African swine fever in wild boar

Simon J. More; Miguel Angel Miranda; Dominique Bicout; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Sandra Edwards; Bruno Garin-Bastuji; Margaret Good; Virginie Michel; Mohan Raj; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; Jan Arend Stegeman; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Klaus Depner; Vittorio Guberti; Marius Masiulis; Edvins Olsevskis; Petr Satran; Mihaela Spiridon; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Arvo Viltrop; Grzegorz Wozniakowski; Andrea Bau; Alessandro Broglia; José Cortiñas Abrahantes; Soﬁe Dhollander; Andrey Gogin; Irene Munoz‐Gajardo; Frank Verdonck; Laura Amato; Christian  Gortazar Schmidt

doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344

African swine fever in wild boar

Simon J. More, Miguel Angel Miranda, Dominique Bicout, Anette Bøtner, Andrew Butterworth, Paolo Calistri, Sandra Edwards, Bruno Garin-Bastuji, Margaret Good, Virginie Michel, Mohan Raj, Søren Saxmose Nielsen, Liisa Sihvonen, Hans Spoolder, Jan Arend Stegeman, Antonio Velarde, Preben Willeberg, Christoph Winckler, Klaus Depner, Vittorio GubertiMarius Masiulis, Edvins Olsevskis, Petr Satran, Mihaela Spiridon, Hans-Hermann Thulke, Arvo Viltrop, Grzegorz Wozniakowski, Andrea Bau, Alessandro Broglia, José Cortiñas Abrahantes, Soﬁe Dhollander, Andrey Gogin, Irene Munoz‐Gajardo, Frank Verdonck, Laura Amato, Christian Gortazar Schmidt

39 Citationer (Scopus)

45 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The European Commission requested EFSA to compare the reliability of wild boar density estimates across the EU and to provide guidance to improve data collection methods. Currently, the only EU‐wide available data are hunting data. Their collection methods should be harmonised to be comparable and to improve predictive models for wild boar density. These models could be validated by more precise density data, collected at local level e.g. by camera trapping. Based on practical and theoretical considerations, it is currently not possible to establish wild boar density thresholds that do not allow sustaining African swine fever (ASF). There are many drivers determining if ASF can be sustained or not, including heterogeneous population structures and human‐mediated spread and there are still unknowns on the importance of different transmission modes in the epidemiology. Based on extensive literature reviews and observations from affected Member States, the efficacy of different wild boar population reduction and separation methods is evaluated. Different wild boar management strategies at different stages of the epidemic are suggested. Preventive measures to reduce and stabilise wild boar density, before ASF introduction, will be beneficial both in reducing the probability of exposure of the population to ASF and the efforts needed for potential emergency actions (i.e. less carcass removal) if an ASF incursion were to occur. Passive surveillance is the most effective and efficient method of surveillance for early detection of ASF in free areas. Following focal ASF introduction, the wild boar populations should be kept undisturbed for a short period (e.g. hunting ban on all species, leave crops unharvested to provide food and shelter within the affected area) and drastic reduction of the wild boar population may be performed only ahead of the ASF advance front, in the free populations. Following the decline in the epidemic, as demonstrated through passive surveillance, active population management should be reconsidered.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Artikelnummer	e05344
Tidsskrift	EFSA Journal
Vol/bind	16
Udgave nummer	7
Sider (fra-til)	1-78
Antal sider	78
ISSN	1831-4732
DOI	https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344
Status	Udgivet - 11 jul. 2018

Adgang til dokumentet

10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344Licens: CC BY-ND

African Swine Fever in Wild BoarForlagets udgivne version, 7,55 MBLicens: CC BY-ND

Citationsformater

More, S. J., Miranda, M. A., Bicout, D., Bøtner, A., Butterworth, A., Calistri, P., Edwards, S., Garin-Bastuji, B., Good, M., Michel, V., Raj, M., Nielsen, S. S., Sihvonen, L., Spoolder, H., Stegeman, J. A., Velarde, A., Willeberg, P., Winckler, C., Depner, K., ... Gortazar Schmidt, C. (2018). African swine fever in wild boar. EFSA Journal, 16(7), 1-78. [e05344]. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344

