Glover Barbara, Macfarlane Malcolm, Bengis Roy, O'Dell Jacques, Steyl Johan, van Heerden Henriette, Abernethy Darrell
Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, Pretoria 0110, South Africa.
Former Chief State Veterinarian of the Graaff Reinet State Vet Area, Eastern Cape 6280, South Africa.
Microorganisms. 2020 Sep 29;8(10):1494. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8101494.
In this study, infection in sable antelope () was investigated on two wildlife ranches in South Africa over a 12-year period in order to determine the origin of the outbreaks and the role of livestock in maintaining the disease. Retrospective data were obtained from farm records and interviews as well as samples tested from different disease scenarios and clinical settings. On one ranch, 10 of 74 sable tested seropositive for in 2004 but were certified clear of infection after no further brucellosis cases were detected following repeated serological tests and culling over a five-year period. Recrudescence occurred in 2013 (7 of 187 brucellosis positives) and in 2014 (one positive), with persistent, latent infection being the most reasonable explanation. In a second case study, linked to the first one through a common vendor, 15 of 80 sable tested positive in 2016, some five years after the acquisition of the animals from a putative source. biovar 1 and/or 3 were isolated from each outbreak on both ranches. Both outbreaks resulted in substantial losses for the owners, arising from testing and culling and significant resource expenditure by the state. The study identified the diagnostic challenges for identifying and resolving disease outbreaks in wildlife, the persistence of in sable, the risks associated with animal movements, and the need for a wildlife-sensitive disease control scheme. Although the actual source of infection could not be identified, the investigation points away from local livestock as a source of ongoing infection while the persistent infection is consistent with the disease circulating within small, ranched populations and being spread through the keeping and trading of high-value animals. The implications of the study findings to disease control in wildlife are discussed.
在本研究中,为了确定疫情的源头以及家畜在维持疾病传播中的作用,在南非的两个野生动物牧场对南非大羚羊()感染情况进行了为期12年的调查。通过农场记录、访谈以及从不同疾病场景和临床环境中采集的样本检测获取回顾性数据。在一个牧场,2004年74只南非大羚羊中有10只布鲁氏菌血清检测呈阳性,但在经过五年的反复血清学检测和扑杀后未再检测到布鲁氏菌病病例,被认定感染已清除。2013年(187例布鲁氏菌病阳性中有7例)和2014年(1例阳性)出现复发,最合理的解释是存在持续性潜伏感染。在第二个案例研究中,通过一个共同供应商与第一个案例相关联,2016年80只南非大羚羊中有15只检测呈阳性,这些动物是从一个假定来源购入约五年后出现此情况。在两个牧场的每次疫情中均分离出了生物变种1和/或3。两次疫情均给所有者造成了重大损失,包括检测和扑杀成本以及国家的大量资源支出。该研究确定了在野生动物中识别和解决疾病爆发的诊断挑战、南非大羚羊中布鲁氏菌的持续性、动物移动相关风险以及对具有野生动物敏感性的疾病控制方案的需求。尽管无法确定实际感染源,但调查表明当地家畜并非持续感染源,而持续性感染与疾病在小型养殖种群中传播并通过高价值动物的饲养和交易扩散的情况相符。讨论了该研究结果对野生动物疾病控制的影响。