#Coronaviruses: #Genome Structure, #Replication, and #Pathogenesis (J Med. Virol., abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Coronaviruses: Genome Structure, Replication, and Pathogenesis

Yu Chen 1, Qianyun Liu 1, Deyin Guo 2

Affiliations: 1 State Key Laboratory of Virology, Modern Virology Research Center, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, P. R. China. 2 Center for Infection & Immunity Study, School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, P. R. China.

PMID: 31967327 DOI: 10.1002/jmv.25681

 

Abstract

The recent emergence of a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), which caused an outbreak of unusual viral pneumonia in tens of people in Wuhan, a central city of China, restated the risk of coronaviruses posed to public health. In this mini-review, we give a brief introduction of the general features of coronaviruses and describe various diseases caused by different coronaviruses in humans and animals. This review will help understand the biology and potential risk of coronaviruses that exist in richness in wildlife such as bats.

Keywords: Coronavirus; Epidemiology; Pathogenesis; Respiratory tract; Virus classification; Zoonoses.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Coronavirus; Wildlife; 2019-nCoV.

——

Emergence of an #Eurasian #avian-like #swine #influenza A (#H1N1) virus from #mink in #China (Vet Microbiol., abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Vet Microbiol. 2020 Jan;240:108509. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2019.108509. Epub 2019 Nov 22.

Emergence of an Eurasian avian-like swine influenza A (H1N1) virus from mink in China.

Liu J1, Li Z1, Cui Y1, Yang H1, Shan H1, Zhang C2.

Author information: 1 College of Veterinary Medicine, Qingdao Agricultural University, Qingdao, China. 2 College of Veterinary Medicine, Qingdao Agricultural University, Qingdao, China. Electronic address: zhangchuanmei100@163.com.

 

Abstract

We evaluated the phenotype and genotype of a fatal influenza/canine distemper virus coinfection found in farmed mink in China. We identified a novel subtype H1N1 influenza virus strain from the lungs of infected mink designated A/Mink/Shandong/1121/2017 (H1N1). The results of phylogenetic analysis of 8 gene fragments of the H1N1 strain showed the virus was a swine origin triple-reassortant H1N1 influenza virus: with the 2009 pandemic H1N1 segments (PB2, PB1, PA, NP and M), Eurasian avian-like H1N1 swine segments (HA and NA) and classical swine (NS) lineages. The EID50/0.2 mL of this strain was 10-6.2 and pathogenicity tests were 100 % lethal in a mouse model of infection. We found that while not lethal and lacking any overt signs of infection in mink, the virus could proliferate in the upper respiratory tracts and the animals were converted to seropositive for the HA protein.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

KEYWORDS: Eurasian avian-like swine influenza virus; H1N1; Mink influenza virus; Phylogenetic analysis; Reassortment

PMID: 31902506 DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2019.108509

Keywords: Avian Influenza; Swine Influenza; H1N1pdm09; H1N1; Reassortant strain; Wildlife; China.

——

#Zika Virus #Surveillance at the #Human – #Animal #Interface in West-Central #Brazil, 2017-2018 (Viruses, abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Viruses. 2019 Dec 16;11(12). pii: E1164. doi: 10.3390/v11121164.

Zika Virus Surveillance at the Human-Animal Interface in West-Central Brazil, 2017-2018.

