Skip to main content

The potential role of scavenging flies as mechanical vectors of Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2


The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) populations of the Iberian Peninsula have been severely affected by the emergence of the rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2 (RHDV2/b). Bushflies and blowflies (Muscidae and Calliphoridae families, respectively) are important RHDV vectors in Oceania, but their epidemiological role is unknown in the native range of the European rabbit. In this study, scavenging flies were collected between June 2018 and February 2019 in baited traps at one site in southern Portugal, alongside a longitudinal capture-mark-recapture study of a wild European rabbit population, aiming to provide evidence of mechanical transmission of GI.2 by flies. Fly abundance, particularly from Calliphoridae and Muscidae families, peaked in October 2018 and in February 2019. By employing molecular tools, we were able to detect the presence of GI.2 in flies belonging to the families Calliphoridae, Muscidae, Fanniidae and Drosophilidae. The positive samples were detected during an RHD outbreak and absent in samples collected when no evidence of viral circulation in the local rabbit population was found. We were able to sequence a short viral genomic fragment, confirming its identity as RHDV GI.2. The results suggest that scavenging flies may act as mechanical vectors of GI.2 in the native range of the southwestern Iberian subspecies O. cuniculus algirus. Future studies should better assess their potential in the epidemiology of RHD and as a tool for monitoring viral circulation in the field.

Main text

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) is a calicivirus belonging to the genus Lagovirus that causes rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD) in adult European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). The virus has a hepatic tropism and causes cell loss as a result of virally-induced apoptosis leading to a necrotizing hepatitis (reviewed in [1]). Originally detected in China in 1984, RHDV rapidly disseminated worldwide and reached almost all continents, becoming enzootic in several countries (reviewed in [1]). In addition to the significant ecological losses associated with the crashes in the wild rabbit populations, RHD has also led to serious negative economic impacts in the rabbit-associated industries (e.g. [2, 3]). In 2010, French rabbit populations experienced atypical RHD outbreaks [4]. These were shown to be caused by a novel RHDV genotype later named Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2 [5], which is antigenically dissimilar and fatally infects kittens as young as 11 days old [6]. GI.2 replaced older RHDV circulating strains (genotype GI.1; [7,8,9,10]) and quickly spread worldwide [11, 12]. Recombination is an important mechanism in GI.2 evolution with all known strains resulting from recombination events with either pathogenic (GI.1b and GII.1) or non-pathogenic strains (GI.3 and GI.4), including those associated with the first outbreaks [13,14,15,16].

Transmission of RHDV occurs via contact of a susceptible rabbit with an infected animal or carcass, through contaminated surfaces, food, burrows, cages, etc., or by vectors such as insects, scavenging birds and mammals (reviewed in [1]). Calliphorid and muscid flies were first implicated in GI.1 RHDV dissemination following the escape of the virus from a quarantine compound on the off-shore Australian Wardang Island, subsequently spreading to mainland Australia [17, 18]. Similarly, spread of RHDV to the United Kingdom was also suggested to have been mediated by insect vectors [19]. Later investigations, both in the field and under laboratory conditions, suggested that flies (Calliphora, Chrysomya, Hydrotaea, Lucilia, Musca, Oxysarcodextia and Sarcophaga genera), fleas (Spilopsyllus cuniculi and Xenopsylla cunicularis) and mosquitoes (Aedes notoscriptus, Ae. postspiraculosus and Culex annulinostris) could mechanically transmit RHDV [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Rabbits are infected by ingestion or contact with contaminated flyspots deposited on vegetation or at burrow entrances. Absorption of virus particles from flyspots deposited on mucous membranes such as rabbit conjunctiva was also put forward as a pathway of disease transmission [20]. Flyspots were shown to contain enough viral particles to cause RHD in susceptible rabbits [4]. Yet, insects do not support RHDV replication.

A recent study by Calvete and colleagues [30] showed the inability of GI.2 mechanical transmission by the mosquito Aedes albopictus (Culicidae) and a limited ability of the sandfly Phlebotomus papatasi (Psychodidae). These insects were selected for study based on their availability in laboratory colonies and their feeding habits that render them efficient mechanical vectors of viruses.

