What's the smallest animal that could be rabid?

[RivkahChaya]

Don’t need answer fast. Just idle curiosity.

My Google-fu is failing, so I’m turning here to see if someone has some information on this. I realize there’s probably a factual answer, but since I’m bound to get dozens of opinions, I thought I’d go ahead and post it here.

Anyway, here’s the “problem,” if you want to call it that. Very few small animals have much chance of being rabid, because if they are ever attacked by something rabid, the chances of them surviving are pretty slim, so rabid rats and squirrels just don’t happen. On the other hand, rabid raccoons have been documented.

I’m betting that feral cats are probably the smallest animal that could reasonably survive an attack by something rabid, at least long enough to manifest rabies, and become contagious, and die of rabies before they’d die of gangrene or sepsis from the bite wound itself.

That’s just based on knowing that cats, even older ones, have gotten away from large dogs after a single bite.

We had a Siamese who was five or six when she got attacked by a Husky. Both had rabies shots. She was declawed because she came from the shelter that way. But she got away after one bite and jumped a fence and got away, although she had an open wound and a cracked rib. The emergency vet treated her, and she lived to be 17.

If he’d been rabid, and she’d been feral, he would have been more vicious, but she would have had claws, and he might have been weaker. She also would have been younger, because feral cats’ life expectancy is 2 1/2. I expect she still would have gotten away. What I don’t know is whether she would have died of rabies first, or an infected wound first.

Does anyone have knowledge of a smaller animals that survived a large animal attack without immediate human intervention?

FTR, the dog was kept in a fenced-in yard, but some neighbor kids thought it would be funny to let him out. His owners paid our vet bills. They were beside themselves. They put a lock on the fence after that.

[Kent_Clark]

Bats carry rabies. The most common bat species in the U.S. include the Mexican free-tailed and little brown, both of which typically weigh 1/2 ounce or less.

[steatopygia]

Any mammal can harbor rabies, even mice and rats. Mice and other animals bite each other, so I don’t think the part about “surviving an attack” really comes into play.

I did not know this bit of (undated) information from the Humane Society

"Federal and state wildlife officials have been vaccinating wildlife in many regions over the past 15 years. They distribute vaccine-laden baits that the target animals eat and thereby vaccinate themselves. Right now, oral rabies vaccination of wildlife focuses on halting the spread of specific types of rabies in targeted carrier species. Next, it’s hoped that this tool can shrink the disease’s range. "

[RivkahChaya]

@steatopygia

Any mammal can harbor rabies, even mice and rats. Mice and other animals bite each other, so I don’t think the part about “surviving an attack” really comes into play.

I did not know this bit of (undated) information from the Humane Society

"Federal and state wildlife officials have been vaccinating wildlife in many regions over the past 15 years. They distribute vaccine-laden baits that the target animals eat and thereby vaccinate themselves. Right now, oral rabies vaccination of wildlife focuses on halting the spread of specific types of rabies in targeted carrier species. Next, it’s hoped that this tool can shrink the disease’s range. "

That is so cool.

And I forgot about bats. They have it, I think, originally because some species are scavengers. I forgot about scavengers. That may be why possums sometimes have it, too, because they eat pretty much anything, judging from the ones that used to get into our trash.

[cwthree]

@RivkahChaya

That is so cool.

And I forgot about bats. They have it, I think, originally because some species are scavengers. I forgot about scavengers. That may be why possums sometimes have it, too, because they eat pretty much anything, judging from the ones that used to get into our trash.

Bats can also come into contact with other animals that regard them as prey, getting bitten or scratched in the process.

[John_Mace]

You’re essentially asking what is the smallest mammal. Although there seems to be some dispute, it’s likely the Kitti’s Hog-nosed Bat.

[HoneyBadgerDC]

I think without bats rabies would disappear from the planet in less than a decade. Rabid bats fall from the sky, foxes, raccoons and skunks would be the most likely to find them before they die and getting bit by them is likely a common occurrence. Large cats in Africa and other parts of the world can get it but for some reason house cats seem to be immune to it.

[CalMeacham]

@John_Mace

You’re essentially asking what is the smallest mammal. Although there seems to be some dispute, it’s likely the Kitti’s Hog-nosed Bat.

