 2, 11]. However, the severity can be highly variable. While some studies report a strong correlation between CanineCV detection and diarrheic disease, others have identified the virus in a substantial proportion of apparently healthy dogs. For instance, a Colombian study detected CanineCV in 30% of fecal samples from both diarrheic and non-diarrheic dogs, though the highest positivity was observed in the diarrheic subgroup [15]. This dichotomy has led to the hypothesis that CanineCV may act primarily as an opportunistic or synergistic pathogen, requiring a co-factor, most commonly another enteric virus, to induce overt clinical disease [11, 53]. Indeed, a molecular survey in Italy concluded that CanineCV infection correlated with acute gastroenteritis only when associated with other enteric viruses, such as canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2) or canine coronavirus (CCoV) [53]. This suggests that CanineCV may be a necessary but insufficient cause of severe enteritis in many cases, functioning as a disease modifier rather than a primary etiological agent.

Respiratory Manifestations: An Emerging Clinical Entity

Beyond the gastrointestinal tract, a growing body of evidence implicates CanineCV in canine respiratory disease. The virus has been detected in oronasal secretions and lung tissues of dogs with respiratory illness, with a significant statistical association [49, 56]. A comprehensive study in Thailand found that dogs with respiratory signs were 5.6 times more likely to test positive for CanineCV than healthy controls [49, 56]. Using in situ hybridization (ISH), the CanineCV genome was localized within tracheobronchial lymphoid cells, pulmonary parenchyma, capillary endothelia, and mononuclear cells in the alveoli of dogs with pneumonia [49]. Immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis using a recombinant capsid protein antibody further confirmed the presence of CanineCV antigens in pneumocytes and immune cells within the lung, spleen, and tracheobronchial lymph nodes [9, 56]. These findings demonstrate a clear tissue tropism for the respiratory system, although the precise role of the virus in initiating or exacerbating primary respiratory pathology versus acting as a secondary invader remains to be fully elucidated. The clinical signs reported in these cases are typical of canine infectious respiratory disease complex (CIRDC), including coughing, nasal discharge, and dyspnea, often in the context of co-infections with other respiratory pathogens like canine adenovirus type 2 (CAV-2), canine parainfluenza virus (CPIV), and Bordetella bronchiseptica [49, 59].

Systemic and Vascular Manifestations: Vasculitis and Immunopathology

A hallmark of severe CanineCV infection is systemic vasculitis, which can lead to multi-organ damage and high mortality. The virus has a tropism for vascular endothelium, and infection can trigger fibrinoid necrosis of blood vessel walls, leading to hemorrhage, thrombosis, and infarction [37, 44, 45]. This vasculitic process is not confined to the gastrointestinal tract; it has been documented in the brain, meninges, lung, liver, and kidneys [45]. Clinically, this can manifest as petechiation, ecchymoses, melena, and, in extreme cases, sudden death. The underlying mechanism is thought to involve direct viral damage to endothelial cells combined with an aberrant host immune response, potentially driven by the virus's ability to modulate immune function [6, 17].

CanineCV is also associated with profound immunosuppression, a feature that is critical to its role in co-infections. The virus, particularly its Rep protein, has been shown to inhibit the type I interferon (IFN-I) response, a key antiviral defense pathway [17]. In vitro studies using rescued CanineCV demonstrated that the Rep protein suppresses the activation of the IFN-β promoter and blocks the subsequent expression of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) such as MxA and ISG15 [17]. This suppression of innate immunity creates a permissive environment for secondary pathogens. Furthermore, the virus can induce lymphoid depletion and necrosis in the spleen and lymph nodes, as observed in fatal cases [37, 45]. The capsid protein (Cap) has been localized to lymphocytes and macrophages within these tissues, suggesting direct viral interference with immune cell function [9]. This dual strategy of direct immunosuppression and immune cell destruction underpins the virus's ability to exacerbate concurrent infections.

The Role of Co-infections: Synergistic Pathogenesis and Disease Severity

The most critical aspect of CanineCV clinical disease is its role as a co-infectious agent. The virus is rarely found as a sole pathogen in severely ill animals; instead, it is frequently detected alongside a consortium of other canine viruses, most notably CPV-2, but also CAV-1/2, CCoV, canine distemper virus (CDV), canine astrovirus (CaAstV), and canine kobuvirus (CaKoV) [1, 2, 20, 24, 36, 54, 55, 59]. The prevalence of co-infection in CanineCV-positive dogs with diarrhea can be as high as 68% [37].

Canine Parvovirus Type 2 (CPV-2): The Archetypal Synergy

The interaction between CanineCV and CPV-2 is the most extensively studied and clinically significant co-infection. Numerous studies across the globe have documented a higher-than-expected frequency of dual infections, and the clinical outcome is consistently more severe than infection with either virus alone [23, 24, 28, 33, 51]. A seminal outbreak investigation in Kazakhstan reported a severe gastroenteritis epidemic among service dogs, where high-throughput sequencing revealed that CanineCV (42.3%) and CPV-2 (38%) together accounted for over 80% of all viral reads in clinical samples [24]. The outbreak was characterized by acute onset, rapid progression, and high mortality, particularly in juveniles under 12 months of age, including vaccinated adults [24].

The mechanistic basis for this synergy is becoming clearer. CanineCV-induced immunosuppression, mediated by the Rep protein's inhibition of the IFN-I response, directly promotes CPV-2 replication [17]. In vitro experiments demonstrated that CanineCV co-infection significantly enhances CPV-2 replication in cell culture [6, 17]. Conversely, the Rep protein of CanineCV has also been shown to enhance the cytotoxicity of the virus itself, while simultaneously promoting the replication of co-infecting viruses like Feline Panleukopenia Virus (FPV), a close relative of CPV-2 [6]. This creates a vicious cycle: CanineCV suppresses the host's antiviral defenses, allowing CPV-2 to replicate to higher titers, which in turn causes more extensive tissue damage and a more profound inflammatory response.

Clinically, dogs co-infected with CPV-2 and CanineCV exhibit significantly worse outcomes compared to those with CPV-2 alone. A detailed clinicopathological study in Vietnam found that co-infected dogs had more severe diarrhea, vomiting, and anorexia, higher mortality rates, longer treatment durations, and poorer recovery [33]. Hematological analysis revealed marked leukopenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia, while biochemical profiles showed more pronounced hypoglycemia, hypoproteinemia, hypoalbuminemia, and electrolyte disturbances such as hypokalemia [33]. Pathologically, co-infected animals displayed more extensive intestinal and systemic damage, including severe villous atrophy, crypt necrosis, and lymphoid depletion [33]. The mortality rate in CPV-2 mono-infected dogs was reported to double in the presence of CanineCV co-infection [23]. This synergistic effect is so pronounced that routine screening for CanineCV in all CPV-2-positive dogs is now recommended for improved clinical management and prognostication [33].

Other Viral Co-infections: Expanding the Pathogenic Network

While CPV-2 is the most common partner, CanineCV frequently co-occurs with other pathogens, further complicating the clinical picture. Co-infection with canine adenovirus type 1 (CAV-1) and type 2 (CAV-2) has been documented, particularly in dogs with parvoviral enteritis [20]. In a study of 95 CPV-2-infected dogs in Italy, 29.5% were co-infected with other viruses, including CanineCV (7.4%) and CAV-2 (19%) [20]. Although this study did not find a statistically significant increase in disease severity in the co-infected group, the high frequency of co-detection underscores the complex viral ecology in canine enteritis.