Pauvolid-Corrêa A1, Gonçalves Dias H2, Marina Siqueira Maia L3, Porfírio G4, Oliveira Morgado T5, Sabino-Santos G6, Helena Santa Rita P7, Teixeira Gomes Barreto W8, Carvalho de Macedo G4, Marinho Torres J4, Arruda Gimenes Nantes W4, Martins Santos F4, Oliveira de Assis W4, Castro Rucco A4, Mamoru Dos Santos Yui R4, Bosco Vilela Campos J4, Rodrigues Leandro E Silva R4, da Silva Ferreira R3, Aparecido da Silva Neves N3, Charlles de Souza Costa M3, Ramos Martins L3, Marques de Souza E3, Dos Santos Carvalho M3, Gonçalves Lima M7, de Cássia Gonçalves Alves F7, Humberto Guimarães Riquelme-Junior L7, Luiz Batista Figueiró L7, Fernandes Gomes de Santana M7, Gustavo Rodrigues Oliveira Santos L8, Serra Medeiros S8, Lopes Seino L8, Hime Miranda E9, Henrique Rezende Linhares J9, de Oliveira Santos V9, Almeida da Silva S9, Araújo Lúcio K9, Silva Gomes V9, de Araújo Oliveira A10, Dos Santos Silva J10, de Almeida Marques W10, Schafer Marques M6, Junior França de Barros J11, Campos L11, Couto-Lima D12, Coutinho Netto C13, Strüssmann C14, Panella N15, Hannon E15, Cristina de Macedo B16, Ramos de Almeida J14, Ramos Ribeiro K14, Carolina Barros de Castro M14, Pratta Campos L14, Paula Rosa Dos Santos A14, Marino de Souza I14, de Assis Bianchini M5, Helena Ramiro Correa S5, Ordones Baptista Luz R5, Dos Santos Vieira A5, Maria de Oliveira Pinto L2, Azeredo E2, Tadeu Moraes Figueiredo L6, Augusto Fonseca Alencar J10, Maria Barbosa de Lima S9, Miraglia Herrera H4, Dezengrini Shlessarenko R3, Barreto Dos Santos F2, Maria Bispo de Filippis A1, Salyer S17, Montgomery J17, Komar N15.

Author information: 1 Laboratório de Flavivírus, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 2 Laboratório de Imunologia Viral, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 3 Laboratório de Virologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá 78060-900, Brazil. 4 Laboratório de Biologia Parasitária, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Ambientais e Sustentabilidade Agropecuária, Universidade Católica Dom Bosco (UCDB), Campo Grande 79117-010, Brazil. 5 Hospital Veterinário, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá 78060-900, Brazil. 6 Centro de Pesquisa em Virologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto 14025-099, Brazil. 7 Biotério, Universidade Católica Dom Bosco (UCDB), Campo Grande 79117-010, Brazil. 8 Laboratório de Ecologia de Populações e do Movimento, Programa de Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS), Campo Grande 79070-900, Brazil. 9 Laboratório de Tecnologia Virológica, Bio-Manguinhos, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 10 Laboratório de Diptera, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 11 Laboratório de Virologia Molecular, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 12 Laboratório de Transmissores de Hematozoários, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro 21040-900, Brazil. 13 Centro de Reabilitação de Animais Silvestres (CRAS), Campo Grande 79037-109, Brazil. 14 Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá 78060-900, Brazil. 15 Laboratory of Arbovirus Ecology, Arboviral Diseases Branch, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Fort Collins, CO 80521, USA. 16 Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária da Universidade de Cuiabá (UNIC), Cuiabá 78065-900, Brazil. 17 Global Epidemiology, Laboratory, and Surveillance Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, CDC, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.

 

Abstract

Zika virus (ZIKV) was first discovered in 1947 in Uganda but was not considered a public health threat until 2007 when it found to be the source of epidemic activity in Asia. Epidemic activity spread to Brazil in 2014 and continued to spread throughout the tropical and subtropical regions of the Americas. Despite ZIKV being zoonotic in origin, information about transmission, or even exposure of non-human vertebrates and mosquitoes to ZIKV in the Americas, is lacking. Accordingly, from February 2017 to March 2018, we sought evidence of sylvatic ZIKV transmission by sampling whole blood from approximately 2000 domestic and wild vertebrates of over 100 species in West-Central Brazil within the active human ZIKV transmission area. In addition, we collected over 24,300 mosquitoes of at least 17 genera and 62 species. We screened whole blood samples and mosquito pools for ZIKV RNA using pan-flavivirus primers in a real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in a SYBR Green platform. Positives were confirmed using ZIKV-specific envelope gene real-time RT-PCR and nucleotide sequencing. Of the 2068 vertebrates tested, none were ZIKV positive. Of the 23,315 non-engorged mosquitoes consolidated into 1503 pools tested, 22 (1.5%) with full data available showed some degree of homology to insect-specific flaviviruses. To identify previous exposure to ZIKV, 1498 plasma samples representing 62 species of domestic and sylvatic vertebrates were tested for ZIKV-neutralizing antibodies by plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT90). From these, 23 (1.5%) of seven species were seropositive for ZIKV and negative for dengue virus serotype 2, yellow fever virus, and West Nile virus, suggesting potential monotypic reaction for ZIKV. Results presented here suggest no active transmission of ZIKV in non-human vertebrate populations or in alternative vector candidates, but suggest that vertebrates around human populations have indeed been exposed to ZIKV in West-Central Brazil.