I thought it was the pygmy shrew.

Wikipedia says:

The Etruscan shrew (Suncus etruscus), also known as the Etruscan pygmy shrew or the white-toothed pygmy shrew is the smallest known mammal by mass, weighing only about 1.8 grams (0.063 oz) on average[3][4][5][6][7] (The bumblebee bat is regarded as the smallest mammal by skull size).[3][8]

Etruscan shrew

Shrews can get rabies, although it’s unusual:

Of course, those legendary Killer Shrews are much bigger, and dangerous even without rabies.

[John_Mace]

Wikipedia also says:

The vulnerable Kitti’s hog-nosed bat (Craseonycteris thonglongyai), also known as the bumblebee bat, from Thailand and Myanmar[35] is the smallest mammal, at 3–4 centimetres (1.2–1.6 in) in length and 1.5–2 grams (0.053–0.071 oz) in weight.

The Etruscan shrew (Suncus etruscus), is the smallest mammal by mass, weighing only about 1.8 grams (0.063 oz) on average. The bumblebee bat has a smaller skull size. The smallest mammal that ever lived, the shrew-like Batodonoides vanhouteni, weighed only 1.3 grams (0.046 oz).

If I average 1.5 and 2.0, I get 1.75 < 1.8. That is partially why I said there is some dispute.

[MLS]

@HoneyBadgerDC

I think without bats rabies would disappear from the planet in less than a decade. Rabid bats fall from the sky, foxes, raccoons and skunks would be the most likely to find them before they die and getting bit by them is likely a common occurrence. Large cats in Africa and other parts of the world can get it but for some reason house cats seem to be immune to it.

I’ve never heard anyone else say house cats are immune to rabies. Obviously if they always stay inside and no rabid animal gets in they won’t get sick, but that’s not the same as immunity. Vets routinely immunize cats for rabies and in some places it’s required even if the cat never goes outside.

[CalMeacham]

@John_Mace

Wikipedia also says:

If I average 1.5 and 2.0, I get 1.75 < 1.8. That is partially why I said there is some dispute.

Why “also”? You quoted a passage virtually identical to what I quoted"

[outlierrn]

Well, since the bat is an insectavore, I’d say the rabies award goes to the shrew.

[cormac262]

@HoneyBadgerDC

I think without bats rabies would disappear from the planet in less than a decade.

Possibly. But the domino effect of eliminating such a huge predator of insects and pollenators would be devastating. A huge “baby” thrown out with the bath water. We’d probably bring back DDT to compact the insects.
Bats also get a very bad rap for association with rabies. As stated, ALL mammals can contract rabies.

@HoneyBadgerDC

Rabid bats fall from the sky, foxes, raccoons and skunks would be the most likely to find them before they die and getting bit by them is likely a common occurrence.

I don’t agree with this. MANY species of bats are VERY small - like bumblebee size and smaller. Their ability to “bite” such an animal would be extremely difficult.

[you_with_the_face]

@HoneyBadgerDC

I think without bats rabies would disappear from the planet in less than a decade. Rabid bats fall from the sky, foxes, raccoons and skunks would be the most likely to find them before they die and getting bit by them is likely a common occurrence.

Nope to this. Certain mammals (raccoons, bats, skunks, mongoose, and foxes) maintain and circulate their own variants of the rabies virus. These variants are specific to their species. So all the bats could die off, but raccoons will still propagate raccoon rabies, as will other reservoirs. Bats infecting other animals is pretty uncommon (unless we’re talking about vampire bats attacking cattle in the Amazon region).

To answer the OP, rabid squirrelshave been reported, and these run smaller than cats. Bats are also pretty tiny, as has been pointed out.

[Maggie_the_Ocelot]

@steatopygia

I did not know this bit of (undated) information from the Humane Society

"Federal and state wildlife officials have been vaccinating wildlife in many regions over the past 15 years. They distribute vaccine-laden baits that the target animals eat and thereby vaccinate themselves. Right now, oral rabies vaccination of wildlife focuses on halting the spread of specific types of rabies in targeted carrier species. Next, it’s hoped that this tool can shrink the disease’s range. "

AHA!! That explains why squirrels have such bad ADHD! They’re vaccine-injured!!

