Eigentlich sagen die Autoren etwas völlig Anderes:
"Moreover, the finding of
agents serologically related to eradicable viruses, such as mumps,
distemper and measles virus, is highly relevant in assessing perspectives and consequences of virus eradication19,49–51. Clearly, the
bats investigated in this study carried viruses that were only similar
but not identical to those agents endemic in humans or livestock.
These new data therefore emphasise the importance of investigating possible transmission chains, as exemplified by the case of
severe acute respiratory syndrome, in which an agent derived from
bats was probably passed to humans by intermediate hosts such as
carnivores52
. In the case of the mumps-related bat virus, a direct
antigenetic relatedness between human and bat viruses has been
confirmed, and the close genetic proximity between both viruses
suggests that even cross-neutralisation might be possible. In light of
the still narrow representation of genetic diversity of bats covered
in this study (ca. 7.5% of bat species), further research might reveal
further bat-borne PV in close relationship to known pathogens of
humans and livestock. If antigenic overlap exists, this could become
relevant for virus eradication concepts. Relevant antigenic overlap
would be defined by proof of cross-neutralisation between reservoir-borne and human or livestock pathogens. In this latter case,
elimination of circulating virus and the subsequent cessation of
vaccination might leave humans or livestock susceptible for
reservoir-borne, antigenetically related viruses.
Although these data identify a potential reservoir of important
mammalian viruses, we can only begin to understand their true
significance by functional investigation. Knowledge on the genetic
range of pathogens carried by speciose small mammals may enable
early recognition of zoonotic epidemics and rapid decision-making
in the public health sector53,54. However, much more (and different)
work needs to be done to actually assess and ameliorate zoonotic
risks. The most relevant provision in this field is that epidemic risks
emanating from wildlife virus reservoirs should trigger wildlife conservation rather than interference with wild animal populations2"
.