KEYWORDS: Brazil; Zika; enzootic cycle; plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT); zoonotic

PMID: 31888285 DOI: 10.3390/v11121164

Keywords: Zika Virus; Wildlife; Brazil.

——

#Antibiotic #Resistance of #Escherichia coli from #Humans and Black #Rhinoceroses in #Kenya (Ecohealth, abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Ecohealth. 2019 Dec 7. doi: 10.1007/s10393-019-01461-z. [Epub ahead of print]

Antibiotic Resistance of Escherichia coli from Humans and Black Rhinoceroses in Kenya.

Kipkorir KC1, Ang’ienda PO1, Onyango DM1, Onyango PO2.

Author information: 1 Department of Zoology, Maseno University, Private Bag, Maseno, Kenya. 2 Department of Zoology, Maseno University, Private Bag, Maseno, Kenya. patonyango@gmail.com.

 

Abstract

Upsurge of antibiotic resistance in wildlife poses unprecedented threat to wildlife conservation. Surveillance of antibiotic resistance at the human-wildlife interface is therefore needed. We evaluated differences in antibiotic resistance of Escherichia coli isolates from human and the endangered black rhinoceros in Lambwe Valley, Kenya. We used standard microbiological techniques to carry out susceptibility assays using eight antibiotics of clinical and veterinary importance. Standard PCR method was used to characterize antibiotic resistance genes. There was no difference in resistance between E. coli isolates from human and those from rhinoceros (U = 25, p = 0.462). However, higher resistance in isolates from humans was noted for cotrimoxazole (p = 0.000, OR = 0.101), ceftriaxone (p = 0.005, OR = 0.113) and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (p = 0.017, OR = 0.258), whereas isolates from rhinoceros showed higher gentamicin resistance (p = 0.001, OR = 10.154). Multi-drug resistance phenotype was 69.0% in humans and 43.3% in rhinoceros. Isolates from both species contained blaTEM, tetA, tetB, dfrA1 and sul1 genes. Resistance profiles in the two species suggest potential for cross-transfer of resistance genes or exposure to comparable selective pressure and call for a multi-sectorial action plan on surveillance of antibiotic resistance at the human-wildlife interface. Genome-wide studies are needed to explicate the direction of transfer of genes that confer antibiotic resistance at the human-wildlife interface.

KEYWORDS: Antibacterial resistance; Black rhinoceros; Escherichia coli; Kenya; Multi-drug resistance; Zoonotic

PMID: 31811599 DOI: 10.1007/s10393-019-01461-z

Keywords: Antibiotics; Drugs Resistance; E. Coli; Wildlife; Human; Kenya.

——

Identification of a Novel #Betacoronavirus (#Merbecovirus) in Amur #Hedgehogs from #China (Viruses, abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Viruses. 2019 Oct 24;11(11). pii: E980. doi: 10.3390/v11110980.

Identification of a Novel Betacoronavirus (Merbecovirus) in Amur Hedgehogs from China.

Lau SKP1,2,3,4, Luk HKH5, Wong ACP6, Fan RYY7, Lam CSF8, Li KSM9, Ahmed SS10, Chow FWN11, Cai JP12, Zhu X13,14, Chan JFW15,16,17,18, Lau TCK19, Cao K20,21, Li M22,23, Woo PCY24,25,26,27, Yuen KY28,29,30,31.

Author information: 1 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. skplau@hku.hk. 2 State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. skplau@hku.hk. 3 Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. skplau@hku.hk. 4 Collaborative Innovation Centre for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. skplau@hku.hk. 5 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. hkhluk@hku.hk. 6 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. antonwcp@connect.hku.hk. 7 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. rachelfyy2004@yahoo.com.hk. 8 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. carollamsukfun@yahoo.com.hk. 9 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. keth105@gmail.com. 10 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. shakeel87@gmail.com. 11 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. cwn5810@gmail.com. 12 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. caijuice@hku.hk. 13 Department of Microbiology, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China. zhuxun8@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 14 Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Control (Sun Yat-sen University), Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510080, China. zhuxun8@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 15 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. jfwchan@hku.hk. 16 State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. jfwchan@hku.hk. 17 Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. jfwchan@hku.hk. 18 Collaborative Innovation Centre for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. jfwchan@hku.hk. 19 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Jockey Club College of Veterinary Medicine and Life Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. chiklau@cityu.edu.hk. 20 Department of Microbiology, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China. caoky@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 21 Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Control (Sun Yat-sen University), Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510080, China. caoky@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 22 Department of Microbiology, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China. limf@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 23 Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Control (Sun Yat-sen University), Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510080, China. limf@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 24 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. pcywoo@hku.hk. 25 State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. pcywoo@hku.hk. 26 Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. pcywoo@hku.hk. 27 Collaborative Innovation Centre for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. pcywoo@hku.hk. 28 Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. kyyuen@hku.hk. 29 State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. kyyuen@hku.hk. 30 Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. kyyuen@hku.hk. 31 Collaborative Innovation Centre for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China. kyyuen@hku.hk.