CanineCV has also been identified in co-infections with canine distemper virus (CDV) in wolves, where the combination was associated with severe systemic disease [36]. In domestic dogs, dual infections with canine astrovirus (CaAstV) and canine kobuvirus (CaKoV) have been reported, with co-infection rates reaching 8.77% and 7.02%, respectively, in diarrheic populations [54, 55]. The clinical significance of these specific pairings is still under investigation, but the potential for additive or synergistic effects on gastrointestinal and systemic health is high.

Co-infections in Wildlife: Implications for Viral Ecology and Evolution

The role of co-infections extends beyond domestic dogs into wildlife populations, where CanineCV circulates in wolves, foxes, jackals, and badgers [4, 5, 21, 22, 25, 32, 34, 36, 39]. In a study of grey wolves in Canada, 87.5% of CanineCV-positive animals were co-infected with canine parvoviruses (CPV-2 or canine bufavirus), and CanineCV infection was associated with a 7.5-fold increased risk of acquiring CPV-2 infection [32]. This suggests that CanineCV may facilitate parvoviral super-infections in wild canids, potentially driving viral transmission and evolution in these populations. The detection of recombinant CanineCV strains in golden jackals co-infected with both dog- and fox-derived variants highlights the role of these animals as "mixing vessels" for viral genetic exchange [4, 5]. This dynamic is particularly concerning in regions where domestic and wild canid populations overlap, as it creates opportunities for the emergence of novel, potentially more virulent strains.

Subclinical Infection and the Carrier State

A significant proportion of CanineCV infections are subclinical. The virus has been detected in fecal samples from 6.9% to 14% of apparently healthy dogs in various studies [16, 37]. In Iran, all CanineCV-positive dogs identified in one study were non-diarrheic, demonstrating that the virus can circulate in a population without causing overt disease [16]. This subclinical carrier state is a major challenge for disease control, as these animals can shed the virus in their feces and serve as a source of infection for susceptible individuals, particularly in high-density environments like shelters and kennels [48]. The factors that trigger a transition from subclinical carriage to clinical disease are not fully understood but are likely to involve host immune status, age, stress, and, most importantly, the acquisition of a co-infecting pathogen. Young animals, particularly those under one year of age, appear to be more susceptible to clinical disease, especially when co-infected [23, 48]. The virus's environmental stability further complicates control, as it can persist on fomites and in contaminated feed, facilitating indirect transmission [40].

Diagnostic Approaches for Canine Circovirus Detection

The accurate and timely detection of Canine Circovirus (CanineCV) presents a formidable challenge to veterinary diagnosticians, researchers, and clinicians, primarily due to the virus’s unique biological characteristics, including its small single-stranded circular DNA genome, high genetic variability, and the current inability to reliably propagate the virus in conventional cell culture systems [1, 17]. Unlike many other canine pathogens for which virus isolation remains a gold standard, the diagnostic landscape for CanineCV is heavily reliant on molecular and immunochemical methodologies. The virus’s propensity for co-infection with other enteric and respiratory pathogens, most notably canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2), canine adenovirus (CAdV), and canine distemper virus (CDV), further complicates clinical diagnosis, as the clinical signs are often non-specific and may be attributed to the primary pathogen [1, 20, 23, 24]. Consequently, a multi-tiered diagnostic approach that integrates highly sensitive nucleic acid detection, quantitative viral load assessment, in situ localization of viral components, and serological profiling has become imperative for understanding the virus’s epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical relevance [2, 11]. This section provides an exhaustive examination of the diagnostic modalities available for CanineCV detection, critically evaluating their principles, sensitivities, specificities, and practical applications within the context of both clinical practice and large-scale surveillance.

Molecular Detection: The Cornerstone of CanineCV Diagnosis

The detection of viral nucleic acid represents the most sensitive and specific approach for identifying CanineCV infection, given the current absence of robust virus isolation protocols [1, 17]. The virus’s genome, a circular single-stranded DNA molecule of approximately 2,063–2,066 nucleotides, encodes two major open reading frames (ORFs): ORF1, which encodes the replication-associated protein (Rep), and ORF2, which encodes the capsid protein (Cap) [3, 7]. Both of these genomic regions, along with the conserved nonamer sequence within the stem-loop structure at the origin of replication, have been targeted for molecular assay development.

Conventional and Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction

Conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and its more sensitive variant, nested PCR, have been instrumental in the initial discovery and subsequent molecular surveillance of CanineCV [2, 13, 39]. These assays typically amplify a fragment of the Rep or Cap gene, followed by agarose gel electrophoresis and sequencing for confirmation. The utility of conventional PCR has been demonstrated in numerous epidemiological studies, including the first detection of CanineCV in South Korea, where PCR amplification from small intestine, mesenteric lymph nodes, and fecal samples confirmed infection in a dog with hemorrhagic diarrhea [44]. Similarly, conventional PCR screening of rectal swabs in China revealed a 9.06% positivity rate in dogs and, importantly, provided the first evidence of CanineCV infection in cats, with a prevalence of 3.42% [13]. In Colombia, conventional PCR detected a 30% prevalence of CanineCV in dogs from Medellín, with a significant association between viral detection and the presence of diarrhea [15].

However, while conventional PCR is cost-effective and widely accessible, its sensitivity is inherently limited compared to newer technologies. Reports indicate that traditional PCR methods may have detection limits in the range of 10⁴ copies/μL or higher, necessitating a higher viral load for a positive result [59]. This limitation is particularly critical for CanineCV, which often exhibits low viral titers in subclinical or asymptomatic carriers, potentially leading to underestimation of true prevalence [11]. Nested PCR, which involves two successive amplification rounds using internal primers, offers enhanced sensitivity but carries an increased risk of amplicon contamination, requiring stringent laboratory practices.

Quantitative Real-Time PCR: The Gold Standard for Sensitivity and Quantification

The development and widespread adoption of quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) has revolutionized CanineCV diagnostics by providing a closed-tube system with enhanced sensitivity, specificity, and the ability to quantify viral load [1, 61]. Most qPCR assays for CanineCV employ either SYBR Green I intercalating dye or hydrolysis (TaqMan) probes, with various assays targeting conserved regions of the Rep gene.

A hydrolysis probe-based qPCR assay was specifically established for rapid detection of CanineCV DNA in fecal samples, achieving a minimum detection limit of 8.42 × 10¹ copies/μL, a sensitivity approximately 1,000-fold greater than that of conventional PCR [61]. This assay demonstrated high specificity, showing no cross-reactivity with other common canine viruses such as CPV-2, canine coronavirus (CCoV), or canine distemper virus, and exhibited excellent repeatability, with mean intra-assay and inter-assay coefficients of variation of 0.26% and 0.36%, respectively [61]. In clinical testing, this qPCR detected CanineCV in 14.04% of fecal samples (8/57), with 8% of those positive dogs showing co-infections with other canine pathogens [61]. The quantitative nature of qPCR is particularly valuable for exploring the pathobiology of CanineCV, as it allows researchers to correlate viral load with disease severity and clinical outcomes. In studies of co-infection with CPV-2, qPCR has been used to demonstrate that CanineCV can promote CPV-2 replication by suppressing the host’s type I interferon response, thereby exacerbating clinical disease [17, 33].

