Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR)

More, Simon J.; Bøtner, Anette; Butterworth, Andrew; Calistri, Paolo; Depner, Klaus; Edwards, Sandra; Garin‐Bastuji, Bruno; Good, Margaret; Schmidt, Christian Gortázar; Michel, Virginie; Miranda, Miguel Ángel; Nielsen, Søren Saxmose; Raj, Mohan; Sihvonen, Liisa; Spoolder, Hans; Stegeman, Jan Arend; Thulke, Hans‐Hermann; Velarde, Antonio; Willeberg, Preben; Winckler, Christoph; Baldinelli, Francesca; Broglia, Alessandro; Dhollander, Sofie; Beltrán‐Beck, Beatriz; Kohnle, Lisa; Morgado, Joana; Bicout, Dominique

doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4947

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the Delegated Regulations (EU) 2020/688 [ 10 ] and 2020/689 [ 11 ] established diagnostic methods for granting and maintaining the IBR-free zone of IBR-free herds, using different tests on serum, milk, and meat juice samples. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and virus neutralisation test (VNT) represent excellent diagnostic tools to detect IBR antibodies and identify seropositive animals [ 15 , 16 ]. VNT is considered the reference test for IBR and is a useful tool for comparing antibody titres in animals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a Commercial Indirect ELISA Kit for the Detection of Bovine alphaherpesvirus1 (BoHV-1)-Specific Glycoprotein E Antibodies in Bulk Milk Samples of Dairy Cows

Righi

Iscaro

Ferroni

et al. 2022

Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we validated a commercial indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect antibodies to glycoprotein E (gE) of Bovine alphaherpesvirus 1 (BoHV-1) in bulk milk (BM) samples using the OIE Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals. The assay performance characteristics were evaluated using a panel of positive (n = 36) and negative (n = 80) samples with known infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) status. The assay showed adequate repeatability (within-run and between-run), with a coefficient of variability (CV%) of replicates below 30%; only two 1:40 diluted samples had a CV% above 20%. Additionally, an agreement analysis of the qualitative results of replicates led to a Gwet’s agreement coefficient of 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96–1.00, p < 0.001). The estimated diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) were 100% (95% CI: 90.3–100%) and 97.5% (95% CI: 91.3–99.7%), respectively. Overall, a good level of agreement was observed between the assay results and the true IBR status of samples (weighted Cohen’s κ: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.78–1.00). The findings demonstrate that the indirect ELISA kit validated here is an easy-to-use and economical method to differentiate infected and gE-deleted marker vaccine-immunised animals using BM samples.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a Commercial Indirect ELISA Kit for the Detection of Bovine alphaherpesvirus1 (BoHV-1)-Specific Glycoprotein E Antibodies in Bulk Milk Samples of Dairy Cows

Righi

Iscaro

Ferroni

et al. 2022

Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar evaluations have been undertaken for bovine viral diarrhoea and paratuberculosis (3,4), but these studies were limited to only one disease. In 2017, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published information on EU countries' disease statuses for certain cattle diseases (5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14); however, different definitions were used and not all non-EU regulated diseases were covered. Furthermore, not all European countries were included and some of the data are now outdated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of Cattle Diseases Listed Under Category C, D or E in the Animal Health Law for Which Control Programmes Are in Place Within Europe

