Talk:Titi monkey adenovirus

Uniqueness of species-specific infection

I preface my remarks by acknowledging I am not a virologist, but a layperson with a recent interest in virology, so perhaps my points may easily be refuted by someone with expertise.

Wikipedia article <Infectious canine hepatitis> states that serotype 1 of the Canine adenovirus (CAV-1) infects several different Canifornian species, including bear, coyote, dog, fox and wolf. If that information is correct, it would seem to contradict claim in this article that the Titi monkey adenovirus is a unique exception to the general rule that adenovirus infections do not cross species.

I suggest one of three types of correction, depending on which corresponds to the actual facts:

1) Clarify that the Titi monkey adenovirus is but one of two known exceptions. A variant on this approach, if there might be more than 2 exceptions is to substitute the phrase "have, with rare exceptions, been thought to be species-specific" for the current phrase "have always been thought to be species-specific."

2) Instead of using the term "species-specific," portray the uniqueness of the Titi monkey virus in terms of it being the only known adenovirus that primarily infects a non-human species but is zoonotic to humans.

3) An explanation that reconciles the claim in this article with the claim in <Unfectuiiys canune heoatitis>,

I don't have the knowledge to know which of these approaches is appropriate. If you do, please help.

58.58.26.162 (talk) 14:53, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Ray Glock-Grueneich

Correction of significant spelling error in preceding post: Article referred to in Suggestion # 3 was intended to be <Infectious canine hepatitis>. I apologize for not catching this before intial post. 58.58.26.162 (talk) 14:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Ray Glock-Grueneich