More, SJ, Miranda, MA, Bicout, D, Bøtner, A, Butterworth, A, Calistri, P, Edwards, S, Garin-Bastuji, B, Good, M, Michel, V, Raj, M, Nielsen, SS, Sihvonen, L, Spoolder, H, Stegeman, JA, Velarde, A, Willeberg, P, Winckler, C, Depner, K, Guberti, V, Masiulis, M, Olsevskis, E, Satran, P, Spiridon, M, Thulke, H-H, Viltrop, A, Wozniakowski, G, Bau, A, Broglia, A, Cortiñas Abrahantes, J, Dhollander, S, Gogin, A, Munoz‐Gajardo, I, Verdonck, F, Amato, L & Gortazar Schmidt, C 2018, 'African swine fever in wild boar', EFSA Journal, bind 16, nr. 7, e05344, s. 1-78. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344

@article{5cfa3d3d60d14689a0b147c94ded4ec4,

title = "African swine fever in wild boar",

abstract = "The European Commission requested EFSA to compare the reliability of wild boar density estimates across the EU and to provide guidance to improve data collection methods. Currently, the only EU‐wide available data are hunting data. Their collection methods should be harmonised to be comparable and to improve predictive models for wild boar density. These models could be validated by more precise density data, collected at local level e.g. by camera trapping. Based on practical and theoretical considerations, it is currently not possible to establish wild boar density thresholds that do not allow sustaining African swine fever (ASF). There are many drivers determining if ASF can be sustained or not, including heterogeneous population structures and human‐mediated spread and there are still unknowns on the importance of different transmission modes in the epidemiology. Based on extensive literature reviews and observations from affected Member States, the efficacy of different wild boar population reduction and separation methods is evaluated. Different wild boar management strategies at different stages of the epidemic are suggested. Preventive measures to reduce and stabilise wild boar density, before ASF introduction, will be beneficial both in reducing the probability of exposure of the population to ASF and the efforts needed for potential emergency actions (i.e. less carcass removal) if an ASF incursion were to occur. Passive surveillance is the most effective and efficient method of surveillance for early detection of ASF in free areas. Following focal ASF introduction, the wild boar populations should be kept undisturbed for a short period (e.g. hunting ban on all species, leave crops unharvested to provide food and shelter within the affected area) and drastic reduction of the wild boar population may be performed only ahead of the ASF advance front, in the free populations. Following the decline in the epidemic, as demonstrated through passive surveillance, active population management should be reconsidered.",

author = "More, {Simon J.} and Miranda, {Miguel Angel} and Dominique Bicout and Anette B{\o}tner and Andrew Butterworth and Paolo Calistri and Sandra Edwards and Bruno Garin-Bastuji and Margaret Good and Virginie Michel and Mohan Raj and Nielsen, {S{\o}ren Saxmose} and Liisa Sihvonen and Hans Spoolder and Stegeman, {Jan Arend} and Antonio Velarde and Preben Willeberg and Christoph Winckler and Klaus Depner and Vittorio Guberti and Marius Masiulis and Edvins Olsevskis and Petr Satran and Mihaela Spiridon and Hans-Hermann Thulke and Arvo Viltrop and Grzegorz Wozniakowski and Andrea Bau and Alessandro Broglia and {Corti{\~n}as Abrahantes}, Jos{\'e} and Soﬁe Dhollander and Andrey Gogin and Irene Munoz‐Gajardo and Frank Verdonck and Laura Amato and {Gortazar Schmidt}, Christian",

year = "2018",

month = jul,

day = "11",

doi = "10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "1--78",

journal = "E F S A Journal",

issn = "1831-4732",

publisher = "European Food Safety Authority (E F S A)",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - African swine fever in wild boar

AU - More, Simon J.

