Experimental Infection of Domestic Pigs with African Swine Fever Virus Lithuania 2014 Genotype II Field Isolate

Gallardo, Carmina; Soler, Alejandro; Nieto, Raquel; Cano, Clímaco; Pelayo, V.; Sánchez, María Antonia Huertas; Pridotkas, Gediminas; Fernández-Piñero, Jovita; Briones, V.; Arias, M.

doi:10.1111/tbed.12346

Cited by 122 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In agreement with recent observations from the ASF infected MS, the infection as defined by the model assumptions was found in all simulations spreading unambiguously as long as certain wild boar habitat remained connected, although the direct contact infection between alive animals is reported very low (Blome et al 2012, Gallardo et al 2015 compared to other infectious diseases in wild boar that spread via direct contacts (e.g. FMD, CSF).…”

Section: %supporting

confidence: 90%

Alternative control strategies against ASF in wild boar populations

Lange

2015

EFSA Supporting Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ASF is a devastating infectious disease of domestic pigs and wild boar, usually fatal. No vaccine exists to combat this virus. It does not affect humans nor does it affect any animal species other than members of the Suidae family. From the beginning of 2014 ASF has spread in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, mainly in the wild boar, causing very serious concerns. The European Commission requested EFSA to assess different wild boar management options taking into consideration its ecology in the Baltic States and Poland. Therefore, a simulation study was performed comparing control strategy alternatives using a spatio-temporally explicit individual-based model. The model was developed based on literature regarding wild boar ecology; ethology of the ASF virus recently circulating in Eastern Europe; wild boar density maps from the ASF affected regions and an expert consultation meeting. The model results did not reveal one single immediately effective control measure based on accepted wild boar management tools. Strategies using conventional wild boar management approaches -ban of feeding and targeted hunting of reproductive females -were found to become effective slowly over multiple generations of reproduction. Therefore, when applying the strategies, a width of 100-200km is required as buffer zone surrounding the area with ASF detections in order to compensate the forward spread till measures become effective. Massive population destruction (i.e. about 80% of the population in the control area within 4 months with any available technique) or instantaneous removal of infectious carcasses could stop ASF spread already by limited buffer width of below 50km. The equal outcome is reasoned by the avoidance of infectious carcasses when the population was destroyed. Centred on the effective and immediate exclusion of wild boar contacts with infectious carcasses, hybrid strategies including reasonably intensified conventional hunting may suffice to stop ASF spread using a practical buffer width (about 50km) resp. time horizon (less than 3 years) for control while avoiding destructive measures.

show abstract

Section: %supporting

confidence: 90%

Alternative control strategies against ASF in wild boar populations

Lange

2015

EFSA Supporting Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also important to note that the formation of the antigen-antibody complexes in the tissues of seropositive animals can block the interaction between the ASFV antigen and ASFV conjugate and therefore affect its sensitivity. In the majority of cases, the severe nature of the epidemic disease affecting EU countries leads to mortality with high levels of viral presence in all tissues (9,10,47,52,53). It is therefore highly likely that the virus will be detected using the antigen ELISA in a high proportion of samples taken from dead pigs during an acute outbreak of disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Good correlation was observed between the UPL-PCR and the OIE real-time PCR, with just three of the 62 UPL positive samples (with high cycle threshold [C T ] values of Ͼ36) testing negative in the OIE real-time PCR. Three false-negative blood samples were collected at 17, 34, and 38 dpe from in-contact animals exposed to the virulent Lithuanian 2014 ASFV isolate (LT14/1490), which remained asymptomatic throughout the experimental infection (47). The false-negative results detected with both conventional PCR and/or antigen ELISA were correlated with blood samples with real-time PCR cycle threshold (C T ) values of Ͼ30, mainly collected at the initial stages of infection (Fig.…”

Section: Comparison Of Pcrs and Antigen Elisa In The Detection Of Asfmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…One inoculated pig showed a delayed course of the disease, resembling the same as that seen in the in-contact animals, which died or were slaughtered from 14 to 22 dpe. One in-contact pig remained asymptomatic throughout the experiment and was slaughtered at day 61 (47). rized in Table 3.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ASFV genome was detected by the UPL-PCR in 97.8% of the tested tissues, while in the OIE-prescribed PCR assays, the positive percentage decreased to 96.6%. The 15 negative samples corresponded to organs collected from two pigs exposed to the Lithuania 2014 strain (47). Of the 30 spleen samples tested using the antigen ELISA, 28 were positive and two were negative, which enabled us to detect 93.3% of the infected animals ( Table 4).…”