Real-time PCR assays have also been developed in duplex and multiplex formats to detect CanineCV alongside other enteric or respiratory viruses, a critical capability given the virus’s high rate of co-infection. A duplex SYBR Green I-based real-time PCR assay was established for the simultaneous detection of CanineCV and canine astrovirus, distinguishing the two viruses by their distinct melting temperatures (79°C for CanineCV and 86°C for canine astrovirus) [55]. This assay demonstrated high sensitivity, with detection limits of 9.25 × 10¹ copies/μL for CanineCV and 6.15 × 10¹ copies/μL for canine astrovirus, and no cross-reactivity with other common canine viruses [55]. In 57 clinical fecal samples, the duplex assay detected CanineCV in 14.04% (8/57), canine astrovirus in 12.28% (7/57), with a co-infection rate of 8.77% (5/57) [55]. A similar duplex SYBR Green I-based assay was established for CanineCV and canine kobuvirus, with detection limits of 3.841 × 10¹ copies/μL and 8.924 × 10¹ copies/μL, respectively [54]. For broader respiratory and enteric disease investigation, a multiplex PCR (mPCR) method has been developed to simultaneously detect seven viruses, including canine adenovirus type 2, canine distemper virus, canine influenza virus, canine parainfluenza virus, CanineCV, CCoV, and CPV, with a sensitivity limit of 1 × 10⁴ viral copies for each target [59].

Chip Digital PCR: Emerging Ultra-Sensitive Technology

The most recent advancement in molecular diagnostics for CanineCV is the establishment of chip digital PCR (cdPCR), a technology that offers absolute quantification without the need for standard curves and provides significantly higher sensitivity than qPCR. A newly developed cdPCR assay for CanineCV demonstrated a remarkable minimum detection limit of 6.62 copies/μL, which is approximately 10 times more sensitive than qPCR [47]. In comparative testing of 423 canine fecal samples, the cdPCR exhibited a positive detection rate of 2.1%, double the 1% positivity rate obtained with qPCR [47]. Furthermore, the cdPCR successfully detected CanineCV in samples that were qPCR-negative, highlighting its superior sensitivity for detecting low-level viremia or subclinical infections [47]. The ability to sequence 15 complete CanineCV genomes from cdPCR-positive samples further confirmed the assay’s specificity and utility for genomic characterization [47]. This ultra-sensitive technology is particularly valuable for understanding the true prevalence of CanineCV in diverse populations, including wildlife and asymptomatic carriers, and for monitoring viral dynamics during co-infections.

Immunological and Serological Methods

While molecular detection identifies the presence of viral nucleic acid, serological assays detect host antibodies against CanineCV, providing evidence of past or ongoing infection and facilitating large-scale epidemiological studies. The development of reliable serological tools has been a critical step forward, given that direct detection of viral antigens in clinical samples has proven challenging.

Recombinant Capsid Protein-Based Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)

The capsid (Cap) protein is the primary structural protein of CanineCV and a major immunogen, making it an ideal target for antibody-based detection assays [7, 9]. An indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (iELISA) has been developed using recombinant CanineCV capsid protein (rCap) expressed in Escherichia coli as the coating antigen [52]. The rCap protein, with a molecular weight of approximately 31 kDa, was successfully purified and used to immunize rabbits to generate polyclonal antibodies (PoAbs), which in turn served as positive controls and detection reagents for the iELISA [9, 52].

This iELISA demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance, with no cross-reactivity against antibodies directed against other common canine pathogens, including CPV-2, CCoV, canine adenovirus, and canine distemper virus [52]. When applied to 1,047 clinical serum samples from domestic dogs in northeastern China, the iELISA revealed an overall seroprevalence of CanineCV ranging from 22.22% to 42.29% across five cities [52]. Statistical analyses revealed a significant difference in seroprevalence by age, with dogs older than one year showing significantly higher seropositivity rates compared to dogs younger than three months (p = 0.005), suggesting that most infections likely occur later in life or that maternally derived antibodies wane over time [52]. Critically, among 32 ELISA-positive serum samples, 34.75% also tested positive for CanineCV DNA by qPCR, a rate significantly higher than the 5.26% positivity observed in ELISA-negative samples (2/38), confirming the correlation between serological exposure and active viral shedding [52].

Polyclonal and Monoclonal Antibody Production for Antigen Detection

Beyond serology, the production of specific antibodies against the Cap protein has enabled the development of immunochemical assays for direct detection of viral antigens in tissues. The recombinant Cap protein expressed in E. coli was used to generate rabbit anti-CanineCV rCap protein PoAbs, which were then validated for use in Western blotting, indirect immunofluorescence, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) [9]. The PoAbs demonstrated strong reactivity and specificity, detecting the Cap protein predominantly in immune cells (lymphocytes and macrophages) within the spleen, lung, tracheobronchial lymph nodes, small intestine, and kidney of infected dogs [9]. Additionally, the Cap protein was localized in pneumocytes of the lung and renal tubular epithelial cells in the kidney, providing crucial insights into viral cell tropism and tissue distribution [9].

This IHC method, also referred to as immunoperoxidase detection, has proven invaluable for investigating the pathogenesis of CanineCV at the cellular level. By enabling the visualization of viral antigens within histologically preserved tissues, researchers can correlate the presence of virus with specific pathological lesions, such as granulomatous inflammation, vasculitis, and lymphoid depletion [9, 37]. In a study of dogs with respiratory disease, IHC using PoAbs against the Cap protein successfully identified CanineCV antigens in the lung and tracheobronchial lymph nodes, confirming the virus’s involvement in respiratory pathology [56].

In Situ Hybridization: Localizing Viral Nucleic Acid in Tissues

In situ hybridization (ISH) is a molecular technique that allows for the direct visualization and localization of specific viral nucleic acid sequences within intact tissue sections, providing spatial context that cannot be achieved with PCR-based methods alone [49, 62]. For CanineCV, ISH has been employed to detect viral DNA in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues, using either digoxigenin-labeled probes or commercially available fluorescent ISH (FISH) probe mixes.

ISH techniques have been instrumental in demonstrating the tissue tropism of CanineCV in both the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts. In a study of dogs with respiratory disease, ISH using a probe targeting the CanineCV genome localized viral DNA in the tracheobronchial lymphoid cells (3/4 positive dogs), pulmonary parenchyma, capillary endothelia, and mononuclear cells harboring in alveoli (2/4 positive dogs) [49]. This finding strongly suggested that CanineCV can infect cells within the respiratory system, potentially contributing to pneumonia and other respiratory pathologies. The detection rate and cell-associated positive area using FISH-RNA probe mixes have been reported to be superior compared to digoxigenin-labeled DNA probes, representing a significant advantage for detecting low-abundance viral targets [62]. The application of ISH has also confirmed the presence of CanineCV in the granulomatous lesions of the small intestine and mesenteric lymph nodes of dogs with hemorrhagic diarrhea, where viral DNA was found within histiocytic cells containing characteristic intracytoplasmic amphophilic inclusion bodies [44].

Advanced Genomic and Metagenomic Approaches

The remarkable genetic diversity of CanineCV, driven by high mutation rates and extensive recombination, necessitates the use of advanced genomic tools for comprehensive characterization and surveillance. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and metagenomic analyses have become indispensable for discovering novel strains, identifying recombination events, and monitoring the virus’s evolutionary trajectory [3, 24, 31].

Next-Generation Sequencing and Full-Genome Characterization

NGS platforms, such as Illumina MiSeq, enable the unbiased sequencing of viral genomes directly from clinical samples, bypassing the need for cell culture isolation. This approach has been pivotal in characterizing the first CanineCV genomes from various regions, including Thailand, Brazil, and Africa [12, 30, 31]. In a study from Brazil, NGS was used to sequence the complete genome of a CanineCV strain from a dog with intermittent hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, revealing a genome of 2,063 nucleotides and identifying a unique amino acid change in the replicase protein [30]. Similarly, NGS of pooled oral, rectal, and blood swabs from an outbreak of fatal gastroenteritis in Kazakhstan revealed that the majority of viral sequences corresponded to CanineCV (42.3% of total viral reads), underscoring the virus’s role as a primary or synergistic pathogen in severe disease [24].

