# Survey of Ebola Viruses in Frugivorous and Insectivorous Bats in Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017

Hélène M de Nys, Placide Mbala Kingebeni, Alpha Keita, Christelle Butel, Guillaume Thaurignac, Christian Julián Villabona-Arenas, Thomas Lemarcis, Mare Geraerts, Nicole Vidal, Amandine Esteban, et al.

► To cite this version:

Hélène M de Nys, Placide Mbala Kingebeni, Alpha Keita, Christelle Butel, Guillaume Thaurignac, et al. Survey of Ebola Viruses in Frugivorous and Insectivorous Bats in Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 2018, 24 (12), pp.2228-2240. 10.3201/eid2412.180740. hal-01941405

HAL Id: hal-01941405

https://hal.umontpellier.fr/hal-01941405

Submitted on 26 May 2020

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Survey of Ebola Viruses in Frugivorous and Insectivorous Bats in Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017

Helene M. De Nys,<fnref n="1" /> Placide Mbala Kingebeni,<fnref n="1" /> Alpha K. Keita,<fnref n="1" /> Christelle Butel, Guillaume Thaurignac, Christian-Julian Villabona-Arenas, Thomas Lemarcis, Mare Geraerts, Nicole Vidal, Amandine Esteban, Mathieu Bourgarel, François Roger, Fabian Leendertz, Ramadan Diallo, Simon-Pierre Ndimbo-Kumugo, Justus Nsio-Mbeta, Nikki Tagg, Lamine Koivogui, Abdoulaye Toure, Eric Delaporte, Steve Ahuka-Mundeke, Jean-Jacques Muyembe Tamfum, Eitel Mpoudi-Ngole, Ahidjo Ayouba,<fnref n="2" /> Martine Peeters<fnref n="2" />

To clarify the role of bats in the ecology of Ebola viruses, we assessed the prevalence of Ebola virus antibodies in a large-scale sample of bats collected during 2015–2017 from countries in Africa that have had previous Ebola outbreaks (Guinea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo) or are at high risk for outbreaks (Cameroon). We analyzed 4,022 blood samples of bats from ≥12 frugivorous and

27 insectivorous species; 2–37 (0.05%–0.92%) bats were seropositive for Zaire and 0–30 (0%–0.75%) bats for Sudan Ebola viruses. We observed Ebola virus antibodies in 1 insectivorous bat genus and 6 frugivorous bat species. Certain bat species widespread across Africa had serologic evidence of Zaire and Sudan Ebola viruses. No viral RNA was detected in the subset of samples tested (n = 665). Ongoing surveillance of bats and other potential animal reservoirs are required to predict and prepare for future outbreaks.

Author affiliations: TransVIHMI of Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France (H.M. De Nys, P. Mbala Kingebeni, A.K. Keita, C. Butel, G. Thaurignac, C.-J. Villabona-Arenas, T. Lemarcis, M. Geraerts, N. Vidal, A. Esteban, A. Toure, E. Delaporte, A. Ayouba, M. Peeters); National Institute of Biomedical Research, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (P. Mbala Kingebeni, S.-P. Ndimbo-Kumugo, S. Ahuka-Mundeke, J.-J. Muyembe Tamfum); Cliniques Universitaires de Kinshasa, Kinshasa (P. Mbala Kingebeni, S. Ahuka-Mundeke, J.-J. Muyembe Tamfum); Centre de Recherche et de Formation en Infectiologie de Guinée, Conakry, Guinea (A.K. Keita, A. Toure); ASTRE of Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement, Institut national de la Recherche Agronomique and Univerisity of Montpellier, Montpellier (M. Bourgarel, F. Roger); Robert Koch-Institute, Berlin, Germany (F. Leendertz); Ministère de l'Elevage et des Productions Animales, Conakry (R. Diallo); Direction de Lutte contre la Maladie, Kinshasa (J. Nsio-Mbeta); Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium (N. Tagg); Université de Conakry, Conakry (L. Koivogui); Institut National de Sante Publique, Conakry (A. Toure); Institut de Recherches Médicales et d'Études des Plantes Médicinales, Yaoundé, Cameroon (E. Mpoudi-Ngole); Cameroon Institut de Recherche pout le Développement, Yaoundé (E. Mpoudi-Ngole)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2412.180740

Since the first outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in 1976 in the northern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), 26 recognized outbreaks have occurred in humans across Africa; fatality rates of outbreaks have been 25%–90% (1–4). Each EVD outbreak most likely resulted from independent zoonotic events.

Bats are believed to play a role in the ecology of Ebola viruses as a reservoir species (5). Bats might infect humans directly or via intermediate amplifying hosts, like nonhuman primates or duikers (6,7). Bats might serve as a source of infection in certain areas where bats are hunted and eaten as bushmeat, but infection could also occur after consumption of fruits contaminated with saliva, urine, or feces from Ebola virus–infected bats (8,9). Ebola virus emergence through exposure to bats was suspected for at least 2 outbreaks: Luebo (the DRC) in 2007 and West Africa in 2013 (10,11).

Relatively few data are available to support the role of bats in the ecology of Ebola viruses. During the EVD outbreaks of 2003 in Gabon and the Congo, Zaire Ebola

<footnote n="1">¹These first authors contributed equally to this article.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²These senior authors contributed equally to this article.</footnote>
virus RNA and antibodies were detected in live-caught
specimens from 3 fruit bat species (*Epomops franqueti*,
*Hypsignathus monstrosus*, *Myonycteris torquata*); virus
sequences were found in the livers or spleens of a few bats
(6). In subsequent studies in Gabon, the Congo, Ghana, and
Zambia, antibodies were detected in additional frugivorous
bat species (*Eidolon helvum*, *Epomophorus gambianus*,
*Rousettus aegyptiacus*, *Micropteropus pusillus*) and 1 in-
sectivorous species (*Mops condylurus*) (12–16). The am-
plification and sequencing of viral RNA of other filoviruses
in bats, such as Marburg virus in bats from Africa (17–20),
Lloviu virus in bats from Europe (21), and new filoviruses
in bats from China (22), has provided additional evidence
for a possible role of bats in Ebola virus ecology.

In general, EVD outbreaks have been limited in terms
of their geographic spread and chains of human-to-human
transmission (1). However, during the 2013–2016 out-
break, virus spread to the urban areas of 3 countries, infect-
ing ≈30,000 persons in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia,
and ≈11,000 deaths were recorded (23). This outbreak il-
lustrated the potential for epidemic spread from a single
zoonotic transmission, with severe public health and so-
cioeconomic impact (24). Additional studies are urgently
needed to identify the animal reservoir, predict EVD out-
break risks, and improve our capacity to control epidemics.

In previous modeling studies, areas were defined as at
risk for EVD outbreaks on the basis of data collected from
a limited number of wildlife bat species from a few geo-
graphic regions (5,25). Also, a wide variety of serologic
assays and interpretation criteria have been used, making
comparison of results challenging (12–16,26,27). For this
study, we performed a large serosurvey with a highly spe-
cific and sensitive high-throughput assay to assess Ebola
virus prevalence in bats from Africa (28). We studied bats
from Guinea and the DRC, countries with previous EVD
outbreaks, and Cameroon, a country considered at high risk
for future EVD outbreaks (5,25).

Materials and Methods

Study Sites and Sample Collection

During November 2015–August 2017, we collected sam-
ples from free-ranging frugivorous and insectivorous bats
in Guinea, Cameroon, and the DRC. We captured bats at
night using ground mist nets or harp traps in roosting and
foraging sites. We set up ground mist nets (12 × 3.2 m)
of 30-mm and 60-mm mesh sizes at different heights (1–7
m) to maximize capture of different species. We opened
nets or harp traps just before sunset and checked for bats
every 1–2 hours. Captured bats were released the same
night immediately after sampling. Using bat whole blood
taken by venipuncture of the propatagial or brachial vein,
we dropped blood samples directly onto Whatman 903

filter paper (GE Healthcare, Feasterville-Trevose, PA,
USA). We air-dried and preserved samples individually in
plastic bags containing silica desiccant and stored them in
hermetic boxes; 2–3 weeks later, we transferred dried blood
spots to -20°C until needed for analysis. Data recorded in
the field included information on capture site (global posi-
tioning system coordinates, ecologic environment), capture
method, morphology (body measurements, weight, color),
sex, age class (adult, juvenile), and species (identified visu-
ally). We collected negative control samples (n = 145) from
a captive-born insectivorous bat species (103 *Carollia per-
spicillata* bats) hosted at the Parc Zoologique de Montpel-
lier (Montpellier, France) and 2 frugivorous bat species (19
*Pteropus giganteus* bats, 23 *R. aegyptiacus* bats) hosted at
Wilhelma Zoo and Botanical Garden (Stuttgart, Germany).
We collected and preserved samples the same way we did
for free-ranging bats.

