RESUMEN

The known host range of circoviruses is continuously expanding because of more intensive diagnostic activities and advanced sequencing tools. Recently, a new circovirus (penguin circovirus (PenCV)) was identified in the guano and cloacal samples collected from Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) and chinstrap penguins (Pygoscelis antarcticus) in Antarctica. Although the virus was detected in several asymptomatic subjects, a potential association with feather disease was speculated. To investigate the occurrence and implications of PenCV in other penguin species located outside of Antarctica, a broad survey was undertaken in African penguins (Spheniscus demersus) on two islands off the southern Namibian coast. For this purpose, specific molecular biology assays were developed and validated. None of the 151 blood samples tested positive for PenCV. Several reasons could explain the lack of PenCV positive samples. African penguins and Pygoscelis species are separated by approximately 6000 km, so there is almost no opportunity for transmission. Similarly, host susceptibility to PenCV might be penguin genus-specific. Overall, the present study found no evidence of PenCV in African penguin colonies in Namibia. Further dedicated studies are required to assess the relevance of PenCV among different penguin species.

RESUMEN

From late 2017 to early 2018, clade 2.3.4.4B H5N8 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses caused mass die-offs of thousands of coastal seabirds along the southern coastline of South Africa. Terns (Laridae) especially were affected, but high mortalities in critically endangered and threatened species like African Penguins (Spheniscus demersus) caused international concern and, exactly a year later, the disease recurred at a key African Penguin breeding site on Halifax Island, Namibia. Twenty-five clade 2.3.4.4B H5N8 HPAI viruses from coastal seabirds and a Jackal Buzzard (Buteo rufofuscus) were isolated and/or sequenced in this study. Phylogenetic analyses of the full viral genomes and time to the most recent common ancestor (tMRCA) analyses of the HA, NA, PB1 and PA genes determined that the South African coastal seabird viruses formed a monophyletic group nested within the South African genotype 4 viruses. This sub-lineage likely originated from a single introduction by terrestrial birds around October 2017. Only the HA and NA sequences were available for the Namibian penguin viruses, but the phylogenetic data confirmed that the South African coastal seabird viruses from 2017 to 2018 were the source and the most closely related South African virus was found in a gull. tMRCA analyses furthermore determined that the progenitors of the five genotypes implicated in the earlier 2017 South African outbreaks in wild birds and poultry were dated at between 2 and 4 months prior to the index cases. tMRCA and phylogenetic data also showed that the novel genotype 6 virus introduced to South Africa in 2018, and later also detected in Nigeria and Poland in 2019, most likely arose in late 2017 in West, Central or East Africa. We propose that it continued to circulate there, and that an unidentified reservoir was the source of both the South African outbreaks in early 2018 and in Nigeria in mid-2019.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

High pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) has become a major focus point worldwide due to its zoonotic potential and economic effects resulting from trade restrictions and high mortality rates in poultry. Key ostrich producing provinces of South Africa have experienced three H5N2 HPAI outbreaks (2004, 2006 and 2011) and one H5N8 HPAI (2017) outbreak over the past two decades. The Klein Karoo region in the Western Cape Province, a province with a largely Mediterranean climate, is the predominant ostrich producing region in the country. Understanding the epidemiology of HPAI in ostrich producing areas is an essential first step in developing effective and efficient control measures. This study investigated the spatiotemporal patterns associated with the 2011 (H5N2) and 2017 (H5N8) HPAI outbreaks in the key ostrich producing areas of South Africa. Six hundred and nine and 340 active ostrich farms/holdings were subjected to surveillance during 2011 and 2017 respectively, with over 70 % of these farms located within five local municipalities of the study area. Forty-two and fifty-one farms were affected in the 2011 and 2017 outbreaks respectively. Both HPAI outbreaks occurred predominantly in areas of high ostrich farm density. However, the temporal occurrence, spatial and directional distributions of the outbreaks were different. The 2011 outbreak occurred earlier in the South African autumn months with a predominantly contiguous and stationary distribution, whilst the 2017 outbreak onset was during the winter with a more expansive multidirectional spatial distribution. Results suggest potential dissimilarities in the important risk factors for introduction and possible mode of spread. The 2011 outbreak pattern resembled an outbreak characterised by point introductions with the risk of introduction possibly being linked to high ostrich farm density and common management and husbandry practices in the ostrich industry. In contrast, the 2017 outbreak appeared to have a more propagating mode of transmission. The findings highlight epidemiological features of HPAI outbreak occurrence within ostrich populations that could be used to inform surveillance and control measures including targeted surveillance within high-risk spatial clusters. The study emphasizes the importance of both; implementation of a multi-pronged approach to HPAI control and the need for constant evaluation of the interaction of the host, environment and agent with each outbreak, in order to strengthen disease control.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) prevention and control is a challenge worldwide but the situation in southern Africa is particularly complex because the virus is endemic in wild African buffalo (Syncerus caffer). The objective of this study was to compare stakeholder perceptions of the FMD control methods employed to restrict FMD virus to the infected zone of South Africa. Data collection was performed using an online questionnaire distributed to FMD experts, government veterinarians, private livestock veterinarians, people involved within the wildlife sector, and "other" occupation groups including the general public. Data were also collected using semi-structured participatory group discussions with government animal health technicians (AHT) and communal cattle owners directly affected by FMD control measures. Evaluated control methods were the disease control fence bordering the western boundary of the Greater Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area, clinical surveillance of livestock, movement control of cloven-hoofed animals and products, and routine FMD vaccination of cattle. These management procedures were scored according to a set of technical, economic, and ethical criteria by stakeholders, who also weighted the criteria according to their perceived importance. Scores and weights were aggregated using an additive linear model to rank control methods. Sensitivity analysis was performed using a stochastic model to explore the effects of varying inputs and the exclusion of scores from randomly selected respondent groups on the ranking of control methods. The deterministic analysis assigned the highest ranking to the disease control fence and the lowest to routine vaccination of cattle. The fence had the highest ranking in 40% of the stochastic iterations, and second, third and fourth in 26%, 20% and 14% of iterations, respectively. The inputs from the AHT and people involved in the wildlife sector were the most influential for ranking the fence as the preferred control option. The most influential criteria were the feasibility of the fence as a control option and its influence on the economics of the communal cattle owners, livestock industry in the FMD free zone, and the government. The disease control fence was the highest ranking control option but further investigations are necessary to understand the reasons for stakeholder perceptions.

Asunto(s)