Hodnik

Acinger-Rogić²,

Alishani

et al. 2021

Front. Vet. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COST action “Standardising output-based surveillance to control non-regulated diseases of cattle in the European Union (SOUND control),” aims to harmonise the results of surveillance and control programmes (CPs) for non-EU regulated cattle diseases to facilitate safe trade and improve overall control of cattle infectious diseases. In this paper we aimed to provide an overview on the diversity of control for these diseases in Europe. A non-EU regulated cattle disease was defined as an infectious disease of cattle with no or limited control at EU level, which is not included in the European Union Animal health law Categories A or B under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2002. A CP was defined as surveillance and/or intervention strategies designed to lower the incidence, prevalence, mortality or prove freedom from a specific disease in a region or country. Passive surveillance, and active surveillance of breeding bulls under Council Directive 88/407/EEC were not considered as CPs. A questionnaire was designed to obtain country-specific information about CPs for each disease. Animal health experts from 33 European countries completed the questionnaire. Overall, there are 23 diseases for which a CP exists in one or more of the countries studied. The diseases for which CPs exist in the highest number of countries are enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, bovine viral diarrhoea and anthrax (CPs reported by between 16 and 31 countries). Every participating country has on average, 6 CPs (min–max: 1–13) in place. Most programmes are implemented at a national level (86%) and are applied to both dairy and non-dairy cattle (75%). Approximately one-third of the CPs are voluntary, and the funding structure is divided between government and private resources. Countries that have eradicated diseases like enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis and bovine viral diarrhoea have implemented CPs for other diseases to further improve the health status of cattle in their country. The control of non-EU regulated cattle diseases is very heterogenous in Europe. Therefore, the standardising of the outputs of these programmes to enable comparison represents a challenge.

show abstract

“…Measures such as a non-go back policy and no longer collaborating in shows (quarantine implementation) and enough boundaries fencing also can restrict touch of animals with the ones in other herds. Aerosol transmission can also arise over a short distance (Simon et al, 2017) [60] . Suitable disinfection measures, challenge of traffic and their frequency of contact with livestock and implementation of suitable disinfection system or provision of wearing farm specific boots and garb may be used to deal with the risk factors related to fomites and personnel.…”

Section: Prevention and Control Of Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Slaughter has to be done within the abattoir. To eliminate seropositive animal at herd stage, culling is best effective while the prevalence has fallen to low level and isn't always practiced within the face of an outbreak disease (Simon et al, 2017) [60] .…”

Section: Prevention and Control Of Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitismentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2024

Acta Entomol. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis is a disease of domestic and wild cattle and caused by BoHV-1. The disease was spread globally, but most of the European countries were eradicated it. The infection was manifested by signs of respiratory system, whereas the upper part is mostly affected and produce clinical sign of nasal discharge, reddening of the mouth and nose and conjunctivitis, elevated temperature, depression, loss of appetite, loss of milk yield and abortion. Genital tract also affected by the virus and produce the affection of male and female reproductive system. Isolation of virus from can be occurred from genital and nasal swabs for animals with reproductive problem and respiratory signs. The sample should be collected at the acute face of the infection. In severe cases, the sample also collected from different organs after slaughtering. Latency is the unique feature of the virus and the animals remain carrier of the virus throughout their life. The virus also further subtyped by molecular technique of DNA restriction analysis in to subtypes BoHV1.1 and BoHV1.2. Subtype 1.2 can also subdivided in to 2a and 2b. Establishment of IBR depends more on the route of infection than on the subtypes of the BoHV 1. Indirect or blocking ELISA and virus neutralization test are most frequently used for antibody detection. Both attenuated live and inactivated vaccine are used. This vaccine ised used to reduce clinical sign and the subsequent shedding of field virus. Moreover, to avoid its occurrence and spread of IBR, it is required to develop coordinated and systematic disease control with the involvement of all pertinent organizations and people.

show abstract

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR)

Abstract: Infectious bovine rhinotracheitis

Cited by 7 publications

References 41 publications

Validation of a Commercial Indirect ELISA Kit for the Detection of Bovine alphaherpesvirus1 (BoHV-1)-Specific Glycoprotein E Antibodies in Bulk Milk Samples of Dairy Cows

Validation of a Commercial Indirect ELISA Kit for the Detection of Bovine alphaherpesvirus1 (BoHV-1)-Specific Glycoprotein E Antibodies in Bulk Milk Samples of Dairy Cows

Overview of Cattle Diseases Listed Under Category C, D or E in the Animal Health Law for Which Control Programmes Are in Place Within Europe

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About