**Screening for Ebola Virus Antibodies**

We tested dried blood spots with a Luminex-based sero-
logic assay adapted for bats (28) (online Technical Appen-
dix, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/EID/article/24/12/18-0740-
Techapp1.pdf). The assay included recombinant Ebola
virus proteins glycoprotein, nucleoprotein, or viral protein
40 for different lineages: Zaire, Sudan, Bundibugyo, and
Reston. We reconstituted plasma from dried blood spots as
previously described (28) and incubated 100 µL of sample
(final plasma dilution 1:2,000) with 50 µL of recombinant
protein-coated beads (2 µg protein/1.25 × 10⁶ beads) in
96-well flat-bottom filter plates (Millipore, Tullagreen,
Ireland) on a plate shaker at 300 rpm for 16 h at 4°C in
the dark. After washing, we added 0.1 µg/mL of goat anti-
bat biotin-labeled IgG (Euromedex, Souffelweyersheim,
France) per well and incubated for 30 min at 300 rpm. Af-
ter another round of washing, we added 50 µL of 4 µg/mL
streptavidin-R-phycoerythrin (Fisher Scientific, Illkirch,
France) per well and incubated for 10 min at 300 rpm. Re-
actions were read with BioPlex-200 (BioRad, Marnes-la-
Coquette, France). We expressed results as median fluo-
rescence intensity (MFI) per 100 beads. We included 3
samples on every plate to validate interassay repeatability.

**Determination of Cutoffs**

In the absence of positive control samples, we used 4 dif-
ferent statistical methods to determine the MFI cutoff value
for each antigen (29,30) (online Technical Appendix Table
1). First, we used a general formula that involved the MFI
of the 145 negative control samples, and we assigned the
cutoff as mean plus 4 times the SD (mean + 4×SD). Second,
we used a change point analysis (31) to identify the value
at which statistical properties of the underlying probability
distribution changed. This value was used to identify outli-
ers and classify them as reactive. We used the R package
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Bat samples collected for Ebola virus serology by study site, Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017</caption><thead><tr><th>Country, site</th><th>No. samples</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Democratic Republic of the Congo</strong></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Boma</td><td>156</td></tr><tr><td>Kimpese</td><td>202</td></tr><tr><td>Zongo</td><td>472</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Subtotal</strong></td><td><strong>830</strong></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Cameroon</strong></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Yaoundé</td><td>126</td></tr><tr><td>Libellengoi Sud</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>Mbalmayo</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Bipindi</td><td>479</td></tr><tr><td>Campo M'an</td><td>344</td></tr><tr><td>North Dja</td><td>295</td></tr><tr><td>Ekom</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>Djoum</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Mambele</td><td>348</td></tr><tr><td>Mbam Djerem</td><td>156</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Subtotal</strong></td><td><strong>2,018</strong></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Guinea</strong></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Conakry</td><td>107</td></tr><tr><td>Kindia</td><td>323</td></tr><tr><td>Kankan</td><td>378</td></tr><tr><td>Koundara</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Mamou</td><td>147</td></tr><tr><td>Gueckedou</td><td>49</td></tr><tr><td>Macenta</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Nzerekore</td><td>71</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Subtotal</strong></td><td><strong>1,174</strong></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total</strong></td><td><strong>4,022</strong></td></tr></tbody></table>

changepoint (32) to calculate a single shift in the arithmetic mean with the at-most-1-change method (33). Third, we fitted univariate distributions to our data and defined the cutoff as a 0.001 risk for error, as was used in other virus serology studies (13,34). We reduced the set of candidate distributions following a bootstrapped skewness-kurtosis analysis (35). We performed fitting by maximum-likelihood estimation and selected the best-fit distribution on the basis of the Akaike information criteria with the R library fitdistrplus (36). A negative binomial distribution best-fit the data; however, we also used the negative exponential distribution as in Pourrut et al. and Laing et al. (13,34). For every antigen, we computed bootstrap values using 10,000 replicates and averaged. We performed analyses with R version 3.3.2 software (https://www.r-project.org/). We considered a blood sample reactive if the MFI of the reaction was above the cutoff. We defined Ebola virus antibody positivity as reactivity to glycoprotein and nucleoprotein of the same lineage, as was done in our previous study (28).

## Nucleic Acid Extraction and PCR Screening for Ebola Virus RNA

We extracted total DNA and RNA from dried blood spots as previously described using Nuclisens (bioMerieux, Marcy-l'Etoile, France) or m2000sp methods (Abbott Molecular Inc., Des Plaines, IL, USA), which are known for a high performance recovering nucleic acids from dried blood spots

(37,38). For bat species from Cameroon and Guinea, we screened for Zaire Ebola virus RNA by seminested reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) targeting the nucleoprotein region of the virus genome. We amplified a 126-bp fragment of Zaire Ebola virus using primers NP1F1 (forward, 5'-CGGACACACAAAAAGAAWGAA-3') and NP1R-ZR (reverse, 5'-CTCTATCTTKGTGATRTGGCTCTGA-3') in the first round of PCR and NP1F2 (forward, 5'-TTGT-GTGCGARTAACTAYGAGGAAG-3') plus NP1R-ZR in the second round. For species from the DRC, we performed seminested RT-PCR targeting the viral protein 35 region of the genome using the protocol of He et al. with modifications (41). In the first round, we amplified a 217-bp fragment with primers VP35-F (5'-ATYATGTATGAT-CACYTVCCWGG-3') and VP35-R (52-AGCGRATGTG-GATSACRGGT-32) and, in the second round, a 184-bp product with primers VP35-R and VP35-in-F (5'-GCTT-TYCAYCAAYTAGTRCAAG-3').

## Molecular Confirmation of Bat Species

We confirmed bat species identification recorded in the field on a subset of samples by using molecular tests. We amplified an ≈800-bp fragment of mitochondrial cytochrome b using primers cytb-L14724 (forward) and cytb-H15506 (reverse) (11,39,40). We substituted the cytb-L14724 primer with cytb-L140217 (5'-ATGACCAACATCC-GAAAATCNCAC-3') to improve PCR performance for certain species. We purified PCR products through agarose gel (1%) and directly sequenced on an ABI 3500 sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Courtaboeuf, France). We performed BLAST analyses (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi) to identify the most similar bat species. For samples with no or low similarity (<97%) hits with species in GenBank, we performed phylogenetic analyses with newly obtained sequences and reference sequences for different bat species using maximum-likelihood methods implemented with PhyML (http://www.atgc-montpellier.fr/phyml/) to determine genus.

## Results

### Bat Species and Sampling

We analyzed blood samples from 4,022 wild bats from 21 different regions in Cameroon (n = 10), Guinea (n = 8), and the DRC (n = 3) (Figure 1; Table 1). To increase species diversity, we captured bats in multiple ecologic settings: forests (49%), open fields (10%), villages (29%), plantations (7%), and urban areas (5%). For 1,470 (36.5%) samples, species identification in the field was confirmed by sequence analysis. At each site, ≥1 sample was confirmed per sampling date, capture method, and morphologic description. For the remaining samples, species identification was extrapolated by combining molecular and morphologic data, including photographs whenever available. For some insectivorous bat
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

**Figure 1.** Study sites for bat blood sample collection for Ebola virus serology, Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017. Yellow dots indicate sampling sites for bats in our study, and green dots indicate sampling sites in previously published studies. Dark red shading indicates highest and light yellow lowest risk for Ebola virus spillover events. Study sites are numbered: 1, Koundara; 2, Conakry; 3, Kindia; 4, Mamou; 5, Kankan; 6, Gueckedou; 7, Macenta; 8, Nzerekore; 9, Mbam Djerem; 10, Libellengoi Sud; 11, Yaoundé; 12, Ekom; 13, North Dja; 14, Bipindi; 15, Mbalmayo; 16, Djoum; 17, Mambele; 18, Campo M'an; 19, Boma; 20, Kimpese; 21, Zongo. Countries with reported index Ebola cases and countries without such cases but deemed at risk are indicated. Map of Africa adapted from Pigott et al. (5) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) by adding locations of collection sites.

families (*Miniopteridae*, *Molossidae*, *Nycteridae*, *Rhinolophidae*), identification was possible only at the genus level; for some *Molossidae* bats, we could not distinguish between *Mops* and *Chaerephon* genera because of the lack of sequences in GenBank (Table 2). For 87 (2.16%) samples, species identification was not possible because incomplete data were recorded in the field, and available biologic materials were insufficient for molecular confirmation. We collected samples from 1,736 (43.2%) frugivorous bats (family *Pteropodidae*) of 12 species and 2,199 (54.7%) insectivorous bats (7 families) of ≥27 species. The insectivorous bat families sampled, in order of decreasing frequency, were *Hipposideridae* (31.9%), *Molossidae* (13.4%), *Miniopteridae* (5.8%), *Rhinolophidae* (2.1%), *Vespertilionidae* (0.8%), *Nycteridae* (0.5%), and *Emballonuridae* (0.12%). Overall, 54.7% of bats were female and 43.8% were male; for 1.5% (n = 60) of bats, sex was unknown. Most (77.9%) bats were adults, and 9.6% were juveniles; for 12.5% (n = 502) of bats, age could not be determined or was not recorded.

