Estimation of economic losses due to Peste de Petits Ruminants in small ruminants in India

Singh, B.; Bardhan, D.; Verma, Medram; Prasad, Shiv; Sinha, D. K.

doi:10.14202/vetworld.2014.194-199

Cited by 40 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…PPR affects small ruminants and it is not a zoonosis. Goats have been reported to be more susceptible than sheep , but this has not been confirmed in other outbreaks (Singh et al, 2014…”

Section: Resistance Of the Virusmentioning

confidence: 93%

Scientific Opinion on peste des petits ruminants

2015

EFSA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) is a severe viral disease of small ruminants caused by a Morbillivirus closely related to rinderpest virus. It is widespread in Africa and Asia and is currently also found in Turkey and Northern Africa. PPR is transmitted via direct contact, and the disease would mainly be transferred to infection-free areas by transport of infected animals. In the EU, it could only happen through illegal transport of animals. The risk of that depends on the prevalence in the country of origin and the number of animals illegally moved. The extent of the spread would depend mainly on the time during which it is undetected, the farm density, the frequency and distance of travel of animals. PPR has a high within-herd transmission rate, therefore contacts between flocks, e.g. through common grazing areas, should be avoided when PPR is present. If PPR enters EU areas with dense sheep population but low goat density, it may spread rapidly undetected, since goats are considered more susceptible than sheep. Effective measures in limiting the spread of PPR in the EU include prompt culling of infected herds, rapid detection, movement restriction, and disinfection. Live attenuated vaccines against PPR are available, safe and effective, and have been successfully used to control PPR epidemics, but no method exists for differentiating between infected and vaccinated animals; therefore, the development of one is recommended. Awareness-raising campaigns for farmers and veterinary staff to promote recognition of the disease should be considered. The cooperation of the EU with neighbouring countries should be encouraged to prevent the spread of PPR and other transboundary diseases. In particular, EFSA was asked to (i) characterise the disease and provide an update on the global occurrence of PPR and changes in the distribution during the last 10 years; (ii) map the region of concern and other countries of the Mediterranean Basin and Black Sea, displaying identified, or likely, major live animal trade routes; (iii) evaluate all possible pathways of introduction of PPR into the EU, ranking them on the basis of their level of risk, with a view to enhancing preparedness and prevention; (iv) assess the risk of introduction and speed of propagation of PPR into the EU and neighbouring countries; (v) assess the risk of PPR becoming endemic in animal populations in the EU; (vi) assess the impact PPR would have if it were to enter the EU, considering different scenarios as regards the effectiveness of surveillance and control measures; and (vii) review the feasibility, availability and effectiveness of the main disease prevention and control measures (diagnostic tools, biosecurity measures, restrictions on movement, culling). © EuropeanRegarding disease characterisation, the AHAW Panel reported that PPR is a severe viral disease of small ruminants caused by a Morbillivirus closely related to rinderpest virus. It is widespread in Africa, the Middle East and Southern Asia. It is one of the priority animal diseases wh...

show abstract

“…PPR affects small ruminants and it is not a zoonosis. Goats have been reported to be more susceptible than sheep , but this has not been confirmed in other outbreaks (Singh et al, 2014…”

Section: Resistance Of the Virusmentioning

confidence: 93%

Scientific Opinion on peste des petits ruminants

2015

EFSA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was worked out as the product of the number of animals that died due to PPR (D A : more than 12 months of age; D Y : between 6 to 12 months; and D K/L : below 6 months of age), and the probable market value (P A , P Y , and P K/L , respectively) of the animal. Mortality losses were categorised by age group because earlier studies have reported significant differences in deaths according to age (5,6).…”

Section: Loss From Mortalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Singh et al (6) estimated the economic losses due to PPR in India at US $0.25 million/year, using official data on the incidence and number of deaths. This estimate would appear to be too low and reflects the under-reporting of animal disease.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The economic impact of peste des petits ruminants in India

2017

Rev. Sci. Tech. OIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) is an economically important livestock disease which affects a vast section of the small ruminant population in India. However, data on the incidence of PPR are limited and scant literature is available on the economic losses caused by the disease. In the present study, a structured sampling design was adopted, which covered the major agro-climatic regions of the country, to ascertain the morbidity and mortality rates of PPR. Available estimates of the economic losses in India due to various livestock diseases are based on single values of various epidemiological and economic parameters. Stochastic modelling was used to estimate the economic impact of PPR. Overall annual morbidity and mortality rates of PPR for small ruminants in India have been estimated from the sample as being 8%and 3.45%, respectively. The authors have analysed variations in these rates across species, age group, sex, season and region. The expected annual economic loss due to PPR in India ranges from as little as US $2 million to $18 million and may go up to US $1.5 billion; the most likely range of expected economic losses is between US $653 million and $669 million. This study thus reveals significant losses due to the incidence of PPR in small ruminants in India.

show abstract

“…The disease was first reported in 1987 from Arasur village, Tamil Nadu state and later spread to other states and the country became endemic for the disease (Singh et al., ). In India, annual loss reported in the literature was INR 88,951 million (Singh, Bardhan, Verma, Prasad, & Sinha, ), INR 16,116 million (Govindaraj, Balamurugan, & Rahman, ) and INR 45,710–46,830 million (USD 653–669 million; Bardhan et al., ). Considering the importance of the disease, a live‐attenuated PPR vaccine that provides immunity for 3–6 years was developed by ICAR‐Indian Veterinary Research Institute (Sreenivasa, Dhar, Singh, & Bandyopadhyay, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of effectiveness of Mass Vaccination Campaign against Peste des petits ruminants in Chhattisgarh state, India

Govindaraj

Roy²,

Mohanty

et al. 2019

Transbound Emerg Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The study evaluated the effectiveness of ‘Mass Vaccination Campaign (MVC)’ implemented against the contagious transboundary OIE notified Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) in sheep and goats on the lines of ‘pulse polio campaign’ for humans in Chhattisgarh state, India. The effectiveness was evaluated on the axes of adequacy, financial viability under with and without MVC through differencing under various scenarios and options and programme impact from a farmer's perspective. The adequacy evaluation revealed that the reported outbreaks, diagnosed and death cases declined under PPR‐MVC inconsonance with increased vaccination coverage. Furthermore, the seroconversion increased during post PPR‐MVC implies elevated immunity levels in the sheep and goat population. The estimated mean mortality loss was USD 45.2 and USD 16.5 per animal in goats and sheep, respectively, whereas the treatment and opportunity cost of labour was USD 1.9 and USD 2.5 per animal respectively. Under the low PPR incidence scenario, benefit: cost ratio, net present value and internal rate of return were 4.9:1, 48.9 million USD and 146.6%, whereas it was 12.4:1,142.7 million USD and 430.4% and 13.5:1,156.7 million USD and 430.4% under medium and high incidence scenarios. Furthermore, the option of vaccinating 100% risk population during the first year followed by 30% during subsequent years to cover naïve population will maximize benefits than 100% coverage every year; nevertheless, benefits outweighs cost manifolds in both of these options. The farmers had a positive opinion on the overall services provided under PPR‐MVC and the results provide the empirical evidence on effectiveness of ‘mass vaccination’ for its replication in other states of India or countries with similar socio‐economic and rearing environments.

show abstract

Estimation of economic losses due to Peste de Petits Ruminants in small ruminants in India

Cited by 40 publications

References 8 publications

Scientific Opinion on peste des petits ruminants

Scientific Opinion on peste des petits ruminants

The economic impact of peste des petits ruminants in India

Evaluation of effectiveness of Mass Vaccination Campaign against Peste des petits ruminants in Chhattisgarh state, India

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About