[Yllaria]

@HoneyBadgerDC

I think without bats rabies would disappear from the planet in less than a decade. Rabid bats fall from the sky, foxes, raccoons and skunks would be the most likely to find them before they die and getting bit by them is likely a common occurrence. Large cats in Africa and other parts of the world can get it but for some reason house cats seem to be immune to it.

What if the bats fall from the sky, die from hitting the ground, and then get eaten soon thereafter? Will eating a dead rabid bat give a larger animal rabies?

[you_with_the_face]

@Yllaria

What if the bats fall from the sky, die from hitting the ground, and then get eaten soon thereafter? Will eating a dead rabid bat give a larger animal rabies?

No, transmission does not work this way. To be exposed to the virus under natural conditions, you generally need to have infectious saliva enter your body through a bite or some other kind of skin break.

[HoneyBadgerDC]

@you_with_the_face

Nope to this. Certain mammals (raccoons, bats, skunks, mongoose, and foxes) maintain and circulate their own variants of the rabies virus. These variants are specific to their species. So all the bats could die off, but raccoons will still propagate raccoon rabies, as will other reservoirs. Bats infecting other animals is pretty uncommon (unless we’re talking about vampire bats attacking cattle in the Amazon region).

To answer the OP, rabid squirrelshave been reported, and these run smaller than cats. Bats are also pretty tiny, as has been pointed out.

Do you have a cite for this? I know for a fact that all of the above animals can pass on the virus to any of the other above mentioned animals. Are any of these animals immune to dying from rabies? Rabies is fairly quick and once it gets into a pack or family group it will generally wipe them all out in a short amount of time. Vampire bats are obvious vectors of the disease.

[you_with_the_face]

@HoneyBadgerDC

Do you have a cite for this? I know for a fact that all of the above animals can pass on the virus to any of the other above mentioned animals. Are any of these animals immune to dying from rabies? Rabies is fairly quick and once it gets into a pack or family group it will generally wipe them all out in a short amount of time.

From here:

@CDC

Although all species of mammals are susceptible to rabies virus infection, only a few species are important as reservoirs for the disease. In the United States, several distinct rabies virus variants have been identified in terrestrial mammals, including raccoons, skunks, foxes, and coyotes. In addition to these terrestrial reservoirs, several species of insectivorous bats are also reservoirs for rabies.

No mammal is immune to rabies; they can contract the disease from any infected animal that bites them. But that doesn’t mean every mammal is a reservoir (i.e. maintains the virus in the ecosystem). With few exceptions, bats infect other bats, raccoons infect other raccoons, and skunks infect other skunks.

When an infected reservoir bites and infects other animals (like humans), we consider that “spillover” infection. Spillover hosts are poor conduits for transmission to other animals, which is why there are few (if any) cases of rabid people infecting other people.

What you’re saying about rabies “wiping out” packs is false. If it worked that way, the disease would’ve burned itself out by now.

Vampire bats are obvious vectors of the disease.

Yes, just like raccoons, skunks, foxes, and mongoose.

[HoneyBadgerDC]

@you_with_the_face

From here:

No mammal is immune to rabies; they can contract the disease from any infected animal that bites them. But that doesn’t mean every mammal is a reservoir (i.e. maintains the virus in the ecosystem). With few exceptions, bats infect other bats, raccoons infect other raccoons, and skunks infect other skunks.

When an infected reservoir bites and infects other animals (like humans), we consider that “spillover” infection. Spillover hosts are poor conduits for transmission to other animals, which is why there are few (if any) cases of rabid people infecting other people.

What you’re saying about rabies “wiping out” packs is false. If it worked that way, the disease would’ve burned itself out by now.

Yes, just like raccoons, skunks, foxes, and mongoose.

When you say they become a reservoir species do you mean they can survive infection and just become carriers? I read the cite but have hard time accepting it at face value. I can see where a population of bats could keep a variant going in a region and it might appear to be endemic to foxes or raccoon. I have a hard time accepting that any of the larger animals that go solo or in small family groups could keep a disease like this going very long.

If the disease did not kill them I could easily accept them becoming a reservoir species.