## Bats Antibodies against Different Ebola Virus Antigens

We tested all samples for Ebola virus antibodies. The number of samples reacting with ≥1 antigen was 734 (18.2%)

by the mean + 4×SD method, 274 (6.8%) for the change-point method, 175 (4.4%) for the binomial method, and 457 (11.4%) for the exponential method. Blood samples frequently reacted with glycoprotein antigens; samples reacted most with Zaire and Sudan Ebola virus antigens and least with Reston (Table 3). Simultaneous reactivity to >1 antigen (i.e., glycoprotein, nucleoprotein, viral protein 40) from the same virus lineage was rare. Simultaneous reactivity to the same antigen from different virus lineages was frequent; 32.3%–76.7% of blood samples were reactive to glycoprotein from ≥2 Ebola virus species, 18.4%–34.0% to viral protein 40, and 1.5%–4.4% to nucleoprotein (online Technical Appendix Table 2). When using the criterion simultaneous presence of antibodies to nucleoprotein and glycoprotein, the antibody positivity for Zaire or Sudan Ebola virus antibodies was generally <1% for all bats tested, regardless of cutoff method, and was lower among insectivorous than frugivorous bats: 0.05%–0.27% (insectivorous) and 0.06%–1.79% (frugivorous) for Zaire Ebola virus versus 0%–0.09% (insectivorous) and 0%–1.61% (frugivorous) for Sudan Ebola virus (Table 3; Figure 2). Three samples were positive for Zaire and Sudan Ebola viruses, but only by less stringent cutoff methods (i.e., mean + 4×SD).
<table><caption>**Table 2.** Bat species sampled for Ebola virus serology, Guinea, Cameroon, and the DRC, 2015–2017*</caption><thead><tr><th>Family</th><th>Species</th><th>DRC, no.</th><th>Cameroon, no.</th><th>Guinea, no.</th><th>Total, no.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Emballonuridae</td><td>Coleura afra</td><td>0</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="8">Hipposideridae</td><td>Hipposideros abae</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>37</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>H. beatus</td><td>0</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>H. cyclops</td><td>0</td><td>14</td><td>0</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>H. fuliginosus</td><td>0</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>H. gigas</td><td>2</td><td>9</td><td>2</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>H. jonesi</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>12</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>H. ruber/caffèr</td><td>127</td><td>807</td><td>237</td><td>1,171</td></tr><tr><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>28</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td></td><td>157</td><td>837</td><td>288</td><td>1,282</td></tr><tr><td>Miniopterusidae</td><td>Miniopterus sp.</td><td>205</td><td>0</td><td>27</td><td>232</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Molossidae</td><td>Chaerephon sp.</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>44</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>Mops condylurus</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>110</td><td>110</td></tr><tr><td>Mops sp.</td><td>0</td><td>256</td><td>0</td><td>256</td></tr><tr><td>Mops/Chaerephon sp.</td><td>0</td><td>8</td><td>120</td><td>128</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td></td><td>0</td><td>264</td><td>274</td><td>538</td></tr><tr><td>Nycteridae</td><td>Nycteris sp.</td><td>0</td><td>7</td><td>15</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Rhinolophidae</td><td>Rhinolophus alcyone</td><td>0</td><td>16</td><td>0</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>R. darlingii</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>R. fumigatus</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>19</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>R. landeri</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>6</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Rhinolophus sp.</td><td>3</td><td>38</td><td>1</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td></td><td>6</td><td>54</td><td>26</td><td>86</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="7">Vespertilionidae</td><td>Glauconycteris variegata</td><td>0</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Kerivoula sp.</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Myotis bocagii</td><td>0</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Neoromicia sp.</td><td>0</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus leucogaster</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>15</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>S. nigrita</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>S. nux</td><td>0</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td></td><td>0</td><td>18</td><td>16</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="14">Pteropodidae</td><td>Eidolon helvum</td><td>305</td><td>158</td><td>17</td><td>480</td></tr><tr><td>Epomophorus gambianus</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>191</td><td>191</td></tr><tr><td>Epomophorus wahlbergi</td><td>0</td><td>16</td><td>0</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Epomops buettikoferi</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Epomops franqueti</td><td>20</td><td>256</td><td>0</td><td>276</td></tr><tr><td>Hypsignathus monstrosus</td><td>1</td><td>176</td><td>8</td><td>185</td></tr><tr><td>Lissonycteris angolensis</td><td>22</td><td>30</td><td>32</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>Megaloglossus woermanni</td><td>1</td><td>19</td><td>0</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Micropteropus pusillus</td><td>44</td><td>2</td><td>18</td><td>64</td></tr><tr><td>Myonycteris torquata</td><td>35</td><td>21</td><td>0</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Rousettus aegyptiacus</td><td>0</td><td>131</td><td>228</td><td>359</td></tr><tr><td>Scotonycteris zenkeri</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td></td><td>428</td><td>810</td><td>498</td><td>1,736</td></tr><tr><td>Indeterminate species</td><td></td><td>34</td><td>23</td><td>30</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td>830</td><td>2,018</td><td>1,174</td><td>4,022</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Zaire and Sudan Ebola Virus Reactivity of Different Bat Species

We estimated specific reactivity to Zaire and Sudan Ebola viruses by bat species. We did not include Bundibugyo and Reston because recombinant nucleoproteins were not available. Among insectivorous bats, only blood samples from *Mops* sp. bats (1–6/494) were positive for Zaire or Sudan Ebola virus antibodies (Table 4). Among frugivorous bats, samples from *E. helvum*, *H. monstrosus*, and *R. aegyptiacus* bats had the highest reactivity. We observed Zaire and Sudan Ebola virus seropositivity in these 3 species with almost all cutoff methods: 0.2%–3.3% for Zaire Ebola virus and 1.0%–2.9% for Sudan Ebola virus in *E. helvum* bat samples, 0.5%–1.6% for

Zaire Ebola virus and 1.1%–4.3% for Sudan Ebola virus in *H. monstrosus* bat samples, and 0.6%–2.5% for Zaire Ebola virus and 0.8%–1.4% for Sudan Ebola virus in *R. aegyptiacus* bat samples. We observed 2.4% Zaire Ebola virus seropositive samples for *Lissonycteris angolensis* bats and 0.5% for *Epomophorus* sp. bats, but only by less stringent cutoff methods. One sample from *M. pusillus* bats was seropositive for Sudan Ebola virus. No samples from *E. franqueti* or *M. torquata* bats were reactive with any Ebola virus antigens. Samples from the 1 *Scotonycteris zenkeri* bat and 20 *Megaloglossus woermanni* bats were seronegative. Overall, Zaire or Sudan Ebola virus antibodies were observed in 7 (1 insectivorous and 6 frugivorous) bat species.