Full-genome sequencing has also been critical for resolving the complex genotyping and phylogeography of CanineCV. Analyses based on complete genome sequences have led to the classification of CanineCV into multiple genotypes, with some studies proposing five or more distinct clades (CanineCV-1 through CanineCV-5, and further subtypes like CCV-1a through CCV-2b) based on pairwise sequence identity and phylogenetic reconstruction [3, 8, 10]. The genotyping system is still evolving, with different authors using varying nomenclatures; however, the consensus threshold for species demarcation within the Circoviridae family is 80% genome-wide nucleotide identity [25]. Recombination analysis, enabled by full-genome data, has revealed extensive inter-clade and inter-host recombination events, which are major drivers of CanineCV evolution and can lead to the emergence of novel strains with altered pathogenic potential [3, 10, 31]. For instance, recombination breakpoints have been identified within the Rep gene and the intergenic region, with American and Chinese strains serving as major and minor parents for recombinant viruses circulating in Thailand and Vietnam [23, 31].

Metagenomic Surveillance for Co-Infections and Novel Viruses

Metagenomic sequencing is a powerful tool for investigating the entire virome of a sample, making it particularly valuable for

Prevention, Control Strategies, and Vaccine Development

The multifaceted challenge of controlling Canine circovirus (CanineCV) stems from its remarkable genetic plasticity, its capacity for cross-species transmission, its environmental persistence, and its intricate role as a co-pathogen that exacerbates other infections through immunosuppression [1, 2]. Consequently, effective prevention and control demand a holistic, multi-pronged strategy that integrates rigorous biosecurity, advanced surveillance diagnostics, targeted immunoprophylaxis, and a profound understanding of the virus's molecular pathogenesis to disrupt its transmission cycle and mitigate its clinical impact.

Biological Basis for Control Challenges and Intervention Targets

A critical barrier to developing effective countermeasures is the virus's ability to subvert the host immune response. The non-structural Rep protein has been demonstrated to act as a potent antagonist of the type I interferon (IFN-I) signaling pathway. Specifically, the Rep protein inhibits the activation of the IFN-β promoter and suppresses the subsequent expression of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) such as MxA and ISG15 [6, 17]. This immunosuppressive effect is a cornerstone of CanineCV's pathogenic strategy; by dampening the host's antiviral state, the virus not only creates a permissive environment for its own replication but also facilitates the replication of co-infecting pathogens like canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2) [17]. Research has confirmed that this synergistic interaction is not merely passive but active, with the Rep protein promoting CPV-2 replication while simultaneously suppressing host protein expression and innate immunity [6, 17]. The discovery of a truncated Rep' protein further complicates this picture, as it exerts a stronger cytotoxic effect on host cells compared to the full-length Rep protein, though both contribute to enhanced viral pathogenesis during co-infections [6]. Therefore, any successful vaccine strategy must ideally elicit robust neutralizing antibodies against the capsid and, potentially, a cell-mediated immune response that targets these non-structural proteins to neutralize their immunosuppressive functions. Furthermore, the virus's tropism for lymphoid tissues, including lymphocytes, macrophages, and capillary endothelia, as demonstrated through immunohistochemical detection of the Cap protein in spleen, lymph nodes, and pulmonary tissues, underscores the need for immune-based interventions that can protect these target cells [9, 37, 49]. The capsid protein itself, particularly its highly variable surface loops, is under strong positive selection driven by host immune pressure, indicating that the virus is continuously evolving to evade antibody responses [7, 8]. This evolutionary arms race necessitates a vaccine design approach that targets conserved, functionally critical epitopes to provide broad and durable protection against diverse genotypes.

Biosecurity, Environmental Control, and Zoonotic Risk Mitigation

Non-pharmaceutical interventions form the first line of defense against CanineCV, particularly in high-density populations such as kennels, shelters, and breeding facilities. The virus is a non-enveloped, single-stranded DNA virus, a structural characteristic that confers significant environmental stability. Data from analogous circoviruses, such as Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), demonstrate that similar pathogens can survive in feed ingredients and organic matter under transboundary shipping conditions, highlighting the potential for fomite transmission [40]. While specific survival data for CanineCV in the environment is still limited, its non-enveloped nature and high prevalence in fecal matter [2, 11] strongly suggest that it can persist for extended periods in contaminated bedding, food bowls, and kennel surfaces. Consequently, rigorous cleaning and disinfection protocols employing virucidal agents effective against non-enveloped viruses, such as accelerated hydrogen peroxide, sodium hypochlorite (bleach), or potassium peroxymonosulfate, are essential. These measures must be applied meticulously, especially in facilities where dogs are housed communally.

The detection of CanineCV across a widening range of species, including domestic cats, red foxes, golden jackals, wolves, Eurasian badgers, and even raccoon dogs, establishes it as a multi-host pathogen with a complex eco-epidemiology [1, 13, 21, 32, 34, 36]. This has profound implications for control, as wild canids and other wildlife serve as reservoir hosts that can sustain viral circulation independent of domestic dog populations [4, 5, 25]. Phylogenetic studies have documented independent introduction events into wildlife and the existence of "fox-only" clades, suggesting long-standing viral-host associations and species-specific adaptation in some cases [5, 22]. However, the overlap between domestic and wild animals in peri-urban environments, as documented in Serbia and Italy, creates opportunities for viral spillover in both directions [4, 34, 41]. Therefore, prevention strategies must adopt a One Health framework, integrating wildlife surveillance with domestic animal health management. The potential for zoonotic transmission, flagged by computational host adaptability analyses showing a higher adaptation index toward human hosts compared to previously documented hosts, cannot be ignored [1, 3]. While no confirmed human disease has been reported, the presence of CanineCV DNA in human stool samples and its genetic relatedness to cycloviruses found in human specimens warrants a precautionary approach [18, 43]. Immunocompromised individuals and those with occupational exposure (veterinarians, kennel workers, wildlife rehabilitators) should adhere to strict hygiene protocols, including the use of gloves and proper handwashing when handling canine feces or respiratory secretions.

Surveillance, Diagnostics, and Molecular Epidemiology as Control Tools

Robust surveillance is the bedrock of any effective control program. The advent of highly sensitive diagnostic tools has revolutionized our ability to detect and quantify CanineCV, which is often present in subclinical infections or at low viral loads. Real-time PCR (qPCR) has become the gold standard, with hydrolysis probe-based assays achieving detection limits as low as 8.42 × 10¹ copies/μL, offering a 1,000-fold improvement over conventional PCR [61]. Chip digital PCR (cdPCR) represents the next frontier in sensitivity, capable of detecting as few as 6.62 copies/μL, making it ten times more sensitive than qPCR and ideal for detecting low-level shedding in carrier animals [47]. These advanced nucleic acid detection methods, including duplex and multiplex assays that simultaneously detect CanineCV alongside common coinfecting pathogens like CPV-2, canine kobuvirus, and canine astrovirus, are invaluable for understanding the true burden of disease and for differential diagnosis in clinical settings [54, 55, 59].

Beyond simple detection, genomic surveillance is critical for tracking viral evolution and the emergence of new genotypes. Continuous monitoring of the capsid gene, which is under strong diversifying selection at key codons (e.g., positions 24, 50, 103, and 111), allows for the early identification of antigenic variants that could escape vaccine-induced immunity [7]. The division of global strains into at least five to seven distinct genotypes (e.g., CanineCV-1a through CanineCV-2b) with specific geographic distributions underscores the need for global and regional surveillance networks [3, 8, 10]. For instance, the identification of a "Cosmopolitan" clade alongside region-specific Asian clades (China-I, China-II, EA, SEA) demonstrates that while some lineages are highly mobile, others remain geographically constrained [3]. Recombination, a major driver of CanineCV evolution, is frequently detected in the Rep gene and contributes to the emergence of novel chimeric strains with unpredictable pathogenic potential [1, 31]. Therefore, a control strategy must incorporate regular sequencing of Rep and Cap genes to monitor for recombination events and to ensure that diagnostic assays remain capable of detecting all circulating lineages. Serological surveillance using recombinant capsid protein-based ELISAs has also proven valuable, revealing high seroprevalence (22–42%) in some dog populations and confirming that infection is far more widespread than clinical case numbers suggest [52]. Integrating PCR-based viral detection with serological surveys provides a comprehensive picture of both active infection and past exposure, which is essential for assessing the efficacy of control measures over time [52].