Section: Comparison Of Pcrs and Antigen Elisa In The Detection Of Asfmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment of African Swine Fever Diagnostic Techniques as a Response to the Epidemic Outbreaks in Eastern European Union Countries: How To Improve Surveillance and Control Programs

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A frican swine fever (ASF) is a complex and lethal viral disease affecting swine and has a significant socioeconomic impact on both the developed and developing world. It has a major negative effect on national, regional, and international trade and constrains pig production in affected areas. The devastating acute form of the disease is characterized, among other features, by functional and congestive-hemorrhagic disorders of the digestive and respiratory systems and causes around 100% mortality in infected pigs (1). Both European wild boars (Sus scrofa) and feral pigs are susceptible and exhibit clinical signs and mortality rates similar to those of domestic pigs. In contrast, African wild pigs (Phacochoerus and Potamochoerus spp.) are resistant to the disease (2-10).The causative agent of the disease, the ASF virus (ASFV), is a large double-stranded DNA virus and the only member of the Asfarviridae family, genus Asfivirus (11, 12). The virus genome is 170 to 192 kb long (13-17). ASF is endemic in sub-Saharan Africa, where it was first described in 1921 (18). Several outbreaks have occurred since then in Europe and South and Central America. In most non-African countries, the disease has been successfully eradicated, the only exception being Sardinia (Italy), where the disease is still endemic (19,20). In April 2007, the disease spread from East Africa to the Republic of Georgia (21), and outbreaks occurred in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the Russian Federation (22). The ongoing spread of ASFV into adjacent eastern European countries, such as Ukraine (23,24) and Belarus (25), and the situation in Russia affecting both wild boars and domestic pigs placed neighboring areas in the European Union (EU) at risk for the spread of ASFV. The first cases of ASF in wild boars in Lithuania and Poland were reported in early 2014 in areas bordering . According to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), during 2014, nearly 260 ASF cases or outbreaks in wild boars and domestic pigs were detected in EU countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland). This situation, combined with the uncertainty present in Belarus, has created a permanent risk of reintroducing ASF into the EU via wild boars or the illegal trade of contaminated pork products and waste (31).No vaccine is available to prevent ASF infection. The control and eradication measures applicable are based on classical disease control methods, including surveillance, epidemiological investigation, tracing of pigs, and stamping out in infected holdings. Citation Gallardo C, Nieto R, Soler A, Pelayo V, Fernández-Pinero J, MarkowskaDaniel I, Pridotkas G, Nurmoja I, Granta R, Simón A, Pérez C, Martín E, Fernández-Pacheco P, Arias M. 2015. Assessment of African swine fever diagnostic techniques as a response to the epidemic outbreaks in eastern European Union countries: how to improve surveillance and control programs.

show abstract

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

Pepin

Golnar

Abdo

et al. 2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental sources of infection can play a primary role in shaping epidemiological dynamics; however, the relative impact of environmental transmission on host‐pathogen systems is rarely estimated. We developed and fit a spatially explicit model of African swine fever virus (ASFV) in wild boar to estimate what proportion of carcass‐based transmission is contributing to the low‐level persistence of ASFV in Eastern European wild boar. Our model was developed based on ecological insight and data from field studies of ASFV and wild boar in Eastern Poland. We predicted that carcass‐based transmission would play a substantial role in persistence, especially in low‐density host populations where contact rates are low. By fitting the model to outbreak data using approximate Bayesian computation, we inferred that between 53% and 66% of transmission events were carcass‐based that is, transmitted through contact of a live host with a contaminated carcass. Model fitting and sensitivity analyses showed that the frequency of carcass‐based transmission increased with decreasing host density, suggesting that management policies should emphasize the removal of carcasses and consider how reductions in host densities may drive carcass‐based transmission. Sensitivity analyses also demonstrated that carcass‐based transmission is necessary for the autonomous persistence of ASFV under realistic parameters. Autonomous persistence through direct transmission alone required high host densities; otherwise re‐introduction of virus periodically was required for persistence when direct transmission probabilities were moderately high. We quantify the relative role of different persistence mechanisms for a low‐prevalence disease using readily collected ecological data and viral surveillance data. Understanding how the frequency of different transmission mechanisms vary across host densities can help identify optimal management strategies across changing ecological conditions.

show abstract

Experimental Infection of Domestic Pigs with African Swine Fever Virus Lithuania 2014 Genotype II Field Isolate

Cited by 122 publications

References 11 publications

Alternative control strategies against ASF in wild boar populations

Alternative control strategies against ASF in wild boar populations

Assessment of African Swine Fever Diagnostic Techniques as a Response to the Epidemic Outbreaks in Eastern European Union Countries: How To Improve Surveillance and Control Programs

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About