<footnote>*DRC, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 3.** Blood samples from bats reactive with Ebola virus antigens in Luminex assay, by antigen, bat type, and statistical method used to determine cutoff, Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017*</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Ebola virus species, antigen</th><th rowspan="2">Bat type</th><th colspan="4">Statistical method, no. (%)</th><th rowspan="2">Estimated range, %</th></tr><tr><th>Mean + 4×SD</th><th>Change point</th><th>Binomial</th><th>Exponential</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="7"><strong>Zaire</strong></td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>57 (3.28)</td><td>8 (0.46)</td><td>24 (1.38)</td><td>51 (2.94)</td><td>0.46–3.28</td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>15 (0.68)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>15 (0.68)</td><td>0.05–0.68</td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Total</td><td>72 (1.79)</td><td>9 (0.22)</td><td>30 (0.75)</td><td>66 (1.64)</td><td>0.23–1.79</td></tr><tr><td>GP-K</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>365 (21.03)</td><td>141 (8.12)</td><td>20 (1.15)</td><td>113 (6.51)</td><td>1.15–21.03</td></tr><tr><td>GP-K</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>73 (3.32)</td><td>18 (0.82)</td><td>2 (0.09)</td><td>12 (0.55)</td><td>0.09–3.32</td></tr><tr><td>GP-K</td><td>Total</td><td>440 (10.94)</td><td>160 (3.98)</td><td>22 (0.55)</td><td>125 (3.11)</td><td>0.55–10.94</td></tr><tr><td>GP-M</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>226 (13.02)</td><td>128 (7.37)</td><td>16 (0.92)</td><td>103 (5.93)</td><td>0.92–13.02</td></tr><tr><td>GP-M</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>31 (1.41)</td><td>14 (0.64)</td><td>2 (0.09)</td><td>12 (0.55)</td><td>0.09–1.41</td></tr><tr><td>GP-M</td><td>Total</td><td>259 (6.44)</td><td>143 (3.56)</td><td>18 (0.45)</td><td>115 (2.86)</td><td>0.45–6.44</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>55 (3.17)</td><td>8 (0.46)</td><td>24 (1.38)</td><td>44 (2.53)</td><td>0.46–3.17</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>19 (0.86)</td><td>5 (0.23)</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>14 (0.64)</td><td>0.23–0.86</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Total</td><td>75 (1.86)</td><td>14 (0.35)</td><td>30 (0.75)</td><td>59 (1.47)</td><td>0.35–1.86</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>31 (1.79)</td><td>31 (1.79)</td><td>1 (0.06)</td><td>7 (0.40)</td><td>0.06–1.79</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>0.05–0.27</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Total</td><td>37 (0.92)</td><td>37 (0.92)</td><td>2 (0.05)</td><td>8 (0.20)</td><td>0.05–0.92</td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><strong>Sudan</strong></td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>71 (4.09)</td><td>15 (0.86)</td><td>34 (1.96)</td><td>77 (4.44)</td><td>0.86–4.44</td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>12 (0.55)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>5 (0.23)</td><td>18 (0.82)</td><td>0.05–0.82</td></tr><tr><td>NP</td><td>Total</td><td>84 (2.09)</td><td>17 (0.42)</td><td>39 (0.97)</td><td>96 (2.39)</td><td>0.42–2.39</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>459 (26.44)</td><td>147 (8.47)</td><td>17 (0.98)</td><td>121 (6.97)</td><td>0.98–26.44</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>49 (2.23)</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>0.05–2.23</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Total</td><td>509 (12.66)</td><td>154 (3.83)</td><td>18 (0.45)</td><td>125 (3.11)</td><td>0.45–12.66</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>102 (5.88)</td><td>20 (1.15)</td><td>28 (1.61)</td><td>61 (3.51)</td><td>1.15–5.88</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>19 (0.86)</td><td>4 (0.18)</td><td>6 (0.27)</td><td>18 (0.82)</td><td>0.18–0.86</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Total</td><td>121 (3.01)</td><td>24 (0.60)</td><td>34 (0.85)</td><td>80 (1.99)</td><td>0.60–3.01</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>28 (1.61)</td><td>28 (1.61)</td><td>0</td><td>10 (0.58)</td><td>0–1.61</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>2 (0.09)</td><td>2 (0.09)</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0–0.09</td></tr><tr><td>NP + GP</td><td>Total</td><td>30 (0.75)</td><td>30 (0.75)</td><td>0</td><td>10 (0.25)</td><td>0–0.75</td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><strong>Bundibugyo</strong></td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>301 (17.34)</td><td>59 (3.40)</td><td>0</td><td>93 (5.36)</td><td>0–17.34</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>58 (2.64)</td><td>8 (0.36)</td><td>5 (0.23)</td><td>13 (0.59)</td><td>0.23–2.64</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Total</td><td>361 (8.98)</td><td>68 (1.69)</td><td>22 (0.55)</td><td>107 (2.66)</td><td>0.55–8.98</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>9 (0.52)</td><td>7 (0.40)</td><td>12 (0.69)</td><td>37 (2.13)</td><td>0.40–2.14</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>0</td><td>1 (0.05)</td><td>8 (0.36)</td><td>20 (0.91)</td><td>0–0.91</td></tr><tr><td>VP</td><td>Total</td><td>9 (0.22)</td><td>8 (0.20)</td><td>20 (0.5)</td><td>57 (1.42)</td><td>0.20–1.42</td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><strong>Reston</strong></td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Frugivorous</td><td>17 (0.98)</td><td>28 (1.61)</td><td>26 (1.50)</td><td>61 (3.51)</td><td>0.98–3.51</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Insectivorous</td><td>3 (0.14)</td><td>10 (0.45)</td><td>10 (0.45)</td><td>29 (1.32)</td><td>0.14–1.32</td></tr><tr><td>GP</td><td>Total</td><td>20 (0.50)</td><td>38 (0.94)</td><td>36 (0.90)</td><td>90 (2.24)</td><td>0.50–2.24</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Comparison of Zaire Ebola Virus Seroprevalence in Bats from Africa across Studies

For comparison, we compiled data regarding Zaire Ebola virus serology in bats of known species from previous studies (n = 4,493) and this study (n = 3,935; 46.7%) (Tables 5, 6). Data were available for 3,023 insectivorous bats of ≈30 species from 7 different families; 2,199 (72.7%) were from this study (Table 5). Insectivorous bat samples originated from Guinea, Cameroon, the DRC, and Gabon. Zaire Ebola virus reactivity has been observed only in *M. condylurus* bat samples from Gabon and *Mops* sp. bat samples from Cameroon. Data were available for 5,405 frugivorous bats of 17 species from 12 genera from West (Guinea, Ghana), West Central (Cameroon, Gabon, the Congo, the DRC), and East (Zambia) Africa (Table 6). No Zaire Ebola virus reactivity has been seen in blood samples from bat species

*Casinycteris, Megaloglossus, Nanonycteris, and Scotonycteris*, but only a limited number of samples (n = 152) have been tested. Overall, blood samples from 8 frugivorous bat species have been found reactive with Zaire Ebola virus antigens. Blood samples from *E. helvum*, *H. monstrosus*, and *R. aegyptiacus* bats from several countries across Africa have been reported to be seropositive. Reactivity has been observed with samples from *E. gambianus* bats in Ghana (10.8%) and Guinea. Reactivity was observed with large sample sets from *E. franqueti* bats derived from Gabon and the Congo and a small sample set from Ghana but not Guinea, Cameroon, or the DRC. *M. pusillus* and *M. torquata* bats tested positive for Zaire Ebola virus antibodies in studies in which large sample sets were collected. Among *L. angolensis* bat samples, only those from Cameroon have tested positive for antibodies.

<footnote>*VP refers to viral protein 40 of Ebola virus. Results are presented for frugivorous (n = 1,736), insectivorous (n = 2,199), and total (n = 4,022) bats. GP, glycoprotein; K, Kissoudougou strain; M, Mayinga strain; NP, nucleoprotein; VP, viral protein.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

**Figure 2.** Bat blood samples reactive to Ebola virus antigens, by statistical method used to determine cutoff, Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017. Samples from frugivorous bats (n = 1,736) and insectivorous bats (n = 2,199) were tested by Luminex assay with GP, NP, and VP of the Zaire and Sudan lineages; GP and VP of the Bundibugyo lineage; and GP of the Reston lineage. GP, glycoprotein; K, Kissoudougou strain; M, Mayinga strain; NP, nucleoprotein; VP, viral protein 40.

## RT-PCR Screening for Zaire Ebola Virus RNA

We screened 665 samples from the DRC (n = 193), Cameroon (n = 399), and Guinea (n = 73) by RT-PCR for the presence of Zaire Ebola virus RNA. Of the 294 samples originating from bats previously documented to carry Zaire Ebola virus RNA (6) (i.e., *H. monstrosus* [132 from Cameroon, 1 from the DRC], *M. torquata* [20 from Cameroon, 25 from the DRC], and *E. franqueti* [116 from Cameroon]), all were negative for Zaire Ebola virus RNA. Of the 371 samples from bat species *E. helvum* (58 from Cameroon, 165 from the DRC, 3 from Guinea), *L. angolensis* (8 from Cameroon, 4 from Guinea), *M. pusillus* (2 from the DRC, 1 from Guinea), *R. aegyptiacus* (45 from Cameroon, 40 from Guinea), *E. gambianus* (25 from Guinea), and *Mops* sp. (20 from Cameroon), all were negative for Zaire Ebola virus RNA.