Vaccine Development: Current Status and Future Directions

Currently, there is no commercially available vaccine for CanineCV, and the development of an effective immunogen remains a major research priority [2, 19]. The capsid protein (Cap) is the primary target for vaccine development, given its role in host cell attachment and its immunogenicity. Recombinant Cap (rCap) proteins have been successfully expressed in E. coli systems and have been used to generate polyclonal antibodies that recognize the native virus, confirming the antigenic integrity of the recombinant protein [9, 56]. This lays the groundwork for developing a subunit vaccine based on the Cap protein. Immunoinformatic approaches have already identified five highly promiscuous T-cell epitopes (YQHLPPFRF, YIRAKWINW, ALYRRLTLI, HLQGFVNLK, and GTMNFVARR) that are predicted to bind strongly to a wide array of dog leukocyte antigens (DLA) [19]. A multi-epitope vaccine construct combining these peptides with appropriate adjuvants and linkers has been designed in silico, demonstrating stable binding to DLA molecules through molecular dynamics simulations [19]. This peptide-based approach offers the advantage of focusing the immune response on conserved, non-variable regions of the virus, potentially overcoming the issue of antigenic drift.

However, moving from in silico predictions to an effective vaccine requires overcoming significant hurdles. The immunosuppressive nature of the virus itself poses a challenge; a vaccine must be strong enough to overcome the virus's ability to inhibit the type I interferon response. The use of potent adjuvants, such as toll-like receptor agonists, may be necessary to drive a robust Th1-biased cellular and humoral response. Furthermore, the virus-like particle (VLP) platform holds considerable promise. VLPs are highly immunogenic, non-infectious structures that display the viral capsid in a repetitive, authentic conformation, which is superior to soluble recombinant protein for eliciting neutralizing antibodies. The successful production of PCV2 VLPs in baculovirus expression systems, including in pH-adapted insect cell lines that enhance production yield, provides a direct template for CanineCV VLP development [63]. Given the extensive co-infection and the immunosuppressive synergy between CanineCV and CPV-2, a multivalent vaccine that combines CanineCV antigens with those of CPV-2 and other common canine pathogens would be highly strategic. Such a vaccine would not only protect directly against CanineCV but also mitigate its role as an exacerbating factor in other viral diseases, thereby reducing the overall severity of canine enteric and respiratory disease complexes. Additionally, the plant-based production of veterinary vaccines, which has been successfully tested for porcine circovirus, offers a scalable and cost-effective manufacturing alternative that is particularly attractive for veterinary applications within a One Health paradigm [42]. Despite the immense promise, the path to licensure is long, and immediate control must rely on stringent biosecurity, comprehensive surveillance, and the judicious use of existing vaccines against co-pathogens like CPV-2 to reduce the synergistic disease burden while the specific anti-CanineCV vaccine candidates are rigorously evaluated in clinical trials.

One Health Implications and Zoonotic Potential of Canine Circovirus

The emergence of Canine circovirus (CanineCV) as a globally distributed pathogen with a rapidly expanding host range necessitates a rigorous examination of its implications within the One Health framework, a paradigm that recognizes the inextricable links between human, animal, and environmental health. While CanineCV is primarily recognized as a pathogen of domestic and wild canids, accumulating evidence of its genetic plasticity, detection in non-canine species, and computational predictions of human host adaptability elevate its status from a mere veterinary concern to a potential public health threat requiring proactive surveillance and interdisciplinary research. This section provides an exhaustive analysis of the zoonotic potential of CanineCV, its ecological drivers for cross-species transmission, and the broader One Health challenges it presents.

The Zoonotic Potential: From Computational Prediction to Biological Plausibility

The central question regarding CanineCV’s public health significance is whether it possesses the capacity to infect humans. Definitive evidence of human infection remains absent in the current literature; however, a convergence of virological, evolutionary, and computational data provides a compelling case for its zoonotic potential. A landmark study employing host adaptability indices based on codon usage bias and nucleotide composition revealed that CanineCV exhibits a significantly higher adaptability to human hosts compared to its previously documented hosts, including dogs and wild canids [3]. This finding, derived from sophisticated bioinformatic analyses of viral genome sequences, suggests that the virus may be pre-adapted to the human cellular environment, a critical prerequisite for cross-species spillover. The authors explicitly underscore that this computational signal warrants urgent investigation into the possibility of zoonotic transmission [3].

The biological plausibility of this threat is further reinforced by the virus’s genetic and structural characteristics. CanineCV is a non-enveloped virus with a highly stable capsid, a feature that confers exceptional environmental resilience [2]. This stability facilitates indirect transmission via fomites, contaminated feed, and environmental surfaces, a route that is notoriously difficult to control and which could bridge the gap between animal reservoirs and human habitats [40]. Furthermore, the virus’s demonstrated ability to suppress the host’s type I interferon (IFN-I) response is a hallmark of many successful zoonotic pathogens [6, 17]. The Rep protein of CanineCV has been shown to broadly inhibit host protein expression and block the activation of the IFN-I promoter, thereby dampening the antiviral state and potentially creating a permissive environment for viral replication [17]. This immunosuppressive capability, if operative in a human host, could facilitate not only primary infection but also severe secondary complications, mirroring the synergistic pathology observed in canine co-infections with parvovirus [6, 17, 24]. The capsid protein (Cap) has also been implicated in modulating IFN-I signaling, though its effects appear to be species-specific, highlighting the need for direct investigation in human cell lines [38].

The Expanding Host Range: Wildlife as Reservoirs and Bridges for Spillover

A cornerstone of the One Health approach is understanding pathogen circulation at the human-animal-environment interface. CanineCV has been detected in a remarkable and growing diversity of wild carnivore species, including red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), golden jackals (Canis aureus), grey wolves (Canis lupus), arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus), Eurasian badgers (Meles meles), and even raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides) [4, 5, 21, 22, 25, 32, 34, 36, 39]. This broad host range is not merely an epidemiological curiosity; it establishes a complex network of wildlife reservoirs that can maintain, evolve, and disseminate the virus across vast geographical and ecological landscapes. The detection of CanineCV in arctic foxes from Svalbard, with samples dating back to 1996, demonstrates a long-standing and geographically isolated circulation in wildlife, predating its formal discovery in domestic dogs [25].

Of particular concern is the role of synanthropic species, wildlife that thrives in close proximity to human settlements. Studies from Serbia have documented a high prevalence of CanineCV in golden jackals (31.6%), with evidence that these animals harbor strains typically found in domestic dogs as well as distinct wildlife variants [4]. The co-occurrence of both variants in individual jackals suggests these animals may act as “mixing vessels” for viral recombination, potentially generating novel strains with altered host tropism or virulence [4, 5]. Similarly, red foxes in peri-urban environments have been identified as significant carriers, with prevalence rates reaching 15.9% in some Italian studies [39]. The increasing encroachment of these wild canids into urban and suburban areas, driven by habitat loss and anthropogenic food sources, creates a high-risk interface for bidirectional pathogen exchange between wildlife, domestic pets, and ultimately, humans [4, 39]. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) have long emphasized the need for surveillance at these interfaces, and CanineCV represents a textbook example of a pathogen for which such surveillance is critically lacking.

