We review the literature and discuss control options regarding foot and mouth disease (FMD) in wildlife around the world. There are more than 100 species of wild, feral, laboratory, or domesticated animals that have been infected naturally or experimentally with FMD virus. Apart from the African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) in sub-Saharan Africa, wildlife has not been demonstrated to play a significant role in the maintenance of FMD. More often, wildlife are passively infected when outbreaks of FMD occur in domestic livestock, and, in some wild ungulates, infection results in severe disease. Efforts to control FMD in wildlife may not be successful when the disease is endemic in livestock and may cause more harm to wildlife, human livelihoods, and domestic animals. Currently in sub-Saharan Africa, the complete eradication of FMD on a subcontinental scale in the near term is not possible, given the presence of FMD-infected African buffalo and the existence of weak veterinary infrastructures in some FMD-endemic countries. Therefore efforts to control the disease should be aimed at improved vaccines and improved use of vaccines, improved livestock management practices, and utilization of programs that can help in disease control such as the FMD Progressive Control Program and regulatory frameworks that facilitate trade such zonation, compartmentalization, and commodity-based trade. Though not meeting the definition of wildlife used in this review, feral domestic animals warrant a special concern with regard to FMD control.

Background: Guam, a United States of America (USA) island territory in the Pacific Ocean, is known to have large populations of ticks; however, it is unclear what the risk is to wildlife and humans living on the island. Dog (Canis familiaris), cat (Felis catus), and wild pig (Sus scrofa) sentinels were examined for ticks, and environmental sampling was conducted to determine the ticks present in Guam and the prevalence of tick-borne pathogens in hosts.Methods and Results: From March 2019-November 2020, ticks were collected from environmental sampling, dogs, cats, and wild pigs. Blood samples were also taken from a subset of animals. A total of 99 ticks were collected from 27 environmental samples and all were Rhipicephalus sanguineus, the brown dog tick. Most ticks were collected during the dry season with an overall sampling success rate of 63% (95% CI: 42.4–80.6). 6,614 dogs were examined, and 12.6% (95% CI: 11.8–13.4) were infested with at least one tick. One thousand one hundred twelve cats were examined, and six (0.54%; 95% CI: 0.20–1.1) were found with ticks. Sixty-four wild pigs were examined and 17.2% (95% CI: 9.5–27.8) had ticks. In total, 1,956 ticks were collected and 97.4% of ticks were R. sanguineus. A subset of R. sanguineus were determined to be the tropical lineage. The other tick species found were Rhipicephalus microplus (0.77%), Amblyomma breviscutatum (0.77 %), and a Haemaphysalis sp. (0.51%). Blood samples from 136 dogs, four cats, and 64 wild pigs were tested using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNA sequencing methods. Five different tick-borne pathogens with the following prevalences were found in dogs: Anaplasma phagocytophilum 5.9% (95% CI: 2.6–11.3); Anaplasma platys 19.1% (95% CI: 12.9–26.7); Babesia canis vogeli 8.8% (95% CI: 4.6–14.9); Ehrlichia canis 12.5% (95% CI: 7.5–19.3); Hepatozoon canis 14.7% (95% CI: 9.2–28.8). E. canis was detected in one cat, and no tick-borne pathogens were detected in wild pigs. Overall, 43.4% (95% CI: 34.9–52.1) of dogs had at least one tick-borne pathogen. Serological testing for antibodies against Ehrlichia spp. and Anaplasma spp. showed prevalences of 14.7% (95% CI: 9.2–28.8) and 31.6% (95% CI: 23.9–40), respectively.Conclusion: Four different tick species were found in Guam to include a Haemaphysalis sp., which is a previously unreported genus for Guam. Dogs with ticks have a high prevalence of tick-borne pathogens which makes them useful sentinels.

No abstract