2019
DOI: 10.1101/2019.12.13.875682
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ecological drivers of African swine fever virus persistence in wild boar populations: insight for control

Abstract: 16Environmental sources of infection can play a primary role in shaping epidemiological 17 dynamics, however the relative impact of environmental transmission on host-pathogen systems 18 is rarely estimated. We developed and fit a spatially-explicit model of African swine fever virus 19 (ASFV) in wild boar to estimate what proportion of carcass-based transmission is contributing to 20 the low-level persistence of ASFV in Eastern European wild boar. Our model was developed 21 based on ecological insight and dat… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
1
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This quantification is substantially different from what reported by Pepin et al. (2020), who estimated that 53–66% of all virus transmission would be due to a contact between a susceptible wild boar and an infectious carcass. It should be noted, though, that those quantifications were based on an initial wild boar density ranging 0.5–2.0 individuals/km 2 , as opposed to the 3.0/km 2 used in our model.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This quantification is substantially different from what reported by Pepin et al. (2020), who estimated that 53–66% of all virus transmission would be due to a contact between a susceptible wild boar and an infectious carcass. It should be noted, though, that those quantifications were based on an initial wild boar density ranging 0.5–2.0 individuals/km 2 , as opposed to the 3.0/km 2 used in our model.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
“…Using a similar modelling approach and surveillance data for Eastern Poland, Pepin et al. (2020) obtained results which are more in agreement with our findings: they estimated 50–60% ASF persistence rates running an individual‐based model which comprised only direct and carcass‐mediated infection, but estimated such persistence on a time horizon of only 2 years, which makes the comparison with our study not optimal. Finally, O'Neill et al.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Compared with direct transmission alone, indirect transmission through infected carcasses was found to prolong the duration of viral persistence by two orders of magnitude (Lange et al, 2018). Using a different spatially explicit model to estimate the proportion of transmission events that should be attributed to contact between a live host and contaminated carcass, Pepin et al (2020) proposed that 53-66% of transmission events in wild boar populations were carcass based. Similar results were obtained across four simulated landscapes with different levels of wild boar density [a landscape of high (2 boar/km 2 ) and low (0.5 boar/km 2 ) density patches, homogenous landscapes with densities of 1, 1.5 and 2 boar/km 2 ].…”
Section: Sensitivity Of Ongoing Surveillance Activities In Estoniamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it has been demonstrated previously that there is no need for long‐term infectious animals in order to replicate the observed spatio‐temporal spread of ASF in wild boar using different spatially explicit simulation models (e.g. Figure 14, Pepin et al., 2020; Lange, 2015).…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%