Cross-Species Transmission to Domestic Pets: The Feline Sentinel

The detection of CanineCV in domestic cats represents a critical milestone in understanding its cross-species transmission dynamics and has direct implications for public health risk assessment. A seminal study in China provided the first evidence of CanineCV infection in cats, with a prevalence of 3.42% (14/409) in the sampled population [13]. The complete genome of a cat-derived CanineCV strain was sequenced for the first time, clustering within the CanineCV-3 genotype [13]. This finding is profoundly significant for several reasons. First, cats are ubiquitous companion animals that share intimate living spaces with humans, often with closer physical contact than dogs. The presence of an active CanineCV infection in a cat creates a novel and potentially more direct pathway for human exposure through saliva, feces, or respiratory secretions. Second, the detection of CanineCV in feline sera in other studies, implying viremia and systemic replication, suggests that the virus is not merely a passive contaminant but is capable of establishing a productive infection in this new host [18]. The identification of a novel feline circovirus alongside CanineCV in the same study further complicates the picture, indicating that the feline host may be a nexus for the emergence of novel circoviruses [18].

The implications for human health are amplified by the fact that cats are known reservoirs for several zoonotic pathogens (e.g., Toxoplasma gondii, Bartonella henselae). The addition of a potentially immunosuppressive circovirus to this list, even if it does not cause overt disease in the cat, could have cascading effects on feline health and, by extension, on the immunocompromised human populations they live with. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) routinely monitors zoonotic diseases associated with companion animals, and the emergence of CanineCV in cats should prompt inclusion in such surveillance frameworks.

Environmental Persistence and Transmission Pathways

The environmental hardiness of circoviruses is a well-documented feature that significantly enhances their pandemic potential. Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), a close relative, is known to survive in feed ingredients and environmental matrices for extended periods under transboundary shipping conditions [40]. Given the shared physicochemical properties of non-enveloped, circular DNA viruses, CanineCV is presumed to possess similar resilience. This environmental stability has profound One Health implications. Fecal shedding of CanineCV is a primary route of transmission, and the virus can contaminate soil, water sources, and public spaces such as dog parks and kennels [37, 52]. The virus has been detected in both diarrheic and non-diarrheic dogs, meaning that apparently healthy animals can serve as silent shedders, contributing to widespread environmental contamination [11, 16, 53]. This creates a persistent exposure risk for other animals and, potentially, for humans, particularly children, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals who may come into contact with contaminated surfaces.

The potential for foodborne transmission also warrants consideration. The detection of CanineCV in dogs with a history of consuming raw pork has been noted, and the virus’s stability in meat products could pose a risk to humans handling or consuming raw or undercooked meat from infected animals [30]. The trade of dogs for meat consumption, documented in Nigeria and other regions, represents a high-risk practice where zoonotic spillover could occur through direct contact with blood and tissues during slaughter and processing [58]. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has identified such informal food systems as critical points for emerging infectious diseases, and CanineCV should be considered in risk assessments for these practices.

The Threat of Immunosuppression and Co-Infection Synergy

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of CanineCV’s pathogenic potential, and the one with the greatest relevance to human health, is its capacity to act as an immunosuppressive agent that exacerbates the severity of co-infections. This phenomenon is well-documented in dogs, where CanineCV co-infection with canine parvovirus type 2 (CPV-2) leads to significantly higher morbidity and mortality rates compared to CPV-2 infection alone [23, 24, 33]. A study from Vietnam reported that the mortality rate in dogs with CPV-2 co-infected with CanineCV doubled compared to those with CPV-2 only [23]. Mechanistically, this synergy is driven by the CanineCV Rep protein, which suppresses the host’s type I interferon response, thereby removing a key antiviral barrier and creating a permissive environment for the co-infecting virus to replicate unchecked [6, 17]. This has been demonstrated experimentally, where CanineCV was shown to promote CPV-2 replication in cell culture [17].

If CanineCV were to establish a foothold in human populations, its immunosuppressive properties could have devastating consequences. A human infected with CanineCV might experience a subclinical or mild illness, but the virus could simultaneously compromise their immune defenses, rendering them more susceptible to common respiratory or enteric pathogens. In a worst-case scenario, CanineCV could act as a “pathogen of pathogens,” potentiating the severity of infections with viruses such as influenza, norovirus, or even emerging pandemic threats. This mechanism of immune modulation is a hallmark of several high-consequence zoonotic viruses and underscores the need to treat CanineCV’s zoonotic potential with the utmost seriousness. The detection of CanineCV in the serum of dogs, indicating systemic spread and viremia, further supports the idea that the virus could disseminate to multiple organ systems and exert systemic immunosuppressive effects [64].

Genomic Plasticity and the Risk of Adaptive Evolution

The capacity for rapid genetic change is a defining feature of emerging viruses, and CanineCV exhibits a remarkable degree of genetic variability and evolutionary dynamism. Phylogenetic analyses have revealed the existence of at least seven distinct genotypes (CanineCV-1 through -7), with new clades continuously being identified [8, 10, 14]. This genetic diversity is fueled by high rates of nucleotide substitution, frequent recombination events, and positive selection acting on key viral proteins, particularly the capsid protein [7, 8, 10, 31]. Recombination, in particular, is a potent evolutionary force for CanineCV, with multiple studies documenting inter- and intra-genotypic recombination events that can generate novel chimeric viruses with unpredictable biological properties [8, 10, 21, 31]. The identification of recombination breakpoints within the Rep and Cap genes suggests that these events can directly alter viral replication efficiency and antigenicity [31].

This genetic plasticity is the engine of host adaptation. The ability of CanineCV to jump from dogs to cats, foxes, badgers, and potentially humans is predicated on its capacity to evolve in response to selective pressures in new host environments. The finding that CanineCV has a predicted higher adaptability to human hosts than to its natural canine hosts is a stark warning [3]. It suggests that the virus may already possess a genetic background that is “pre-adapted” for human infection, and that only a few additional mutations or a recombination event could be sufficient to overcome the remaining species barriers. The identification of positive selection sites within T-cell and B-cell epitopes of the capsid protein indicates that the virus is actively evolving to evade host immune responses, a process that could accelerate its adaptation to a new species like humans [7]. Continuous genomic surveillance, as recommended by the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS) for influenza, should be considered for CanineCV in both animal and human populations to detect early signs of adaptive evolution.

A Call for Proactive One Health Surveillance

The convergence of computational predictions of human adaptability, a rapidly expanding host range that now includes companion cats, a demonstrated capacity for immunosuppression, and a highly plastic genome capable of rapid evolution, collectively paints a picture of a virus with significant zoonotic potential. The current lack of evidence for human infection should not be interpreted as evidence of absence, but rather as a reflection of the absence of systematic surveillance. No studies have yet screened human populations for CanineCV, representing a critical gap in our knowledge. The virus is not included in routine diagnostic panels for human gastroenteritis or respiratory illness, and its small size and novel nature could easily lead to it being missed by conventional detection methods.

