Houe H
Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Vet Microbiol. 1999 Jan;64(2-3):89-107. doi: 10.1016/s0378-1135(98)00262-4.
Infections with bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV) are widespread throughout the world. Although the prevalence of infection varies among surveys, the infection tends to be endemic in many populations, reaching a maximum level of 1-2% of the cattle being persistently infected (PI) and 60-85% of the cattle being antibody positive. Persistently infected cattle are the main source for transmission of the virus. However, acutely infected cattle as well as other ruminants, either acutely or persistently infected, may transmit the virus. Transmission is most efficient by direct contact. However, as infections have been observed in closed, non-pasturing herds, other transmission routes seem likely to have some practical importance. Differences in BVDV prevalence among regions or introduction of virus in herds previously free of BVDV are often associated with particular epidemiological determinants such as cattle population density, animal trade and pasturing practices. However, on a few occasions there have been no obvious explanations for infection of individual herds. Estimates of economic losses due to BVDV infection vary depending on the immune status of the population and the pathogenicity of the infecting virus strains. Introduction of the infection into a totally susceptible population invariably causes extensive losses until a state of equilibrium is reached. Infection with highly virulent BVDV strains causing severe clinical signs and death after acute infection gives rise to substantial economical losses. At an estimated annual incidence of acute infections of 34%, the total annual losses were estimated as US$ 20 million per million calvings when modeling the losses due to a low-virulent BVDV strain. At the same incidence of infection, the losses due to a high-virulent BVDV strain were estimated as US$ 57 million per million calvings. Low-virulent BVDV infections caused maximum losses at an incidence of 45%, whereas high-virulent BVDV infections caused maximum losses at an incidence of 65%. Thus, cost-benefit analyses of control programs are highly dependent on the risks of new infections under different circumstances and on the strains of the virus involved.
牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV)感染在全球广泛存在。尽管不同调查中感染率有所差异,但在许多牛群中该感染往往呈地方流行性,持续感染(PI)的牛占牛群总数的比例最高可达1% - 2%,抗体呈阳性的牛占60% - 85%。持续感染的牛是病毒传播的主要来源。然而,急性感染的牛以及其他反刍动物,无论是急性感染还是持续感染,都可能传播病毒。直接接触传播效率最高。然而,由于在封闭、不放牧的牛群中也观察到了感染情况,其他传播途径似乎也具有一定的实际重要性。不同地区BVDV感染率的差异或病毒传入先前无BVDV的牛群,通常与特定的流行病学决定因素有关,如牛群密度、动物贸易和放牧方式。然而,在少数情况下,个别牛群感染的原因并无明显解释。因BVDV感染造成的经济损失估计因牛群的免疫状况和感染病毒株的致病性而异。将感染引入完全易感的牛群中,在达到平衡状态之前,必然会造成广泛损失。感染高毒力BVDV毒株会在急性感染后导致严重临床症状和死亡,从而造成巨大经济损失。据估计,急性感染的年发病率为34%,在对低毒力BVDV毒株造成的损失进行建模时,每百万头犊牛每年的总损失估计为2000万美元。在相同感染发病率下,高毒力BVDV毒株造成的损失估计为每百万头犊牛每年5700万美元。低毒力BVDV感染在发病率为45%时造成的损失最大,而高毒力BVDV感染在发病率为65%时造成的损失最大。因此,控制计划的成本效益分析高度依赖于不同情况下新感染的风险以及所涉及的病毒株。