While flies were shown to be the main vectors of RHDV in Oceania [4, 15, 17, 25], their epidemiological role in Europe is unknown. In mainland Portugal, insects from orders Coleoptera and Diptera are the most commonly found near rabbit enclosures, with Psycodidae, Scarabaeidae and Staphylinidae families and Culicoides genus being the most abundantly trapped [31]. RHDV GI.2 has been detected in insects from Mycetophilidae, Staphylinidae and Simuliidae families, Forcipomyiinae subfamily and Culicoides genus [31, 32]. However, other fly species that may constitute vectors of RHDV have not been investigated. The main goals of this study were to search for evidence of mechanical transmission of GI.2 by insects collected in Portugal in the scope of a longitudinal epidemiological study of wild rabbits and to determine the potential of these insects to act as sentinels of GI.2 circulation.


Rabbit trapping

A longitudinal study of wild European rabbits was performed at one population in central mainland Portugal (Companhia das Lezírias, 38°50′43.7″N, 8°51′48.7″W) (Pacheco et al. 2022). Cage-traps (n = 52) were placed regularly spaced in an area of 13 hectares and baited with fresh vegetables. Eight sessions of 4–5 occasions (nights) each were performed between May 2018 and February 2019, in which 50 rabbits were captured 117 times. All rabbit specimens were identified with a subcutaneous microchip when first captured; whole blood was collected by venipuncture of the saphenous vein, placed in clotting tubes, centrifuged at 1430g for 10 min, and the serum was recovered and stored at − 20 °C until analysis. Rabbits were released at the site of their capture immediately after processing. Live trapping and sample collection were conducted under authorizations 580/2018, 8/2019, according to the European Union directives on the use of animals for research (Directive 2010/63/EU) and international wildlife standards [33].

The presence of RHDV GI.2-specific antibodies in rabbit sera was analyzed by an indirect enzyme-linked immune serum assay [34] with minor adaptations, as further described in [35]. Briefly, ELISA was performed by using GI.1 or GI.2 virus-like particles (VLPs) as capture antigens (100 ng/well), sera samples diluted 1/200 and a goat anti-rabbit IgG-HRP diluted 1/4,000 as conjugate. Dilutions were performed in 5% non-fat milk/PBS and incubations were carried out for 1 h at 37 °C, except for the VLPs, which were diluted in carbonate/bicarbonate buffer, pH 7.4, and incubated at 4 °C overnight. After each incubation, plates were washed 3x with PBS-0.05% Tween. Optical density was read at 450 nm within 15 min.

Any rabbit carcass found during the trapping sessions was recovered, subject to a standard necropsy procedure, and liver and lung samples collected and kept stored at − 20 °C until analysis.

Insect trapping

From June 2018 onwards, during each rabbit trapping session and within the same site, three modified bottle flytraps [36] were set baited with rotting meat. Rabbit meat for human consumption was acquired in commercial stores, left to rot for 2–4 days at room temperature, and used as bait. Trapping lasted four days in each session in June, August, September, October, and December 2018. Trapping lasted 3 days in January 2019 and eight days in February 2019. Trapped insects were stored pooled in 70% ethanol at room temperature until analysis.

Morphological identification

Collected flies were morphologically identified according to [37,38,39], Szpila (families Calliphoridae and Sarcophagidae), Grzywacz (family Muscidae) and (database with pictures: family Sarcophagidae), using a stereomicroscope.

Flies were pooled according to the month of collection and the morphology-based taxonomical identification. A subset of the collected flies was selected from the most abundant taxonomical units in each trapping session and subjected to molecular identification. In the peak fly abundance season, only 25% of the trapped insects were identified.

Molecular identification

Insects were removed from the microtubes, washed in sterile water and carefully dried. Sterilized dissection material was used to separate the abdomen from the remaining parts that were stored for morphological reference. DNA and RNA were extracted from 20 to 30 mg of a pool of abdominal contents of insects from the same microtube using the AllPrep DNA/RNA Mini Kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

For molecular identification at the genus and, whenever possible, species-level, the universal primer set for the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene (COI) was used [40], LCO1490: 5′-GGT CAA CAA ATC ATA AAG ATA TTG G-3′ and HCO2198: 5′-TAA ACT TCA GGG TGA CCA AAA AAT CA-3′. Reactions were performed by adding 1 µL of the extracted DNA to 5 µL of Phusion Flash High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix (Thermo Scientific), 2 pmol of each oligonucleotide and water, to a final volume of 10 µL. PCR amplification was carried out as follows: initial denaturation at 98 °C for 3 min, 40 cycles of denaturation at 98 °C for 30 s, annealing at 51 °C for 30 s and extension at 72 °C for 30 s, and a final 5 min extension at 72 °C. Amplification products with the expected size, ~ 700 base pairs (bp), were purified and sequenced on an automatic sequencer (3500xL Genetic Analyzer, Applied Biosystems) using the amplification primers. Sequences herein found were compared with those available in the GenBank database using standard nucleotide BLAST searches.

RHDV GI.2 detection in flies

Due to the expected low viral loads in flies, a sensitive RT-qPCR method was employed for GI.2 detection (see [41] for primers and probe sequences). Amplification was performed in reactions with a final volume of 20 µL using the iTaq Universal Probes One-Step Kit (Biorad), with 1 µM and 0.2 µM of each primer and probe, respectively, 10 µL of enzyme mix and 1 µL of RNA. Cycling conditions consisted of one cycle at 10 min for 50 °C, one cycle at 95 °C for 3 min and 40 cycles of 95 °C for 15 s and 60 °C for 30 s. This system amplifies a 127 bp fragment located within the VP60 gene.

Positive RHDV GI.2 fly samples were further screened by conventional PCR. Extracted RNAs were reverse transcribed using oligo(dT) as primers and SuperScript™ III Reverse Transcriptase (Invitrogen). The primer pair RHDV6186F 5′-CAT TGA CCA CGA CAG AGG TAA C-3′ and RHDV6335R 5′-AAG GGC ACG AAC GAC ATG TCA-3′, which amplifies a fragment of 150 bp of the gene encoding the RHDV capsid protein VP60 [42,43,44], was used for the amplification. Reaction was performed with 1.5 µL of the cDNA reaction in a final volume of 10 µL containing 5 µL of Phusion Flash High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix (Thermo Scientific) and 2 pmol of each oligonucleotide. Cycling conditions were 3 min at 98 °C, followed by 40 cycles of 30 s at 98 °C, 30 s at 50 °C and extension at 72 °C for 10 s. Final extension was carried out for 5 min at 72 °C. Positive samples were identified by gel electrophoresis and sequenced with the amplification primers as described above.

RHDV GI.2 detection in rabbits

RNA was extracted from the liver and lung of a single rabbit found dead in January 2019 (rabbit #118), following the protocol available from Thermo Fisher Scientific (GeneJet RNA Purification kit). In this case, RHDV detection followed a standard procedure previously developed in our lab. The use of these primer pairs allows a rapid and cost-effective detection and identification of the type of RHDV recombinant [14]. cDNA was synthesized with the NZY First-Strand cDNA Synthesis kit (NZYtech). For p16/p23, the PCR primers used were RHDV0001F 5′-GTG AAA GTT ATG GCG GCT ATG TCG-3′ and RHDV0847R 5′-CCA AGA GGA TTG ATG CAA GTG-3′ (847 bp) with the following cycling conditions: 3 min at 98 °C, followed by 40 cycles of 30 s at 98 °C, 30 s at 50 °C and extension at 72 °C for 90 s, and final extension of 5 min at 72 °C. For VP60, the PCR primers used were RHDV6186F 5′-CAT TGA CCA CGA CAG AGG TAA C-3′ and RHDV6748R 5′-CGT TAG TTG AAC CGG CCT CAG-3′ (563 bp) and the cycling conditions consisted of 3 min at 98 °C, followed by 40 cycles of 30 s at 98 °C, 30 s at 67 °C and extension at 72 °C for 30 s, and final extension of 5 min at 72 °C. In both PCRs, we used 5 µL of Phusion Flash High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix (Thermo Scientific), 2 pmol of each oligonucleotide, 1 µL of the cDNA reaction and water to a final volume of 10 µL.

Results and discussion

Overall, 3027 fly specimens were collected between June 2018 and February 2019 and morphologically identified. Morphological identification of each specimen was performed to the species (n = 2301), genus (n = 20), or family level (n = 706) (Table 1). The average daily number of flies collected peaked in October, with a second smaller peak in January and February (Fig. 1). The most abundant Diptera collected in every session were Muscidae and Calliphoridae specimens, as was also shown by other authors in studies carried out in the Iberian Peninsula with pig [36, 45, 46], dog [47] and cat (unpublished observations), except in January, when Drosophilidae was the second most collected family. In Portugal, Calliphora vicina and C. vomitoria can be found all year round, especially during the winter and spring seasons, while other species inside the Calliphoridae family are captured from late spring until autumn (e.g., Chrysomya albiceps, Lucilia sericata, L. ampullacea and L. caesar) [47,48,49]. Flies from the genus Fannia are also present all year round, being especially abundant during all spring season [46].

Table 1 Summary of the morphological identification of the collected flies by trapping session
Fig. 1
figure 1

Average daily number of flies collected per trapping session. Results from the morphological identification. The Y-axis is in square root scale to improve readability

Molecular identification by sequencing of a fragment of the COI gene (GenBank accession numbers OQ860783-OQ860806) and comparison by BLAST analysis with publicly available sequences in GenBank allowed the assignment of the insects into four families, split into 8 genera, in a total of 11 different species (Table 2). In general, there was a good agreement between morphological and molecular identification, with some instances with further assignment to the genus/species level based on the sequences obtained; yet, species identification was not possible for insects of the families Phoridae and Drosophilidae. All the detected species have been previously reported as occurring in Portugal, associated with carrion and organic matter decomposition [e.g. 36, 46, 47].

Table 2 Morphological and molecular identification of the insects collected, and percentage of identity with publicly available sequences

By RT-qPCR, GI.2 was detected in seven pools of insects, with Cq values ranging between 23 and 30 (Table 3). The RT-qPCR system employed in this study was previously shown to detect as few as nine copies of viral RNA, which corresponded to a mean Cq value of 37.56 [41]. Since the Cq values observed in the present study are below that value, these flies were considered as positives for the presence of GI.2. Positive insects were identified as belonging to four families, Muscidae, Calliphoridae, Fanniidae and Drosophilidae, and were collected in January and February 2019. These samples were further screened by conventional RT-PCR. Only one insect pool collected in January 2019 and identified as Hydrotaea armipes was positive (sample 12; Table 2). From this, we were able to sequence a 107 bp fragment within the capsid gene (GenBank accession number: OQ859633). BLAST analysis with sequences available in the GenBank database revealed the highest score with the GI.2 strain AUS/VIC/MLD-6/2017 (98.6% nucleotide identity; accession number MW460206), confirming its identity as GI.2.

Table 3 RT-qPCR results of the insects collected

The apparent seroprevalence of RHDV in the rabbit population was 30.0% (CI95 20.5–41.5%; data not shown). No seroconversions were detected among the 50 individual rabbits trapped between May and December 2018 (117 captures), and no dead rabbits were found, supporting that RHDV was not circulating in the local population during that time. No rabbits were captured during the January-February 2019 trapping session, but the fresh carcass of an adult female, initially live-captured in August 2018 and seronegative for RHDV, was found. At necropsy, lesions suggestive of RHD were found (data not shown) and RHDV RNA was amplified from liver and lung samples. Two fragments of 762 bp and 503 bp, covering p16 and part of p23, and a partial fragment of VP60, were sequenced (GenBank accession numbers OQ859632 and OQ859631). Standard nucleotide BLAST searches revealed 97.3% and 97.6% identity with GI.2 sequences (GenBank accession numbers KM115683 and KM115716) for the p16/p23 and VP60 fragments, respectively. The GI.2 sequence obtained from the fly sample 12 (also collected in January 2019) has 100% nucleotide identity with the sequence obtained from the rabbit samples, confirming it originated from the recorded RHDV GI.2 outbreak. While identical, the samples were handled independently at different periods of time, with no possibility of cross-contamination. Moreover, the sequences obtained were not identical to any of the sequences previously obtained in our laboratory, further discarding the possibility of contamination from other tested samples.

The RT-qPCR method used in this study is a highly sensitive method that detects minimum amounts of GI.2 viral RNA [41]. Previously, Gehrmann and Kretzschmar [22] found that 10–100 virus particles were the minimum dose required to induce disease in rabbits; a more recent study showed that the minimum infective dose for GI.1 is ≤ 104 gRNA copies [50]. However, this has not been fully assessed for GI.2. Thus, despite the detection of GI.2 RNA in these flies, showing their ability to carry the virus, it remains to be determined if the amount of viral particles present was sufficient to induce disease in susceptible rabbits. The detection of RHDV in the abdominal content of the flies after dissection makes it unlikely that it was the result of cross-specimen contamination in the traps or in the subsequent insect pools [24]. Thus, the virus detected would likely later be excreted in flyspots. A single flyspot (faecal and regurgitation spots) has been shown to contain enough RHDV particles to infect susceptible rabbits [20, 27].

Previous observational and experimental studies showed that muscid and calliphorid flies, including Calliphora, Hydrotaea, and Musca, can transmit RHD between susceptible rabbits and might have an essential role in the epidemiology [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Our results are in line with these studies as RHDV positive flies found in this study also belong to these families. We further detected GI.2 RNA in Drosophilidae and Fannidae flies, which had never been reported. The role of these flies in RHDV transmission remains to be determined; however, their life cycles and feeding habits lend support to their role as mechanical vectors for GI.2. Indeed, several RNA viruses belonging to families Rhabdoviridae, Dicistroviridae, Birnaviridae, Reoviridae, and Errantiviridae have been reported in Drosophila melanogaster [51], while Fannia canicularis is a known vector of Newcastle disease virus and Aleutian mink disease virus [52]. Furthermore, Fanniidae flies have a necrophagous life cycle [53], with females being attracted to decaying material, carrion and feces, as well as sweat and mucus from animals. Their larvae can also be found in vertebrate carrion and burrows, causing myasis in animals with unhealed hounds [54]. Drosophilid flies usually feed on substrates rich in bacteria, yeasts, and other fungi, but some feed on animal tissues or secretions, especially those of Amiota, Apsiphortica and Phortica genera [reviewed by 55]. Previous results reported the presence of GI.2 RNA in insects belonging to families Ceratopogonidae (genus Culicoides and subfamiily Forcipomyiinae), Staphylinidae, Simuliidae [31] and Mycetophilidae [32]. While their feeding habits and dispersal behaviour are compatible with a role as mechanical vectors for GI.2, their life cycles reduce the likelihood of acting as virus reservoirs [56]. However, since these insects were not detected in the present study, we could not further assess their role.

In conclusion, our results appear to indicate that scavenging flies C. vomitoria, C. vicina, Hydrotea armipes, Muscina levida, Fannia lepida and those from the Drosophilidae family may have a role as mechanical vectors of RHDV in the native range of the southwestern Iberian subspecies of European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus algirus), as shown in Oceania [24, 27]. Furthermore, our observations suggest that the detection of GI.2 in scavenging flies might be used as a tool to monitor viral circulation [24]. Indeed, we were able to detect GI.2 in scavenging flies during a GI.2 outbreak, but not when there was no  evidence of viral circulation in the local rabbit population. Future studies are warranted to fully determine the potential of scavenging flies in the epidemiology of RHD and as monitoring tools for surveillance of RHDV outbreaks in the field.

Availability of data materials

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the GenBank database under the accession numbers: OQ860783-OQ860806; OQ859631-OQ859633.



Rabbit haemorrhagic disease


Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus


Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus 2


Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus b


  1. Abrantes J, van der Loo W, Le Pendu J, Esteves PJ. Rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD) and rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV): a review. Vet Res. 2012;43:12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Gregg DA, House C, Meyer R, Berninger M. Viral haemorrhagic disease of rabbits in Mexico: epidemiology and viral characterization. Rev Sci Tech. 1991;10:435–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Villafuerte R, Calvete C, Blanco JC, Lucientes J. Incidence of viral hemorrhagic disease in wild rabbit populations in Spain. Mammalia. 1995;59:651–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Le Gall-Reculé G, Lavazza A, Marchandeau S, Bertagnoli S, Zwingelstein F, Cavadini P, Martinelli N, Lombardi G, Guerin JL, Lemaitre E, et al. Emergence of a new lagovirus related to rabbit Haemorrhagic Disease Virus. Vet Res. 2013;44:81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Le Pendu J, Abrantes J, Bertagnoli S, Guitton JS, Le Gall-Recule G, Lopes AM, Marchandeau S, Alda F, Almeida T, Celio AP, et al. Proposal for a unified classification system and nomenclature of lagoviruses. J Gen Virol. 2017;98:1658–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dalton KP, Nicieza I, Balseiro A, Muguerza MA, Rosell JM, Casais R, Alvarez AL, Parra F. Variant rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus in young rabbits, Spain. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;18:2009–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Calvete C, Sarto P, Calvo AJ, Monroy F, Calvo JH. Could the new rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus variant (RHDVb) be fully replacing classical RHD strains in the Iberian Peninsula? World Rabbit Sci. 2014;22:91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dalton KP, Nicieza I, Abrantes J, Esteves PJ, Parra F. Spread of new variant RHDV in domestic rabbits on the Iberian Peninsula. Vet Microbiol. 2014;169:67–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lopes AM, Correia J, Abrantes J, Melo P, Ramada M, Magalhaes MJ, Alves PC, Esteves PJ. Is the new variant RHDV replacing genogroup 1 in Portuguese wild rabbit populations? Viruses. 2015;7:27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mahar JE, Hall RN, Peacock D, Kovaliski J, Piper M, Mourant R, Huang N, Campbell S, Gu X, Read A, et al. Rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus 2 (RHDV2; GI.2) is replacing endemic strains of RHDV in the Australian Landscape within 18 months of its arrival. J Virol. 2018;92:e01374–01317.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Rouco C, Aguayo-Adan JA, Santoro S, Abrantes J, Delibes-Mateos M. Worldwide rapid spread of the novel rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (GI.2/RHDV2/b). Transbound Emerg Dis. 2019;66:1762–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aguayo-Adan JA, Rouco C, Delibes-Mateos M, Santoro S. Lack of evidence for differences in the spread of classic (Lagovirus europaeus/GI.1) and novel (Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2) rabbit haemorrhagic disease viruses in Europe and North Africa. Vet Rec. 2022;190:e1067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lopes AM, Dalton KP, Magalhaes MJ, Parra F, Esteves PJ, Holmes EC, Abrantes J. Full genomic analysis of new variant rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus revealed multiple recombination events. J Gen Virol. 2015;96:1309–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Silverio D, Lopes AM, Melo-Ferreira J, Magalhaes MJ, Monterroso P, Serronha A, Maio E, Alves PC, Esteves PJ, Abrantes J. Insights into the evolution of the new variant rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (GI.2) and the identification of novel recombinant strains. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018;65:983–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Abrantes J, Droillard C, Lopes AM, Lemaitre E, Lucas P, Blanchard Y, Marchandeau S, Esteves PJ, Le Gall-Recule G. Recombination at the emergence of the pathogenic rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2. Sci Rep. 2020;10:14502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Mahar JE, Jenckel M, Huang N, Smertina E, Holmes EC, Strive T, Hall RN. Frequent intergenotypic recombination between the non-structural and structural genes is a major driver of epidemiological fitness in caliciviruses. Virus Evol. 2021;7:veab080.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Cooke BD. Analysis of the spread of rabbit calicivirus from Wardang island through mainland Australia. A report for the Meat Research Corporation, October 1996, as part of project CS.236 “Field evaluation of RCD under quarantine”. pp. 25; 1996:25.

  18. Kovaliski J. Monitoring the spread of rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus as a new biological agent for control of wild european rabbits in Australia. J Wildl Dis. 1998;34:421–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chasey D. Possible origin of rabbit haemorrhagic disease in the United Kingdom. Vet Rec. 1994;135:496–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Asgari S, Hardy JR, Sinclair RG, Cooke BD. Field evidence for mechanical transmission of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) by flies (Diptera:Calliphoridae) among wild rabbits in Australia. Virus Res. 1998;54:123–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Barratt BIP, Ferguson CM, Heath ACG, Evans AA, Logan RAS. Can insects transmit Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus? In: Fifty first New Zealand plant protection conference; Rotorua, New Zealand. Edited by Society NZPP; 1998. p. 245–250.

  22. Gehrmann BBfVSG, Kretzschmar C. Experimental investigations on Rabbit Haemorrhagic Disease (RHD)—transmission by flies. Berliner und Muenchener Tieraerztliche Wochenschrift (Germany FR). 1991, v. 104.

  23. Gould AR, Kattenbelt JA, Lenghaus C, Morrissy C, Chamberlain T, Collins BJ, Westbury HA. The complete nucleotide sequence of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (czech strain V351): use of the polymerase chain reaction to detect replication in australian vertebrates and analysis of viral population sequence variation. Virus Res. 1997;47:7–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hall RN, Huang N, Roberts J, Strive T. Carrion flies as sentinels for monitoring lagovirus activity in Australia. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2019;66:2025–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lenghaus C, Westbury H, Collins B, Natnamoban N, Morrissy C. Overview of the RHD project in the australian Animal Health Laboratory. Canberra: Bureau of Resource Sciences, Aust. Gov. Printing Services; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lugton I. A cross-sectional study of risk factors affecting the outcome of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus releases in New South Wales. Aust Vet J. 1999;77:322–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McColl KA, Merchant JC, Hardy J, Cooke BD, Robinson A, Westbury HA. Evidence for insect transmission of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus. Epidemiol Infect. 2002;129:655–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Cooke BD. Insects as potential vectors of rabbit calicivirus disease. Meat Research Corporation Project—epidemiology of rabbit calicivirus. Camberra: CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Henning J, Meers J, Davies PR, Morris RS. Survival of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) in the environment. Epidemiol Infect. 2005;133:719–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Calvete C, Sarto MP, Iguacel L, Calvo JH. Infectivity of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus excreted in rabbit faecal pellets. Vet Microbiol. 2021;257:109079.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Abade dos Santos F. Quadro anatomo-histopatológico e diagnóstico molecular da doença hemorrágica viral em coelho-bravo. Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária; 2018.

  32. Duarte da Silva J. Integrative taxonomy of arthropods as potential vectors of viral haemorrhagic rabbit disease—genotype 2 (RHDV2) and as potential new vectors of myxomatosis. University of Lisbon, Faculty of Sciences; 2021.

  33. Sikes RS. 2016 guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research and education. J Mammal. 2016;97:663–88.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Barcena J, Guerra B, Angulo I, Gonzalez J, Valcarcel F, Mata CP, Caston JR, Blanco E, Alejo A. Comparative analysis of rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) and new RHDV2 virus antigenicity, using specific virus-like particles. Vet Res. 2015;46:106.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Pacheco H, Lopes AM, Barcena J, Blanco E, Abrantes J, Esteves P, Choquet R, Alves PC, Santos N. Multi-event capture-recapture models estimate the diagnostic performance of serological tests for myxoma and rabbit haemorrhagic disease viruses in the absence of reference samples. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022;69:e3024–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Farinha A, Dourado CG, Centeio N, Oliveira AR, Dias D, Rebelo MT. Small bait traps as accurate predictors of dipteran early colonizers in forensic studies. J Insect Sci. 2014;14:77.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Thielman AC, Hunter FF, Canada, BSo. A photographic key to adult female mosquito species of Canada (Diptera: Culicidae). Biological Survey of Canada; 2007.

  38. Barrientos JA. Curso práctico de entomología. Spain; 2004.

  39. Ramilo D. Phenotypic and genetic characterization of Culicoides (DIPTERA: CERATOPOGONIDAE) in Portugal and comparison of the effect of pyrethroid insecticides in their control. Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária; 2016.

  40. Folmer OF, Black MB, Hoeh WR, Lutz RV, Vrijenhoek RC. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol. 1994;3:294–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Duarte MD, Carvalho CL, Barros SC, Henriques AM, Ramos F, Fagulha T, Luís T, Duarte EL, Fevereiro M. A real time Taqman RT-PCR for the detection of rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus 2 (RHDV2). J Virol Methods. 2015;219:90–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Abrantes J, Lopes AM, Dalton KP, Parra F, Esteves PJ. Detection of RHDVa on the Iberian Peninsula: isolation of an RHDVa strain from a spanish rabbitry. Arch Virol. 2014;159:321–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rouco C, Abrantes J, Serronha A, Lopes AM, Maio E, Magalhães MJ, Blanco E, Bárcena J, Esteves PJ, Santos N, et al. Epidemiology of RHDV2 (Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2) in free-living wild European rabbits in Portugal. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017;65:e373–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lopes AM, Gavier-Widén D, Le Gall-Reculé G, Esteves PJ, Abrantes J. Complete coding sequences of european brown hare syndrome virus (EBHSV) strains isolated in 1982 in Sweden. Arch Virol. 2013;158:2193–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Martín-Vega D, Baz A. Sarcosaprophagous Diptera assemblages in natural habitats in central Spain: spatial and seasonal changes in composition. Med Vet Entomol. 2013;27:64–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Prado e Castro C, Serrano A, Martins Da Silva P, GarcÍA MD. Carrion flies of forensic interest: a study of seasonal community composition and succession in Lisbon, Portugal. Med Vet Entomol. 2012;26:417–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Loução C. Seasonal influence in the succession of entomological fauna on carrions of Canis familiaris in Lisbon, Portugal. Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária; 2017.