## Discussion

To clarify the role of bats in Ebola virus ecology and identify where the virus circulates between outbreaks, we tested >4,000 bats, almost doubling the total number of samples tested in all previous studies in Africa (5–7,42). We provided data on bats from Cameroon, added to the existing data on bats from Guinea and the DRC, and substantially increased the data available on insectivorous bats. We tested samples with the same assay, enabling comparison across species and countries. We used different statistical methods to determine positive sample numbers and expressed the proportion of reactive samples as a range on the basis of the different cutoff values proposed by those methods. As has been done in studies of human Zaire Ebola virus survivors (28,43), we defined Zaire and Sudan Ebola virus positivity as the presence of antibodies to both nucleoprotein and glycoprotein. As such, we estimated that 2–37 (0.05%–0.92%) bats were seropositive for Zaire Ebola virus and 0–30 (0%–0.75%) bats were seropositive for Sudan Ebola virus (Table 3). Among

insectivorous bats, we observed Zaire and Sudan Ebola virus antibodies only in *Mops* sp. bats, an observation that has previously been observed (13). We provided information on insectivorous *Miniopterus* and *Rhinolophus* bats and extended knowledge on *Mops* and *Hipposideros* bats; all 1,200 *Hipposideros* samples were seronegative. We confirmed the presence of Zaire Ebola virus antibodies in only 1 of 3 frugivorous species in which Zaire Ebola virus RNA has been reported, that is, in *H. monstrosus* but not *E. franqueti* or *M. torquata* bats (6). However, this result might have been influenced by sample size, test used, and interpretation criteria. We confirmed antibodies in *E. helvum* bats and showed that Zaire Ebola virus antibodies are widespread among this species across Africa: Ghana and Zambia, and with our data, also Cameroon, Guinea, and the DRC (13,14,16). We confirmed antibodies in *R. aegyptiacus* bats from Cameroon and Guinea, in agreement with previous findings in these bats from the Congo and Gabon (13). For *E. gambianus* bats from Ghana, we also observed Zaire Ebola virus reactivity of samples from this species in Guinea (15). In contrast with a previous study, we observed Sudan Ebola virus antibodies (not Zaire Ebola virus antibodies) in *M. pusillus* bats (13). We also identified Zaire Ebola virus antibodies in *L. angolensis* bats from Cameroon, although only when using less stringent cutoff calculations.

When combining data from previous Zaire Ebola virus seroprevalence studies in bats with data from our study, only 1 insectivorous bat species (*Mops* sp.) and 8 frugivorous bat species (*E. helvum*, *E. gambianus*, *E. franqueti*, *H. monstrosus*, *L. angolensis*, *M. pusillus*, *M. torquata*, *R. aegyptiacus*) exhibited Zaire Ebola virus antibodies (13–16). As seen in bat samples from Zambia, we observed in this study Sudan Ebola virus antibodies in *E. helvum* bats from Guinea, Cameroon, and the DRC, suggesting that Zaire and Sudan Ebola viruses co-circulate and could be widespread among this species. However, only 1 other study has tested
<table><caption>**Table 4.** Blood samples from bats reactive with both nucleoprotein and glycoprotein of Zaire or Sudan Ebola virus, by statistical method used to determine cutoff, Guinea, Cameroon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2015–2017</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="3">Bat family, genus</th><th rowspan="3">No. tested</th><th rowspan="3">Ebola virus species</th><th colspan="8">Statistical method</th></tr><tr><th colspan="2">Mean + 4×SD</th><th colspan="2">Change-point</th><th colspan="2">Binomial</th><th colspan="2">Exponential</th></tr><tr><th>No.</th><th>% (95% CI)</th><th>No.</th><th>% (95% CI)</th><th>No.</th><th>% (95% CI)</th><th>No.</th><th>% (95% CI)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Hipposideridae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Hipposideros sp.</td><td>1,282</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td></tr><tr><td>1,282</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.3)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Miniopteridae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Miniopterus sp.</td><td>232</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td></tr><tr><td>232</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.6)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Molossidae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Chaerephon sp.</td><td>44</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td></tr><tr><td>44</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–8.0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Mops sp.</td><td>494</td><td>Zaire</td><td>6</td><td>1.2 (0.6–2.6)</td><td>6</td><td>1.2 (0.6–2.6)</td><td>1</td><td>0.2 (0.03–1.1)</td><td>1</td><td>0.2 (0.03–1.1)</td></tr><tr><td>494</td><td>Sudan</td><td>2</td><td>0.4 (0.1–1.5)</td><td>2</td><td>0.4 (0.1–1.5)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.8)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.8)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Nycteridae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Nycteris sp.</td><td>22</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Rhinolophidae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Rhinolophus sp.</td><td>86</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td></tr><tr><td>86</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.3)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Vespertilionidae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Glauconycteris sp.*</td><td>3</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Kerivoula sp.*</td><td>1</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Myotis bocagii*</td><td>3</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Neoromicia sp.*</td><td>5</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Scotophilus sp.</td><td>22</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–14.9)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10"><strong>Pteropodidae</strong></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Eidolon helvum</td><td>480</td><td>Zaire</td><td>16</td><td>3.3 (2.1–5.4)</td><td>16</td><td>3.3 (2.1–5.4)</td><td>1</td><td>0.2 (0–1.2)</td><td>4</td><td>0.8 (0.3–2.1)</td></tr><tr><td>480</td><td>Sudan</td><td>14</td><td>2.9 (1.7–4.8)</td><td>14</td><td>2.9 (1.7–4.8)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–0.8)</td><td>5</td><td>1.0 (0.4–2.4)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Epomophorus sp.</td><td>207</td><td>Zaire</td><td>1</td><td>0.5 (0.08–2.7)</td><td>1</td><td>0.5 (0.08–2.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.8)</td></tr><tr><td>207</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.8)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.8)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.8)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.8)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Epomops sp.</td><td>280</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td></tr><tr><td>280</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.4)</td></tr><tr><td>Hypsignathus</td><td>185</td><td>Zaire</td><td>3</td><td>1.6 (0.6–4.7)</td><td>3</td><td>1.6 (0.6–4.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–2.0)</td><td>1</td><td>0.5 (0.05–3.0)</td></tr><tr><td>monstrosus</td><td>185</td><td>Sudan</td><td>8</td><td>4.3 (2.2–8.3)</td><td>8</td><td>4.3 (2.2–8.3)</td><td>3</td><td>1.6 (0.6–4.7)</td><td>2</td><td>1.1 (0.3–3.9)</td></tr><tr><td>Lissonycteris</td><td>84</td><td>Zaire</td><td>2</td><td>2.4 (0.7–8.3)</td><td>2</td><td>2.4 (0.7–8.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td></tr><tr><td>angolensis</td><td>84</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–4.4)</td></tr><tr><td>Megaloglossus</td><td>20</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td></tr><tr><td>woermannii</td><td>20</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–16.1)</td></tr><tr><td>Micropteropus pusillus</td><td>64</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td></tr><tr><td>Myonycteris</td><td>64</td><td>Sudan</td><td>1</td><td>1.6 (0.3–8.3)</td><td>1</td><td>1.6 (0.3–8.3)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–5.7)</td></tr><tr><td>torquata</td><td>56</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–6.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–6.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–6.4)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–6.4)</td></tr><tr><td>Rousettus</td><td>359</td><td>Zaire</td><td>9</td><td>2.5 (1.3–4.7)</td><td>9</td><td>2.5 (1.3–4.7)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.1)</td><td>2</td><td>0.6 (0.2–2.0)</td></tr><tr><td>aegyptiacus</td><td>359</td><td>Sudan</td><td>5</td><td>1.4 (0.6–3.2)</td><td>5</td><td>1.4 (0.6–3.2)</td><td>0</td><td>0 (0–1.1)</td><td>3</td><td>0.8 (0.3–2.4)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotonycteris zenkeri*</td><td>1</td><td>Zaire</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>zenkeri*</td><td>1</td><td>Sudan</td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td><td>0</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

for Ebola viruses other than Zaire Ebola virus in *E. helvum* bats (16). In our study, we also observed Sudan Ebola virus antibodies in *Mops* sp., *H. monstrosus*, and *R. aegyptiacus* bats in Cameroon. Almost all samples were positive for either Zaire or Sudan Ebola virus but not for both.

Despite the presence of Ebola virus antibodies, the role of bats as reservoir species remains unclear because viral RNA detection is rare. In only 1 study Zaire Ebola virus RNA was amplified in a few bats (6). Thus, antibodies

might reflect previous acute infection with viral clearance. Unlike inoculations with Marburg virus (44–46), experimental inoculation of *R. aegyptiacus* bats with Zaire Ebola virus leads to antibody development but infrequent or absent detection of viral RNA or shedding (44,47). *R. aegyptiacus* bats are therefore able to clear Zaire Ebola virus after a short infectious period without viral shedding and with little or no transmission. No antibodies or viral RNA were detected in noninoculated

<footnote>*Percentages were not calculated because the number of samples collected was too low.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 5.** Zaire Ebola virus antibodies in insectivorous bats from our research, Guinea, Cameroon, and the DRC, 2015–2017, and other published studies*</caption><thead><tr><th>Family</th><th>Species</th><th>Country</th><th>Year of study (reference)</th><th>Test</th><th>No. tested</th><th>No. (%) positive†</th><th>Total, no. positive/tested (%)†</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">Emballonuridae</td><td>Coleura afra</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>5</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="2">0/14 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Saccolaimus peli</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>9</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Hipposideridae</td><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>157</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="5">0/1,395 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>837</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>69</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>288</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Hipposideros sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>44</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Miniopteridae</td><td>Miniopterus sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>27</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="3">0/234 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Miniopterus sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>205</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>M. minor</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>2</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">Molossidae</td><td>Chaerephon sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>44</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="6">0/401 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>C. pumilus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>C. ansorgei</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>120</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>C. major</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>26</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>C. pumilus</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>Elisa</td><td>210</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Mops sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>230</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="6">4-9/705 (0.6-1.3)</td></tr><tr><td>Mops sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>264</td><td>1-6 (0.4-2.3)</td></tr><tr><td>Mops sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>158</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Mops sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>28</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Mops condylurus</td><td>Gabon</td><td>2003-2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>24</td><td>3 (12.5)</td></tr><tr><td>M. condylurus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Myopterus whitleyi</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>2</td><td>0 (0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Nycteridae</td><td>Nycteris sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>15</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="5">0/43 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Nycteris sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>6</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Nycteris sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>7</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Nycteris sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>14</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Nycteris hispida</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Rhinolophidae</td><td>Rhinolophus sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>26</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="3">0/86 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Rhinolophus sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>6</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Rhinolophus sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>54</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="20">Vespertilionidae</td><td>Glauconycteris variegata</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>3</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td><td rowspan="20">0/143 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Chalinolobus sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>15</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Eptesicus sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>22</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Eptesicus tenuipinnis</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Kerivoula sp.</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Kerivoula sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>1</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Myotis bocagii</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>3</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>M. bocagii</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>22</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>M. bocagii</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>17</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Neoromicia sp.</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>5</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Pipistrellus nanus</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>2</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus nux</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>6</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus leucogaster</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>15</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus nigrita</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015-2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>1</td><td>0-0 (0-0)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus dinganii</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>19</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td>Scotophilus sp.</td><td>DRC</td><td>1979-1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>10</td><td>0 (0)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">Total</td><td colspan="3">4-9/3,023 (0.13-0.30)</td></tr></tbody></table>

bats housed with experimentally Zaire Ebola virus–infected bats (44). Whether this low level of infectiousness also occurs for other bat species that carry Ebola virus antibodies remains to be determined. Zaire Ebola virus was experimentally inoculated in other bat species (*M. condylurus*, *Chaerephon pumilus*, and *Epomophorus wahlbergi*) in only 1 study; virus replication was seen in all species, and fecal shedding was seen in *E. wahlbergi* bats (48). *R. aegyptiacus* bats experimentally infected with Marburg

virus were shown to develop antibodies that protect against reinfection (49). Long-term survival with Zaire Ebola virus antibodies has been reported with *E. helvum* bats from Ghana but without information on protection (14). Among insectivorous bats, the presence of Ebola virus antibodies in only *Mops* sp. is striking, suggesting higher exposure or susceptibility compared with other insectivorous bats.

In conclusion, we demonstrated higher rates of Ebola virus antibodies in frugivorous than in insectivorous

<footnote>*DRC, the Democratic Republic of the Congo; IFA, immunofluorescence assay.</footnote>

<footnote>†For data from cited studies, the number of positive samples reported in the original study is indicated. For our results, we show the range in the number of samples simultaneously reactive with glycoprotein and nucleoprotein of Zaire Ebola virus on the basis of 4 different statistical methods used to determine cutoff values.</footnote>

<footnote>‡This study.</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 6.** Zaire Ebola virus antibodies in frugivorous (*Pteropodidae* family) bats from our research, Guinea, Cameroon, and the DRC, 2015–2017, and published studies*</caption><thead><tr><th>Species</th><th>Country</th><th>Year of study (reference)</th><th>Test</th><th>No. tested</th><th>No. (%) positive</th><th>Total, no. positive/tested (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Casinycteris ophiodon</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0/20</td></tr><tr><td>Casinycteris argynnis</td><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>18</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C. argynnis</td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="7">Eidolon helvum†</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>21–36/1,551 (1.4–2.3)</td></tr><tr><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>17</td><td>0–3 (0–17.6)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ghana</td><td>2008 (14)</td><td>IFA</td><td>262</td><td>1 (0.39)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>158</td><td>1–9 (0.6–5.7)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>49</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>1979–1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>305</td><td>0–4 (0–1.3)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Zambia</td><td>2006–2013 (16)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>748</td><td>19 (2.55)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Epomophorus gambianus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>191</td><td>0–1 (0–0.5)</td><td>4–5/244 (1.6–2.0)</td></tr><tr><td>Ghana</td><td>2007 (15)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>37</td><td>4 (10.82)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Epomophorus wahlbergi</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>16</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Epomops buettikoferi</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>17</td><td>0</td><td>47/1,269 (3.7)</td></tr><tr><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>4</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">Epomops franqueti</td><td>Ghana</td><td>2007 (15)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>27</td><td>3 (11.2)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>256</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2001–2005 (6)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>117</td><td>8 (6.8)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>805</td><td>36 (4.5)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>20</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>1979–1980 (26)</td><td>IFA</td><td>21</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="7">Hypsygnathus monstrosus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>8</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td>15–18/347 (4.3–5.2)</td></tr><tr><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ghana</td><td>2008 (14)</td><td>IFA</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ghana</td><td>2007 (15)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>16</td><td>2 (12.5)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>176</td><td>0–3 (0–1.7)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2001–2005 (6)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>17</td><td>4 (23.5)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>125</td><td>9 (7.2)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>1</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Lissonycteris angolensis</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>45</td><td>0</td><td>0–2/129 (0–1.6)</td></tr><tr><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>32</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>22</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>30</td><td>0–2 (0–6.7)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Megaloglossus azagnyi</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0/110</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Megaloglossus woermanni</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>19</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>49</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>1</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>38</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Micropteropus pusillus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>18</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td>4/339 (1.2)</td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>2</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>197</td><td>4 (2.04)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>44</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>1995 (27)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>78</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Myonycteris leptodon</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>21</td><td>0</td><td>23–27/708 (3.2–3.8)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Myonycteris torquata</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>21</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2001–2005 (6)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>58</td><td>4 (6.9)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>573</td><td>19 (3.32)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>DRC</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>35</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Nanonycteris veldkampii</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2014 (11)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>17</td><td>0</td><td>0/21</td></tr><tr><td>Ghana</td><td>2007 (15)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Rousettus aegyptiacus</td><td>Guinea</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>228</td><td>0–1 (0–0.4)</td><td>24–33/666 (3.6–5.0)</td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>131</td><td>0–8 (0–6.1)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gabon, Congo</td><td>2003–2008 (13)</td><td>ELISA</td><td>307</td><td>24 (7.8)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Scotonycteris zenkeri</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>2015–2017‡</td><td>Luminex</td><td>1</td><td>0–0 (0–0)</td><td>0–0/1 (0–0)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Total</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>138–172/5,405 (2.55–3.18)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote>*DRC, the Democratic Republic of the Congo; IFA, immunofluorescence assay.</footnote>

<footnote>†For cited studies, the number of positive samples reported in the original study is indicated. For our results, we show the range in the number of samples simultaneously reactive with glycoprotein and nucleoprotein of Zaire Ebola virus on the basis of 4 different statistical methods used to determine cutoff values.</footnote>

<footnote>‡This study.</footnote>
bats. The total number of frugivorous species shown to be Zaire Ebola virus seropositive has increased to 8, and 1 insectivorous bat species (Mops sp.) was confirmed to be seropositive. Zaire and Sudan Ebola viruses circulate in different species across Africa, with potential co-circulation of both viruses in some species. Although we have data on >8,000 bats from ≥40 species, this sample size is small, given the high numbers of bats that constitute colonies. This study illustrates the complexity of tracking the animal reservoir of Ebola viruses, not only because sampling of wild bats without performing eu-thanasia is difficult and time-consuming but also because of the absence of a reference standard for serologic tests. To clarify the significance of Ebola virus antibodies, documenting the extent to which viral RNA and shedding can be detected in species with antibodies is crucial for predicting and controlling the risk for new outbreaks. Efforts must continue not only to sample bats but also other animals to elucidate where the virus circulates in wildlife.

## Acknowledgments

We thank the staffs from the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Environment and the national ethics committees from the DRC, Cameroon, and Guinea for permission to perform this study. We thank all the field staff from the DRC (Guy Midingi and Servet Kimbonza); Guinea (Souana Goumou, Mamadou Kalif Diallo, Pépé Justin Beavogui, Philippe Kolié, Michel Guilavogui); and Cameroon (Innocent Ndong Bass, Aime Mebenga, Joseph Moudindo, Thomas Atemkem) for the collection of bat samples. We thank the staffs of the National Institute of Biomedical Research (Kinshasa, the DRC), the Kongo Central Provincial Government (Matadi, the DRC), and Projet PRESICA; Donald Mbohli from Project Grand Singes; and the staff of the Institut National de Santé Publique (Conakry, Guinea) for logistical support in the field. We thank Seny Mane for his involvement and support in the implementation of this project and Daouda Bangoura for his constant support for this project and the facilitation of field missions. We thank the veterinary staff from the Parc Zoologique de Montpellier and Wilhelma Zoo and Botanical Garden for providing control samples.

This work was supported in part by grants from Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, the Ebola Task Force, REACTing, EBO-SURSY project funded by the European Union, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), and Christophe Mérieux Prize 2015 (to J.-J.M.T.). A.K.K. was supported by a fellowship from the IRD and the University of Montpellier (MUSE, ANR-16-IDEX-0006). C.-J.V.-A. was supported by a fellowship from IRD, Labex EpiGenMed via the National Research Agency, Programme for Future Investment (ANR-10-LABX-12-01), and the University of Montpellier.

## About the Author

Drs. Mbala Kingebeni and Keita are researchers from ASTRE of Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement, Institut national de la recherche agronomique and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. Their research interests include characterization of hosts that harbor zoonotic pathogens.

## References

1. Mylne A, Brady OJ, Huang Z, Pigott DM, Golding N, Kraemer MU, et al. A comprehensive database of the geographic spread of past human Ebola outbreaks. Sci Data. 2014;1:140042. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2014.42

2. Baize S, Pannetier D, Oestereich L, Rieger T, Koivogui L, Magassouba N, et al. Emergence of Zaire Ebola virus disease in Guinea. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1418-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1404505

3. Maganga GD, Kapetshi J, Berthet N, Kebela Ilunga B, Kabange F, Mbala Kingebeni P, et al. Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of Congo. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:2083-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1411099

4. World Health Organization. Ebola outbreak Democratic Republic of the Congo 2017. 2017 Jul 2 [cited 2018 May 3]. http://www.who.int/emergencies/ebola-DRC-2017/en/

5. Pigott DM, Millear AI, Earl L, Morozoff C, Han BA, Shearer FM, et al. Updates to the zoonotic niche map of Ebola virus disease in Africa. eLife. 2016;5:e16412. http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16412

6. Leroy EM, Kumulungui B, Pourrut X, Rouquet P, Hassanin A, Yaba P, et al. Fruit bats as reservoirs of Ebola virus. Nature. 2005;438:575-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/438575a

7. Leendertz SA, Gogarten JF, Düx A, Calvignac-Spencer S, Leendertz FH. Assessing the evidence supporting fruit bats as the primary reservoirs for Ebola viruses. EcoHealth. 2016;13:18-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10393-015-1053-0

8. Kamins AO, Rowcliffe JM, Ntiamoa-Baidu Y, Cunningham AA, Wood JL, Restif O. Characteristics and risk perceptions of Ghanaians potentially exposed to bat-borne zoonoses through bushmeat. EcoHealth. 2015;12:104-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10393-014-0977-0

9. Leroy E, Gonzalez JP, Pourrut X. Ebolavirus and other filoviruses. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2007;315:363-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70962-6_15

10. Leroy EM, Epelboin A, Mondonge V, Pourrut X, Gonzalez JP, Muyembe-Tamfum JJ, et al. Human Ebola outbreak resulting from direct exposure to fruit bats in Luebo, Democratic Republic of Congo, 2007. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2009;9:723-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/vbz.2008.0167

11. Marí Saéz A, Weiss S, Nowak K, Lapeyre V, Zimmermann F, Düx A, et al. Investigating the zoonotic origin of the West African Ebola epidemic. EMBO Mol Med. 2015;7:17-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201404792

12. Pourrut X, Délicat A, Rollin PE, Ksiazek TG, Gonzalez JP, Leroy EM. Spatial and temporal patterns of Zaire ebolavirus antibody prevalence in the possible reservoir bat species. J Infect Dis. 2007;196(Suppl 2):S176-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/520541

13. Pourrut X, Souris M, Towner JS, Rollin PE, Nichol ST, Gonzalez JP, et al. Large serological survey showing cocirculation of Ebola and Marburg viruses in Gabonese bat populations, and a high seroprevalence of both viruses in *Rousettus aegyptiacus*. BMC Infect Dis. 2009;9:159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-9-159

14. Hayman DT, Emmerich P, Yu M, Wang LF, Suu-Ire R, Fooks AR, et al. Long-term survival of an urban fruit bat seropositive for
Ebola and Lagos bat viruses. PLoS One. 2010;5:e11978.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011978

15. Hayman DT, Yu M, Crameri G, Wang LF, Suu-Ire R, Wood JL, et al. Ebola virus antibodies in fruit bats, Ghana, West Africa. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;18:1207–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/ eid1807.111654

16. Ogawa H, Miyamoto H, Nakayama E, Yoshida R, Nakamura I, Sawa H, et al. Seroepidemiological prevalence of multiple species of filoviruses in fruit bats (Eidolon helvum) migrating in Africa. J Infect Dis. 2015;212(Suppl 2):S101–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ infdis/jiv063

17. Towner JS, Pourrut X, Albariño CG, Nkogue CN, Bird BH, Grard G, et al. Marburg virus infection detected in a common African bat. PLoS One. 2007;2:e764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0000764

18. Towner JS, Amman BR, Sealy TK, Carroll SA, Comer JA, Kemp A, et al. Isolation of genetically diverse Marburg viruses from Egyptian fruit bats. PLoS Pathog. 2009;5:e1000536. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000536

19. Kuzmin IV, Niezgoda M, Franka R, Agwanda B, Markotter W, Breiman RF, et al. Marburg virus in fruit bat, Kenya. Emerg Infect Dis. 2010;16:352–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1602.091269

20. Swanepoel R, Smit SB, Rollin PE, Formenty P, Leman PA, Kemp A, et al.; International Scientific and Technical Committee for Marburg Hemorrhagic Fever Control in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Studies of reservoir hosts for Marburg virus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:1847–51. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3201/eid1312.071115

21. Negredo A, Palacios G, Vázquez-Morón S, González F, Dopazo H, Molero F, et al. Discovery of an ebolavirus-like filovirus in europe. PLoS Pathog. 2011;7:e1002304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/ journal.ppat.1002304

22. Yang XL, Zhang YZ, Jiang RD, Guo H, Zhang W, Li B, et al. Genetically diverse filoviruses in *Rousettus* and *Eonycteris* spp. bats, China, 2009 and 2015. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23:482–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid2303.161119

23. World Health Organization. Ebola situation report - 30 March 2016. 2016 [cited 2018 May 3]. http://apps.who.int/ebola/ current-situation/ebola-situation-report-30-march-2016

24. Dudas G, Carvalho LM, Bedford T, Tatem AJ, Baele G, Faria NR, et al. Virus genomes reveal factors that spread and sustained the Ebola epidemic. Nature. 2017;544:309–15. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/nature22040

25. Pigott DM, Deshpande A, Letourneau I, Morozoff C, Reiner RC Jr, Kraemer MUG, et al. Local, national, and regional viral haemorrhagic fever pandemic potential in Africa: a multistage analysis. Lancet. 2017;390:2662–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0140-6736(17)32092-5