 

Abstract

While dromedaries are the immediate animal source of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) epidemic, viruses related to MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) have also been found in bats as well as hedgehogs. To elucidate the evolution of MERS-CoV-related viruses and their interspecies transmission pathway, samples were collected from different mammals in China. A novel coronavirus related to MERS-CoV, Erinaceus amurensis hedgehog coronavirus HKU31 (Ea-HedCoV HKU31), was identified from two Amur hedgehogs. Genome analysis supported that Ea-HedCoV HKU31 represents a novel species under Merbecovirus, being most closely related to Erinaceus CoV from European hedgehogs in Germany, with 79.6% genome sequence identity. Compared to other members of Merbecovirus, Ea-HedCoV HKU31 possessed unique non-structural proteins and putative cleavage sites at ORF1ab. Phylogenetic analysis showed that Ea-HedCoV HKU31 and BetaCoV Erinaceus/VMC/DEU/2012 were closely related to NeoCoV and BatCoV PREDICT from African bats in the spike region, suggesting that the latter bat viruses have arisen from recombination between CoVs from hedgehogs and bats. The predicted HKU31 receptor-binding domain (RBD) possessed only one out of 12 critical amino acid residues for binding to human dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (hDPP4), the MERS-CoV receptor. The structural modeling of the HKU31-RBD-hDPP4 binding interphase compared to that of MERS-CoV and Tylonycteris bat CoV HKU4 (Ty-BatCoV HKU4) suggested that HKU31-RBD is unlikely to bind to hDPP4. Our findings support that hedgehogs are an important reservoir of Merbecovirus, with evidence of recombination with viruses from bats. Further investigations in bats, hedgehogs and related animals are warranted to understand the evolution of MERS-CoV-related viruses.

KEYWORDS: China; Merbecovirus; coronavirus; hedgehog; novel species

PMID: 31653070 DOI: 10.3390/v11110980

Keywords: Betacoronavirus; Coronavirus; MERS-CoV; Merbecovirus; Wildlife; China.

——

#Antimicrobial #resistance genotypes and phenotypes of #Campylobacter jejuni isolated in #Italy from #humans, #birds from wild and urban #habitats, and #poultry (PLoS ONE, abstract)

[Source: PLoS One, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

OPEN ACCESS /  PEER-REVIEWED / RESEARCH ARTICLE

Antimicrobial resistance genotypes and phenotypes of Campylobacter jejuni isolated in Italy from humans, birds from wild and urban habitats, and poultry

Francesca Marotta  , Giuliano Garofolo , Lisa di Marcantonio , Gabriella Di Serafino , Diana Neri , Romina Romantini , Lorena Sacchini , Alessandra Alessiani , Guido Di Donato , Roberta Nuvoloni , Anna Janowicz , Elisabetta Di Giannatale

Published: October 11, 2019 / DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223804

 