  48. Prado e Castro C. Studies on Sarcosaprophagous Diptera (Insecta) in Central Portugal: application to forensic entomology. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologias da Universidade de Coimbra, Departamento de Zoologia; 2005.

  49. Prado e Castro C, Arnaldos MI, García MD. Additions to the Calliphoridae (Diptera) fauna from Portugal, with description of new records. Bol Asoc Esp Entomol. 2009;33:425–37.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Droillard C, Lemaitre E, Amelot M, Blanchard Y, Keita A, Eterradossi N, Le Gall-Reculé G. Rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus Lagovirus europaeus/GI.1d strain: genome sequencing, in vivo virus replication kinetics, and viral dose effect. BMC Vet Res. 2021;17:257.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Huszar T, Imler JL. Drosophila viruses and the study of antiviral host-defense. Adv Virus Res. 2008;72:227–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Murillo AC, Hubbard CB, Hinkle NC, Gerry AC. Big problems with Little House fly (Diptera: Fanniidae). J Integr Pest Manag. 2021;12:40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Oosterbroek P. The European families of the Diptera: identification—diagnosis—Biology. Leiden : KNNV Publishing; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sorokina VS, Ovtshinnikova OG. The phylogenetic relationships of the fanniidae within the muscoid grade (Diptera: Calyptrata) based on the musculature of the male terminalia. Insects. 2022;13:210.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Máca J, Otranto D. Drosophilidae feeding on animals and the inherent mystery of their parasitism. Parasites Vectors. 2014;7:516.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Hutson AM, Ackland DM, Kidd LN. Mycetophilidae (Bolitophilinae, Ditomyiinae, Diadocidiinae, Keroplatinae, Sciophilinae and Manotinae) (Diptera, Nematocera). In: Handbooks for the identification of British insetcs, vol. 9. 1980.

Download references


This study was performed within the scope of project LAGMED (, supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, FCT (PRIMA/0003/2018) and PRIMA programme, an Art.185 initiative supported and funded under Horizon 2020, the European Union’s Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. This work was also co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) and Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, and by the project NORTE-01-0246-FEDER-000063. The authors also acknowledge FCT research support via the Junior Researcher grant of Ana M. Lopes (CEECIND/01388/2017), the PhD grant of João Vasco Côrte-Real (DFA/BD/4965/2020), the post-doctoral grant of Nuno Santos (SFRH/BPD/116596/2016), the Principal Researcher grant of Pedro J. Esteves (CEECIND/CP1601/CT0005), the Assistant Researcher grant of Joana Abrantes (CEECIND/00078/2017), and projects CIISA UIDB/00276/2020, LA/P/0059/2020-Al4AnimalS and CESAM UID/AMB/50017-POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007638. The funding bodies had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



AML, HCO, DWR, MTR, IPF, PJE, NS and JA designed the work. AML, TA, SD, JVCR, DWR and NS performed the experimental work. AML, TA, SD, DWR, MTR, IPF, NS and JA analysed and interpreted the data. All authors drafted the work and/or substantively revised it. All authors read and approved the final version of the work.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Nuno Santos or Joana Abrantes.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Live trapping and sample collection were conducted under permits 580/2018, 8/2019, according to the European Union directives on the use of animals for research (Directive 2010/63/EU) and international wildlife standards [33].

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lopes, A.M., Almeida, T., Diz, S. et al. The potential role of scavenging flies as mechanical vectors of Lagovirus europaeus/GI.2. Virol J 20, 103 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • RHDV
  • Flies
  • Vectors
  • Epidemiology
  • European rabbit