26. Breman JG, Johnson KM, van der Groen G, Robbins CB, Szczeniowski MV, Ruti K, et al.; Ebola Virus Study Teams. A search for Ebola virus in animals in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Cameroon: ecologic, virologic, and serologic surveys, 1979–1980. J Infect Dis. 1999;179(Suppl 1):S139–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/514278

27. Leirs H, Mills JN, Krebs JW, Childs JE, Akaibe D, Woollen N, et al. Search for the Ebola virus reservoir in Kikwit, Democratic Republic of the Congo: reflections on a vertebrate collection. J Infect Dis. 1999;179(Suppl 1):S155–63. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/514299

28. Ayouba A, Touré A, Butel C, Keita AK, Binetruy F, Sow MS, et al. Development of a sensitive and specific serological assay based on luminex technology for detection of antibodies to Zaire Ebola virus. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55:165–76. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1128/JCM.01979-16

29. Peel AJ, McKinley TJ, Baker KS, Barr JA, Crameri G, Hayman DT, et al. Use of cross-reactive serological assays for detecting novel

pathogens in wildlife: assessing an appropriate cutoff for henipavirus assays in African bats. J Virol Methods. 2013;193:295– 303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.06.030

30. Gilbert AT, Fooks AR, Hayman DT, Horton DL, Müller T, Plowright R, et al. Deciphering serology to understand the ecology of infectious diseases in wildlife. EcoHealth. 2013;10:298–313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10393-013-0856-0

31. Lardeux F, Torrico G, Aliaga C. Calculation of the ELISA's cut-off based on the change-point analysis method for detection of *Trypanosoma cruzi* infection in Bolivian dogs in the absence of controls. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2016;111:501–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0074-02760160119

32. Killick R, Eckley IA. changepoint: an R package for changepoint analysis. J Stat Softw. 2014;58:1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/ jss.v058.i03

33. Hinkley DV. Inference about the change-point in a sequence of random variables. Biometrika. 1970;57:1–17. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/biomet/57.1.1

34. Laing ED, Mendenhall IH, Linster M, Low DHW, Chen Y, Yan L, et al. Serologic evidence of fruit bat exposure to filoviruses, Singapore, 2011–2016. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018;24:114–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid2401.170401

35. Cullen AC, Frey HC. Probabilistic techniques in exposure assessment. New York: Plenum Press; 1999. p. 81–159.

36. Delignette-Muller ML, Dutang C. fitdistplus: an R package for fitting distributions. J Stat Softw. 2015;64:1–34. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.18637/jss.v064.i04

37. Monleau M, Montavon C, Laurent C, Segondy M, Montes B, Delaporte E, et al. Evaluation of different RNA extraction methods and storage conditions of dried plasma or blood spots for human immunodeficiency virus type I RNA quantification and PCR amplification for drug resistance testing. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47:1107–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/ JCM.02255-08

38. Guichet E, Serrano L, Laurent C, Eymard-Duvernay S, Kuaban C, Vidal L, et al. Comparison of different nucleic acid preparation methods to improve specific HIV-1 RNA isolation for viral load testing on dried blood spots. J Virol Methods. 2018;251:75–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2017.10.014

39. Irwin DM, Kocher TD, Wilson AC. Evolution of the cytochrome b gene of mammals. J Mol Evol. 1991;32:128–44. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/BF02515385

40. Kocher TD, Thomas WK, Meyer A, Edwards SV, Pääbo S, Villablanca FX, et al. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989;86:6196–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.86.16.6196

41. He B, Feng Y, Zhang H, Xu L, Yang W, Zhang Y, et al. Filovirus RNA in fruit bats, China. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21:1675–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid2109.150260

42. Han BA, Schmidt JP, Alexander LW, Bowden SE, Hayman DT, Drake JM. Undiscovered bat hosts of filoviruses. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:e0004815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pntd.0004815

43. Rimoin AW, Lu K, Bramble MS, Steffen I, Doshi RH, Hoff NA, et al. Ebola virus neutralizing antibodies detectable in survivors of the Yambuku, Zaire outbreak 40 years after infection. J Infect Dis. 2018;217:223–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jix584

44. Paveska JT, Storm N, Grobbelaar AA, Markotter W, Kemp A, Jansen van Vuren P. Experimental inoculation of Egyptian fruit bats (*Rousettus aegyptiacus*) with Ebola virus. Viruses. 2016;8:29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v8020029

45. Amman BR, Jones ME, Sealy TK, Uebelhoer LS, Schuh AJ, Bird BH, et al. Oral shedding of Marburg virus in experimentally infected Egyptian fruit bats (*Rousettus aegyptiacus*). J Wildl Dis. 2015;51:113–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.7589/2014-08-198
46. Schuh AJ, Amman BR, Jones ME, Sealy TK, Uebelhoer LS, Spengler JR, et al. Modelling filovirus maintenance in nature by experimental transmission of Marburg virus between Egyptian rousette bats. Nat Commun. 2017;8:14446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14446

47. Jones ME, Schuh AJ, Amman BR, Sealy TK, Zaki SR, Nichol ST, et al. Experimental inoculation of Egyptian rousette bats (*Rousettus aegyptiacus*) with viruses of the *Ebolavirus* and *Marburgvirus* genera. Viruses. 2015;7:3420–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v7072779

48. Swanepoel R, Leman PA, Burt FJ, Zachariades NA, Braack LE, Ksiazek TG, et al. Experimental inoculation of plants and

animals with Ebola virus. Emerg Infect Dis. 1996;2:321–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid0204.960407

49. Storm N, Jansen Van Vuren P, Markotter W, Paweska JT. Antibody responses to Marburg virus in Egyptian rousette bats and their role in protection against infection. Viruses. 2018;10:73. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v10020073

Address for correspondence: Martine Peeters, TransVIHMI, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, 911 Ave Agropolis, BP34394 Montpellier CEDEX 1, France; e-mail: martine.peeters@ird.fr

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

EMERGING
INFECTIOUS DISEASES®

February 2016

Ebola

* Ebola and Its Control in Liberia, 2014–2015

* Epidemiology of Epidemic Ebola Virus Disease in Conakry and Surrounding Prefectures, Guinea, 2014–2015

* Hospital Preparations for Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Patients and Experience Gained from the Admission of an Ebola Patient

* Trematode Fluke *Procerovum varium* as Cause of Ocular Inflammation in Children, South India

* Association between Landscape Factors and Spatial Patterns of *Plasmodium knowlesi* Infections in Sabah, Malaysia

* Feasibility of Xpert Ebola Assay in Médecins Sans Frontières Ebola Program, Guinea

* Prognostic Indicators for Ebola Patient Survival

* Invasive Group A *Streptococcus* Infection among Children, Rural Kenya

* Randomized Controlled Trial of Hospital-Based Hygiene and Water Treatment Intervention (CHoBI7) to Reduce Cholera

* Sustained Transmission of Pertussis in Vaccinated, 1–5-Year-Old Children in a Preschool, Florida, USA

* Molecular Characterization of Invasive *Streptococcus dysgalactiae* subsp. *equisimilis*, Japan

* Epidemiology of Serotype 1 Invasive Pneumococcal Disease, South Africa, 2003–2013

* Hemorrhagic Fever with Renal Syndrome, Zibo City, China, 2006–2014

* Dogs and Opossums Positive for Vaccinia Virus during Outbreak Affecting Cattle and Humans, São Paulo State, Brazil

* African Buffalo Movement and Zoonotic Disease Risk across Transfrontier Conservation Areas, Southern Africa

* Anaplasmataceae-Specific PCR for Diagnosis and Therapeutic Guidance for Symptomatic Neoehrlichiosis in Immunocompetent Host

* *Candidatus Coxiella massiliensis* Infection

* Ebola Virus Persistence in Semen Ex Vivo

* Ebola Virus RNA Stability in Human Blood and Urine in West Africa's Environmental Conditions

* Uveitis and Systemic Inflammatory Markers in Convalescent Phase of Ebola Virus Disease

* Louseborne Relapsing Fever among East African Refugees, Italy, 2015

* Mediterranean Fin Whales (*Balaenoptera physalus*) Threatened by Dolphin Morbillivirus

* *Blastomyces gilchristii* as Cause of Fatal Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

* Effectiveness of Meningococcal B Vaccine against Endemic Hypervirulent *Neisseria meningitidis* W Strain, England

* Frequency and Distribution of Rickettsiae, Borreliae, and Ehrlichiae Detected in Human-Parasitizing Ticks, Texas, USA

* High Prevalence of *Borrelia miyamotoi* among Adult Blacklegged Ticks from White-Tailed Deer

To revisit the February 2016 issue, go to:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/articles/issue/22/2/table-of-contents