The source of the world's biggest Ebola epidemic might have been the insect-eating bats that inhabited a hollow tree in a remote village Guinea, said scientists on Tuesday.
More than 20,000 cases of Ebola, with at least 7,800 deaths, have been recorded by the World Health Organization (WHO) since a two-year-old boy died in the village of Meliandou in December 2013.
Reporting in the journal EMBO Molecular Medicine, scientists led by Fabian Leendertz at Berlin's Robert Koch Institute delved into the circumstances surrounding this first fatality.
The finger of suspicion points at insectivorous free-tailed bats -- Mops condylurus in Latin -- that lived in a hollow tree 50 metres (yards) from the boy's home, they said.
"The close proximity of a large colony of free-tailed bats... provided opportunity for infection. Children regularly caught and played with bats in this tree," the team said after an exhaustive four-week probe carried out in April.
The Ebola virus holes up in a natural haven, also called a reservoir, among wild animals which are not affected by it.
The virus can infect humans who come into contact with this source directly, or indirectly through contact with animals that have fallen sick from it.
Highly contagious, the virus is then passed among humans through contact with body fluids.
A known reservoir is the fruit bat (Epomophorus wahlbergi), a widespread tropical African species that in some countries is killed for food, offering a infection pathway to hunters and butchers of the mammal.
But the role of fruit bats in the current outbreak has never been confirmed, the scientists said.
In contrast, free-tailed bats, a cousin species, have been found in lab tests to be able to carry the virus but not fall sick with it.
That, too, would make them a "reservoir," but no evidence of this has ever been found in the wild.
The German team said evidence that this species helped unleash the present epidemic was strong but not 100 percent.
Local children not only played with the bats at the tree, they also hunted bats that roosted at village homes and grilled them for food, they found.
In addition, they saw no evidence of any local die-off among larger mammals, which would have been a secondary route of infection for humans.
On the other hand, no trace of Ebola virus was found in any of the bats the scientists captured and whose blood was analysed.