Abstract

Campylobacter jejuni, a common foodborne zoonotic pathogen, causes gastroenteritis worldwide and is increasingly resistant to antibiotics. We aimed to investigate the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genotypes of C. jejuni isolated from humans, poultry and birds from wild and urban Italian habitats to identify correlations between phenotypic and genotypic AMR in the isolates. Altogether, 644 C. jejuni isolates from humans (51), poultry (526) and wild- and urban-habitat birds (67) were analysed. The resistance phenotypes of the isolates were determined using the microdilution method with EUCAST breakpoints, and AMR-associated genes and single nucleotide polymorphisms were obtained from a publicly available database. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing showed that C. jejuni isolates from poultry and humans were highly resistant to ciprofloxacin (85.55% and 76.47%, respectively), nalidixic acid (75.48% and 74.51%, respectively) and tetracycline (67.87% and 49.02%, respectively). Fewer isolates from the wild- and urban-habitat birds were resistant to tetracycline (19.40%), fluoroquinolones (13.43%), and quinolone and streptomycin (10.45%). We retrieved seven AMR genes (tet (O), cmeA, cmeB, cmeC, cmeR, blaOXA-61 and blaOXA-184) and gyrA-associated point mutations. Two major B-lactam genes called blaOXA-61 and blaOXA-184 were prevalent at 62.93% and 82.08% in the poultry and the other bird groups, respectively. Strong correlations between genotypic and phenotypic resistance were found for fluoroquinolones and tetracycline. Compared with the farmed chickens, the incidence of AMR in the C. jejuni isolates from the other bird groups was low, confirming that the food-production birds are much more exposed to antimicrobials. The improper and overuse of antibiotics in the human population and in animal husbandry has resulted in an increase in antibiotic-resistant infections, particularly fluoroquinolone resistant ones. Better understanding of the AMR mechanisms in C. jejuni is necessary to develop new strategies for improving AMR programs and provide the most appropriate therapies to human and veterinary populations.

___

Citation: Marotta F, Garofolo G, di Marcantonio L, Di Serafino G, Neri D, Romantini R, et al. (2019) Antimicrobial resistance genotypes and phenotypes of Campylobacter jejuni isolated in Italy from humans, birds from wild and urban habitats, and poultry. PLoS ONE 14(10): e0223804. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223804

Editor: Grzegorz Woźniakowski, Panstwowy Instytut Weterynaryjny – Panstwowy Instytut Badawczy w Pulawach, POLAND

Received: July 12, 2019; Accepted: September 27, 2019; Published: October 11, 2019

Copyright: © 2019 Marotta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: We have uploaded our study’s minimal underlying data set as Supporting Information file S1 Table.

Funding: This work was supported by the Italian Ministry of Health, grant number: MSRCTE0717. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Keywords: Antibiotics; Drugs Resistance; Campylobacter jejuni; Human; Poultry; Wildlife; Italy.

——

#Quantification of visits of #wild #fauna to a commercial free-range layer #farm in the #Netherlands located in an #avian #influenza hot-spot area assessed by video-camera monitoring (Transbound Emerg Dis., abstract)

[Source: US National Library of Medicine, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Transbound Emerg Dis. 2019 Oct 6. doi: 10.1111/tbed.13382. [Epub ahead of print]

Quantification of visits of wild fauna to a commercial free-range layer farm in the Netherlands located in an avian influenza hot-spot area assessed by video-camera monitoring.

Elbers ARW1, Gonzales JL1.

Author information: 1 Dept. of Bacteriology and Epidemiology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Houtribweg 39, 3848 BW, Lelystad, Netherlands.

 

Abstract

Free-range poultry farms have a high risk of introduction of avian influenza viruses (AIV), and it is presumed that wild (water)birds are the source of introduction. There is very scarce quantitative data on wild fauna visiting free-range poultry farms. We quantified visits of wild fauna to a free-range area of a layer farm, situated in an AIV hot-spot area, assessed by video-camera monitoring. A total of 5,016 hours (209 days) of video recordings, covering all 12 months of a year, were analyzed. A total of 16 families of wild birds and five families of mammals visited the free-range area of the layer farm. Wild birds, except for the dabbling ducks, visited the free-range area almost exclusively in the period between sunrise and the moment the chickens entered the free-range area. Known carriers of AIV visited the outdoor facility regularly: species of gulls almost daily in the period January – August; dabbling ducks only in the night in the period November – May, with a distinct peak in the period December – February. Only a small fraction of visits of wild fauna had overlap with presence of chickens at the same time in the free-range area. No direct contact between chickens and wild birds was observed. It is hypothesized that AIV transmission to poultry on free-range poultry farms will predominantly take place via indirect contact: taking up AIV by chickens via wild-bird-faeces-contaminated water or soil in the free-range area. The free-range poultry farmer has several possibilities to potentially lower the attractiveness of the free-range area for wild (bird)fauna: daily inspection of the free-range area and removal of carcasses and eggs; prevention of forming of water pools in the free range facility. Furthermore, there are ways to scare-off wild birds e.g. use of laser equipment or trained dogs.

© 2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.

KEYWORDS: avian influenza; ducks; free-range poultry; gulls; water pools; wild fauna

PMID: 31587498 DOI: 10.1111/tbed.13382

Keywords: Avian Influenza; Wild Birds; Poultry; Wildlife; Netherlands.

——