A robust One Health response requires a multi-pronged strategy. First, targeted serosurveys and PCR-based screening of human populations, particularly those with high exposure to dogs and cats (e.g., veterinarians, kennel workers, slaughterhouse personnel, and immunocompromised individuals), are urgently needed. Second, the development and deployment of high-sensitivity diagnostic tools, such as the recently established chip digital PCR (cdPCR) which is ten times more sensitive than qPCR, should be prioritized for both veterinary and potential human diagnostic use [47]. Third, the inclusion of CanineCV in the differential diagnosis of undifferentiated febrile illnesses and gastroenteritis in humans, especially in cases with a history of animal contact, should be considered by clinicians and public health agencies. Finally, international bodies such as the WOAH and the CDC should consider adding CanineCV to their lists of emerging pathogens of concern, facilitating global data sharing and coordinated research efforts. The window of opportunity to understand and potentially mitigate the risk of CanineCV spillover is now; waiting for a confirmed human outbreak would be a failure of the One Health principle.

References

[1] Silva DFd, Ciola M, Lopes VdO, Matias DRM, Oliveira TS, Castro AMMGd. Canine circovirus: emergence, adaptation, and challenges for animal and public health. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1535650

[2] Beikpour F, Letafati A, Fakhr ZA, Decaro N, Mozhgani S. Canine circovirus: an emerging virus of dogs and wild canids. Irish Veterinary Journal. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13620-025-00290-7

[3] Li G, Liu R, Chen Y, Liang H, Liang Y, Li X, et al.. Evolutionary dynamics and codon bias analysis of canine circovirus: Insights into global spread and host adaptability.. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2025.108369

[4] Benković D, Nišavić J, Milić N, Krnjaić D, Prošić I, Gajdov V, et al.. Genetic Diversity of Canine Circovirus Detected in Wild Carnivores in Serbia. Veterinary Sciences. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12060515

[5] Radalj A, Benković D, Milić N, Krnjaić D, Prošić I, Nikšić A, et al.. Divergent origins and TMRCA-based insights into canine circovirus in Serbian wild carnivores. Zbornik radova. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/svs25209r

[6] Li S, Xin J, Peng Y, Liu H, Zhou Z, Zhong Z, et al.. Investigation of truncated replication protein mutant of Canine Circovirus: synergistic interaction with Feline Panleukopenia Virus. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1536913

[7] Dankaona W, Nooroong P, Poolsawat N, Srionrod N, Techangamsuwan S, Anuracpreeda P. Molecular characterization of canine circovirus based on the Capsid gene in Thailand. BMC Veterinary Research. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-024-04120-w

[8] Liu Y, Qin Y, Hu Y, Chen W, Han Z, Yi C, et al.. Epidemiological and evolutionary analysis of canine circovirus from 1996 to 2023. BMC Veterinary Research. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-024-04186-6

[9] Dankaona W, Nooroong P, Poolsawat N, Piewbang C, Techangamsuwan S, Anuracpreeda P. Recombinant expression and characterization of Canine circovirus capsid protein for diagnosis. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2024.1363524

[10] Ji J, Jiao R, Zhang Z, Xu X, Wang Y, Bi Y, et al.. Novel genotyping definition and molecular characteristics of canine circovirus in China.. Virology. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2024.110261

[11] Gomez-Betancur D, Vargas-Bermúdez D, Giraldo-Ramirez S, Jaime J, Ruíz-Sáenz J. Canine circovirus: An emerging or an endemic undiagnosed enteritis virus?. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1150636

[12] Villiers Ld, Molini U, Coetzee L, Visser L, Spangenberg J, Villiers Md, et al.. Molecular epidemiology of Canine circovirus in domestic dogs and wildlife in Namibia, Africa.. Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2023.105458

[13] Xiao X, Li YC, Xu F, Hao X, Li S, Zhou P. Canine circovirus among dogs and cats in China: first identification in cats. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1252272

[14] Lv Z, Lian C, Li C, Chui W, Yao X, Shao J, et al.. Epidemiology and genotypic diversity of canine circovirus identified in pet dogs in Harbin, China.. Acta Tropica. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2023.106978

[15] Gomez-Betancur D, Rendon-Marin S, Giraldo-Ramirez S, Jaime J, Ruíz-Sáenz J. Canine circovirus genomic characterization in dogs with and without diarrheal syndrome in Medellín, Colombia. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1204214

[16] Beikpour F, Ndiana LA, Sazmand A, Capozza P, Nemati F, Pellegrini F, et al.. Detection and Genomic Characterization of Canine Circovirus in Iran. Animals. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040507

[17] Hao X, Li Y, Chen H, Chen B, Liu R, Wu Y, et al.. Canine Circovirus Suppresses the Type I Interferon Response and Protein Expression but Promotes CPV-2 Replication. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23126382

[18] Vasinioti V, Pellegrini F, Buonavoglia A, Capozza P, Cardone RA, Diakoudi G, et al.. Investigating the genetic diversity of CRESS DNA viruses in cats identifies a novel feline circovirus and unveils exposure of cats to canine circovirus.. Research in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2023.06.011

[19] Jain PD, Joshi AA, Akhtar N, Krishnan S, Kaushik V. An immunoinformatics study: designing multivalent T-cell epitope vaccine against canine circovirus. Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43141-021-00220-4

[20] Balboni A, Terrusi A, Urbani L, Troìa R, Stefanelli SAM, Giunti M, et al.. Canine circovirus and Canine adenovirus type 1 and 2 in dogs with parvoviral enteritis. Veterinary research communications. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-021-09850-y

[21] Fehér E, Kemenesi G, Görföl T, Wazzani Y, Bodó K, Lanszki J, et al.. Occurrence of Recombinant Canine Coronavirus, Picodicistrovirus, and Circovirus in Red Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) Implies Frequent Virus Transmission Events Among Carnivores. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/tbed/6681119

[22] Franzo G, Menandro ML, Tucciarone C, Barbierato G, Crovato L, Mondin A, et al.. Canine Circovirus in Foxes from Northern Italy: Where Did It All Begin?. Pathogens. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10081002

[23] Tuong NM, Piewbang C, Rungsipipat A, Techangamsuwan S. Detection and molecular characterization of two canine circovirus genotypes co-circulating in Vietnam. Veterinary Quarterly. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2021.1967511

[24] Sabyrzhan T, Kumar M, Kydyrmanov A, Kassymbekov Y, Klivleyeva N, Baimakhanova B, et al.. Co-infection of canine parvovirus and circovirus in fatal gastroenteritis outbreak among service dogs in Kazakhstan, 2023. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2025.1645697

[25] Urbani L, Tryland M, Ehrich D, Fuglei E, Battilani M, Balboni A. Ancient origin and genetic segregation of canine circovirus infecting arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus) in Svalbard and red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in Northern Norway.. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13783

[26] Arcangeli SD, Balboni A, Kaehler E, Urbani L, Verin R, Battilani M. Genomic Characterization of Canine Circovirus Detected in Red Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from Italy using a New Real-Time PCR Assay. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7589/2018-11-270

[27] Niu L, Wang Z, Zhao L, Wang Y, Cui X, Shi Y, et al.. Detection and molecular characterization of canine circovirus circulating in northeastern China during 2014–2016. Archives of Virology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-019-04433-4

[28] Giraldo-Ramirez S, Rendon-Marin S, Vargas-Bermúdez D, Jaime J, Ruíz-Sáenz J. First detection and full genomic analysis of Canine Circovirus in CPV-2 infected dogs in Colombia, South America. Scientific Reports. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74630-8

[29] Sun W, Zhang H, Zheng M, Cao H, Lu H, Zhao G, et al.. The detection of canine circovirus in Guangxi, China.. Virus Research. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2018.10.021

[30] Cruz TF, Batista TN, Vieira EM, Portela LM, Baccarin AM, Gradiz JJ, et al.. Genomic characterization of Canine circovirus detected in a dog with intermittent hemorrhagic gastroenteritis in Brazil. Ciência Rural. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20190909

[31] Piewbang C, Jo W, Puff C, Vries Evd, Kesdangsakonwut S, Rungsipipat A, et al.. Novel canine circovirus strains from Thailand: Evidence for genetic recombination. Scientific Reports. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25936-1

[32] Canuti M, King AV, Franzo G, Cluff H, Larsen LE, Fenton H, et al.. Diverse fox circovirus (Circovirus canine) variants circulate at high prevalence in grey wolves (Canis lupus) from the Northwest Territories, Canada. bioRxiv. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.08.584028

[33] Nguyen M, Pham T, Nguyen H, Nguyen T. Clinicopathological profiling of diarrheic canine parvovirus–circovirus co-infections in Hanoi, Vietnam. Open Veterinary Journal. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/ovj.2026.v16.i2.27

[34] Ndiana LA, Lanave G, Vasinioti V, Desario C, Martino C, Colaianni ML, et al.. Detection and Genetic Characterization of Canine Adenoviruses, Circoviruses, and Novel Cycloviruses From Wild Carnivores in Italy. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.851987

[35] Landrau-Giovannetti N, Subramaniam K, Brown MA, Ng TFF, Rotstein D, West K, et al.. Genomic Characterization of a Novel Circovirus from a Stranded Longman's Beaked whale (Indopacetus pacificus).. Virus Research. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2019.197826

[36] Zaccaria G, Malatesta D, Scipioni G, Felice ED, Campolo M, Casaccia C, et al.. Circovirus in domestic and wild carnivores: An important opportunistic agent?. Virology. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2016.01.007

[37] Li L, McGraw S, Zhu K, Leutenegger C, Marks S, Kubiski S, et al.. Circovirus in Tissues of Dogs with Vasculitis and Hemorrhage. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1904.121390

[38] Kosaka A, Huang C, Lu Z, Hsing H, Choonnasard A, Ringo RS, et al.. Divergent Effects of Circoviridae Capsid Proteins on Type I Interferon Signaling. Pathogens. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14010068

[39] Magliocca M, Taddei R, Urbani L, Bertasio C, Facile V, Gallina L, et al.. Molecular Detection of Viral and Bacterial Pathogens in Red Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from Italy. Animals. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14131969

[40] Dee S, Bauermann FV, Niederwerder M, Singrey A, Clement T, Lima Md, et al.. Survival of viral pathogens in animal feed ingredients under transboundary shipping models. PLoS ONE. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194509

[41] Balboni A, Urbani L, Delogu M, Musto C, Fontana MC, Merialdi G, et al.. Integrated Use of Molecular Techniques to Detect and Genetically Characterise DNA Viruses in Italian Wolves (Canis lupus italicus). Animals. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11082198

[42] Rybicki E. History and Promise of Plant-Made Vaccines for Animals. Prospects of Plant-Based Vaccines in Veterinary Medicine. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90137-4_1

[43] Gainor K, Malik Y, Ghosh S. Novel Cyclovirus Species in Dogs with Hemorrhagic Gastroenteritis. Viruses. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v13112155

[44] Hwang S, Nguyen TH, Soliman M, Bae Y, Lyoo K, Ryu H, et al.. First detection and genomic analysis of canine circovirus in a dog with hemorrhagic diarrhea in South Korea: a case report. Korean Journal of Veterinary Research. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14405/kjvr.20250029

[45] Kruiningen HVV, Heishima M, Kerr K, Garmendia A, Helal Z, Smyth J. Canine circoviral hemorrhagic enteritis in a dog in Connecticut. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638719863102

[46] Dennis TPW, Souza WMd, Marsile-Medun S, Singer JB, Wilson SJ, Gifford R. The evolution, distribution and diversity of endogenous circoviral elements in vertebrate genomes. Virus Research. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2018.03.014

[47] Lei X, Lv Q, Qin Y, Chen W, Hu Y, Zhao C, et al.. Establishment of a chip digital PCR detection method for canine circovirus. Heliyon. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30859

[48] Cardoso BTM, Deus DRD, Sousa EC, Pinheiro KC, Costa JNd, Maués MAC, et al.. Molecular analysis of canine circovirus in dogs from animal shelters in Belém, Pará, northern Brazil: first detection at the amazon region. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Medicine. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29374/2527-2179.bjvm000723

[49] Dankaona W, Mongkholdej E, Satthathum C, Piewbang C, Techangamsuwan S. Epidemiology, genetic diversity, and association of canine circovirus infection in dogs with respiratory disease. Scientific Reports. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19815-z

[50] Faraji R, Sadeghi M, Mozhgani S, Vasinioti V, Ndiana LA, Desario C, et al.. Detection of canine circovirus in dogs infected with canine parvovirus.. Acta Tropica. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2022.106646

[51] Kotsias F, Bucafusco D, Nunez DA, Borisovsky LAL, Rodríguez M, Bratanich A. Genomic characterization of canine circovirus associated with fatal disease in dogs in South America. PLoS ONE. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218735

[52] Wang Z, Shi Y, Wang Y, Zhao L, Cui X, Wen S, et al.. Detection of Antibodies Against Canine Circovirus in Naturally and Experimentally Infected Canines by Recombinant Capsid Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00294

[53] Dowgier G, Lorusso E, Decaro N, Desario C, Mari V, Lucente M, et al.. A molecular survey for selected viral enteropathogens revealed a limited role of Canine circovirus in the development of canine acute gastroenteritis. Veterinary Microbiology. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2017.04.007

[54] Pan Y, Chen J, Wu J, Wang Y, Zou J, Yu J, et al.. A Duplex SYBR Green I-based Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for Rapid Detection of Canine Kobuvirus and Canine Circovirus. Social Science Research Network. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-960132/v1

[55] Wang Y, Li Y, Cui Y, Jiang S, Liu G, Wang J, et al.. Establishment of a duplex SYBR green I-based real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for the rapid detection of canine circovirus and canine astrovirus. Molecular and Cellular Probes. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcp.2020.101666

[56] Dankaona W. Molecular characterization and immunohistochemical investigation using anti-capsid protein antibody of canine circovirus associated with respiratory diseases in Thai dogs. . None. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.the.2024.339

[57] Tuong N. Genetic characterization of canine parvovirus and circovirus in dogs in Vietnam. . None. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.the.2019.547

[58] Ndiana LA, Lanave G, Desario C, Odigie AE, Madubuike K, Lucente M, et al.. Detection of Selected Canine Viruses in Nigerian Free-Ranging Dogs Traded for Meat Consumption. Animals. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13061119

[59] Hao X, Liu R, He Y, Xiao X, Xiao W, Zheng Q, et al.. Multiplex PCR methods for detection of several viruses associated with canine respiratory and enteric diseases. PLoS ONE. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213295

[60] Balboni A, Urbani L, Niculae M, Muresan C, Magliocca M, Facile V, et al.. Molecular Epidemiology of Highly Diffusive DNA Viruses in Dogs and Cats from Romania. Animals. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15243620

[61] Sun P, Ye Y, Li Y, Cui Y, Zhou T, Li Y, et al.. Establishment of hydrolysis probe system real-time PCR assay for rapid detection of canine circovirus. 3 Biotech. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-021-03031-z

[62] Pfankuche V, Hahn K, Bodewes R, Hansmann F, Habierski A, Haverkamp A, et al.. Comparison of Different In Situ Hybridization Techniques for the Detection of Various RNA and DNA Viruses. Viruses. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v10070384

[63] Im JW, Moon H, Woo S. Increased Production of Nonenveloped Virus‐Like Particles in a Neutral pH‐Adapted Insect Cell Line. Entomological Research. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-5967.70039

[64] Weber MN, Cibulski S, Olegário JC, Silva MS, Puhl DE, Mosena AC, et al.. Characterization of dog serum virome from Northeastern Brazil.. Virology. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2018.09.023