AU - Miranda, Miguel Angel

AU - Bicout, Dominique

AU - Bøtner, Anette

AU - Butterworth, Andrew

AU - Calistri, Paolo

AU - Edwards, Sandra

AU - Garin-Bastuji, Bruno

AU - Good, Margaret

AU - Michel, Virginie

AU - Raj, Mohan

AU - Nielsen, Søren Saxmose

AU - Sihvonen, Liisa

AU - Spoolder, Hans

AU - Stegeman, Jan Arend

AU - Velarde, Antonio

AU - Willeberg, Preben

AU - Winckler, Christoph

AU - Depner, Klaus

AU - Guberti, Vittorio

AU - Masiulis, Marius

AU - Olsevskis, Edvins

AU - Satran, Petr

AU - Spiridon, Mihaela

AU - Thulke, Hans-Hermann

AU - Viltrop, Arvo

AU - Wozniakowski, Grzegorz

AU - Bau, Andrea

AU - Broglia, Alessandro

AU - Cortiñas Abrahantes, José

AU - Dhollander, Soﬁe

AU - Gogin, Andrey

AU - Munoz‐Gajardo, Irene

AU - Verdonck, Frank

AU - Amato, Laura

AU - Gortazar Schmidt, Christian

PY - 2018/7/11

Y1 - 2018/7/11

N2 - The European Commission requested EFSA to compare the reliability of wild boar density estimates across the EU and to provide guidance to improve data collection methods. Currently, the only EU‐wide available data are hunting data. Their collection methods should be harmonised to be comparable and to improve predictive models for wild boar density. These models could be validated by more precise density data, collected at local level e.g. by camera trapping. Based on practical and theoretical considerations, it is currently not possible to establish wild boar density thresholds that do not allow sustaining African swine fever (ASF). There are many drivers determining if ASF can be sustained or not, including heterogeneous population structures and human‐mediated spread and there are still unknowns on the importance of different transmission modes in the epidemiology. Based on extensive literature reviews and observations from affected Member States, the efficacy of different wild boar population reduction and separation methods is evaluated. Different wild boar management strategies at different stages of the epidemic are suggested. Preventive measures to reduce and stabilise wild boar density, before ASF introduction, will be beneficial both in reducing the probability of exposure of the population to ASF and the efforts needed for potential emergency actions (i.e. less carcass removal) if an ASF incursion were to occur. Passive surveillance is the most effective and efficient method of surveillance for early detection of ASF in free areas. Following focal ASF introduction, the wild boar populations should be kept undisturbed for a short period (e.g. hunting ban on all species, leave crops unharvested to provide food and shelter within the affected area) and drastic reduction of the wild boar population may be performed only ahead of the ASF advance front, in the free populations. Following the decline in the epidemic, as demonstrated through passive surveillance, active population management should be reconsidered.

AB - The European Commission requested EFSA to compare the reliability of wild boar density estimates across the EU and to provide guidance to improve data collection methods. Currently, the only EU‐wide available data are hunting data. Their collection methods should be harmonised to be comparable and to improve predictive models for wild boar density. These models could be validated by more precise density data, collected at local level e.g. by camera trapping. Based on practical and theoretical considerations, it is currently not possible to establish wild boar density thresholds that do not allow sustaining African swine fever (ASF). There are many drivers determining if ASF can be sustained or not, including heterogeneous population structures and human‐mediated spread and there are still unknowns on the importance of different transmission modes in the epidemiology. Based on extensive literature reviews and observations from affected Member States, the efficacy of different wild boar population reduction and separation methods is evaluated. Different wild boar management strategies at different stages of the epidemic are suggested. Preventive measures to reduce and stabilise wild boar density, before ASF introduction, will be beneficial both in reducing the probability of exposure of the population to ASF and the efforts needed for potential emergency actions (i.e. less carcass removal) if an ASF incursion were to occur. Passive surveillance is the most effective and efficient method of surveillance for early detection of ASF in free areas. Following focal ASF introduction, the wild boar populations should be kept undisturbed for a short period (e.g. hunting ban on all species, leave crops unharvested to provide food and shelter within the affected area) and drastic reduction of the wild boar population may be performed only ahead of the ASF advance front, in the free populations. Following the decline in the epidemic, as demonstrated through passive surveillance, active population management should be reconsidered.

U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344

DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5344

M3 - Journal article

SN - 1831-4732

VL - 16

SP - 1

EP - 78

JO - E F S A Journal

JF - E F S A Journal

IS - 7

M1 - e05344

ER -

African swine fever in wild boar

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater