Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2017 until November 2018)

Boklund, Anette; Cay, Brigitte; Depner, Klaus; Földi, Zsolt; Gubertì, Vittorio; Masiulis, Marius; Miteva, Aleksandra; More, Simon J.; Oļševskis, Edvīns; Petr, Satran; Spiridon, Mihaela; Ståhl, Karl; Thulke, Hans‐Hermann; Viltrop, Arvo; Woźniakowski, Grzegorz; Broglia, Alessandro; Abrahantes, José Cortiñas; Dhollander, Sofie; Gogin, Andrey; Verdonck, Frank; Amato, Laura; Papanikolaou, Alexandra; Gortázar, Christian

doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5494

Cited by 122 publications

(139 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

135

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Term of Reference 3 (TOR3) requested a review of the control measures applied by affected MSs to control the spread of ASF in wild boar and to eradicate infection. In the previous reporting period (EFSA, ), this assessment was based on a spatiotemporally explicit individual‐based model approach in structured geographic landscapes. No contradicting evidence has subsequently emerged and, therefore, the earlier conclusions and recommendations are still valid.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the previous report (EFSA, ), an extensive literature review had been undertaken to study the efficacy of different methods to control ASF spread through reducing wild boar population densities. The review was updated in this reporting period, but no conflicting evidence was found.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To review the control measures applied by the affected MSs for controlling the spread of the disease a spatiotemporally explicit individual‐based model approach was used in the previous reporting period (EFSA, ). This model process was not repeated for this reporting period.…”

Section: Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The extensive literature review in 2018 (EFSA, ) concluded that recreational hunting of wild boar and feral pigs can be effective as a mean to maintain population stability, however biased hunting preferences towards large males and feeding of wild boar should be avoided. Hunting efforts should be increased in intensity (harvest rate > 67% per year) to stabilise wild boar populations (Bonet‐Arboli et al., ; Monzon and Bento, ).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2018, a spatiotemporally explicit individual‐based model approach was used (see http://ecoepi.eu/ASFWB; Lange et al., ) to improve the conceptual understanding of the impact of natural barriers on the spread of ASF in wild boar populations (EFSA, , chapter 3.4). The model simulated the continental spread of ASF in wild boar habitat in the Baltic countries.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2018 to October 2019)

Anette¹,

Anette²,

Theodora³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report provides an update of the epidemiology of African swine fever (ASF) in the European Union during the period November 2018 to October 2019. In this period, ASF has been confirmed in Slovakia, whereas Czechia became officially ASF-free in March 2019, bringing the number of affected countries in the EU to nine. The report provides a narrative update of the situation in the different countries and an analysis of the temporal and spatial patterns of the disease. There has been no increase in the proportion of seropositive hunted wild boar in the affected areas. In hunted animals, the proportions of wild boar testing polymerase chain reaction-positive and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-positive has remained low (< 0.05). In addition to the obvious seasonal peak in summer in domestic pigs, seasonality of ASF in wild boar was statistically confirmed. A network analysis demonstrated that the median velocity of the natural propagation of the disease in wild boar populations was between 2.9 and 11.7 km/year. Human-mediated spread, both in pigs and wild boar, however, remains important. Several wild boar-and domestic pig-related risk factors for ASF occurrence in non-commercial farms in Romania were identified with a case-control study. This report also updates an extensive literature review on control measures to stop the spread of the disease in wild boar and on measures to separate wild boar populations. Several new studies have been identified in this reporting period, but these did not alter the conclusions of the previous reporting period. Field experience with the use of fences as part of the control strategy deployed in the Belgian focal outbreak of ASF in wild boar is described. So far, the measures have proven effective to keep ASF virus inside the affected area. This strategy included a combination of different measures, namely zoning, carcass removal, a complete feeding ban, specific hunting regulations and depopulation actions depending on the zone, a partial ban of people and logging, and setting up a network of concentric fences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2018 to October 2019)

Anette¹,

Anette²,

Theodora³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Defining and testing a wildlife intervention framework for exotic disease control

Smith

Brough

Podgórski

et al. 2022

Ecol Sol and Evidence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Outbreaks of disease at the wildlife-livestock interface may require management interventions. Where they involve exotic/non-endemic pathogens in wildlife, then such plans may need to be rapidly conceived and implemented to prevent further disease spread. However, detailed information on the distribution of infection is likely to be absent, whilst limited resources and tools, and ethical considerations impose constraints on what is possible and proportionate.2. We describe four considerations to inform decision-making on whether to intervene. With reference to two recent examples (bovine tuberculosis in badgers in an otherwise disease-free area, and African swine fever in wild boar in central Europe), we outline six steps to guide implementation. 3. In both examples, a Disease Control Area was defined by determining a minimum infected area (MIA) and a buffer zone based on wildlife ecology and the potential for unrecorded spread of infection. The total area was the subject of management intervention, with the level of infection used to inform adaptive management.4. The MIA is defined as the minimum area that could contain all infected wildlife, given our current level of information, with a surrounding buffer zone to account for the possibility of further onward spread. In our examples, the zones were defined using a combination of field data and existing knowledge of host spatial organization and movement.5. The MIA (plus buffer zone) approach provides a framework for optimizing the targeting of resources in a proportionate response to a disease outbreak. Where infected animals occur outside the MIA, our examples show how wildlife management has been adapted. In principle, this approach is suitable for the delivery of disease outbreak control in wildlife, whether through culling, vaccination or other forms of control.

show abstract

Permeability of artificial barriers (fences) for wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Mediterranean mixed landscapes

Laguna

Barasona

Carpio

et al. 2022

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Fences are one of the most widespread manmade features in nature, constituting an artificial limitation to the movement of wildlife. To date, their effects on wildlife behavior have been understudied but this knowledge is required to design effective management procedures. Using 21 GPS-monitored wild boar, we evaluated the permeability of different types of fences and described temporal patterns and spatial hotspots for crossing events. A fence's permeability was inferred by the crossing success, i.e., the number of times that animals crossed a barrier vs the number of times they did not cross. The vulnerability of fences at watercourses was explored by assessing whether the frequency of crossings was higher around watercourse intersections than expected by chance.RESULTS: Well-maintained big game proof fences were the most effective in reducing successful wild boar crossings; they were, on average, 30% more efficient than livestock type fences. Crossing success was higher for males than females and during the food shortage period than in the food abundance period. The frequency of crossings around watercourses was higher than expected by chance, especially in moderately and well-maintained big game proof type fences.CONCLUSION: While no fence type was 100% wild boar proof, well-maintained big game proof fences substantially constrained the movement of boar. However, they are vulnerable around watercourses. Managing the conflicts in which this species is involved, such as shared infections and agricultural damage, would require fences that are even more effective than the ones analyzed here, ideally in conjunction with other preventive actions.

show abstract

Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2017 until November 2018)

Cited by 122 publications

References 56 publications

Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2018 to October 2019)

Epidemiological analyses of African swine fever in the European Union (November 2018 to October 2019)

Defining and testing a wildlife intervention framework for exotic disease control

Permeability of artificial barriers (fences) for wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Mediterranean mixed landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About