Questionnaire survey of detrimental fur animal epidemic necrotic pyoderma in Finland

Abstract

BackgroundIn 2007, a previously unrecorded disease, fur animal epidemic necrotic pyoderma (FENP), was detected in farmed mink (Neovision vision), foxes (Vulpes lagopus) and Finnraccoons (Nyctereutes procyonoides) in Finland. Symptoms included severe pyoderma with increased mortality, causing both animal welfare problems and economic losses. In 2011, an epidemiologic questionnaire was mailed to all members of the Finnish Fur Breeders’ Association to assess the occurrence of FENP from 2009 through the first 6 months of 2011. The aim was to describe the geographical distribution and detailed clinical signs of FENP, as well as sources of infection and potential risk factors for the disease.ResultsA total of 239 farmers (25%) returned the questionnaire. Clinical signs of FENP were observed in 40% (95% CI 34–46%) of the study farms. In addition, the survey clarified the specific clinical signs for different animal species. The presence of disease was associated with the importation of mink, especially from Denmark (OR 9.3, 95% CI 2.6–33.0). The transmission route between Finnish farms was associated with fur animal purchases. Some risk factors such as the farm type were also indicated. As such, FENP was detected more commonly on farms with more than one species of fur animal in comparison to farms with, for example, only foxes (OR 4.6, 95% CI 2.4–8.6), and the incidence was higher on farms with over 750 breeder mink compared to smaller farms (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.6–9.0). Contact between fur animals and birds and other wildlife increased the risk of FENP on farms. Responses also indicated that blocking the entry of wildlife to the animal premises protected against FENP.ConclusionsFENP was most likely introduced to Finland by imported mink and spread further within the country via domestically purchased fur animals. Some potential risk factors, such as the type and size of the farm and contact with wildlife, contributed to the spread of FENP. Escape-proof shelter buildings block the entry of wildlife, thus protecting fur animals against FENP.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13028-017-0322-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Association between Fur Animal Necrotizing Pyoderma in breeding farm mink (Neovison vison) and reduced fertility

“…For the Palomino/ Pearl beige and Brown mink this number were 0.54 and 0.04 respectively. This could indicate that Brown mink may be more resistant towards FNP compared to the other colour types; an observation also presented by Nordgren et al [6]. The above mentioned difference may have been affected by the fact that this study was conducted on different farms with potentially different strategies, methods and different feed kitchens.…”

“…The mechanisms behind variation in the occurrence of FNP between individuals and farms remain unknown. Suggested factors include genetics, immunological robustness and transfer of mink [6,9].…”

“…During the mating season, females are moved between cages and thereby encounter several males. Farms with a higher number of breeding animals have been shown to exhibit a higher risk of FNP [ 6 ]. Some studies suggest a seasonal pattern where most cases of FNP were present in the winter or breeding season [ 1 , 2 , 4 ].…”

One health implications of fur farming

“…(Picket and Harris, 2015;Mustonen et al, 2017) Morbidity = (e.g., in mink, foxes, racoon dogs, raccoons, & marmots) numerous bacterial/protozoan/viral/ectoparasite infections, causing conditions including enteric disease, necrotic pyoderma, pneumonia, obesity, leg weakness, negative mobility, abrasions, pressure lesions, skeletal pathology (carpal joint laxity and locomotor deficits), periodontal disease, eye disease, and negative genetic traits and associated conditions. (Kempe et al, 2010;Plotnikov, 2012;Ellick et al, 2013;Picket and Harris, 2015;Brash et al, 2016;Hammer et al, 2016;Kempe and Strandeń, 2016;Moisander-Jylhä et al, 2016;Nordgren et al, 2016a;Nordgren et al, 2016b;Smura et al, 2016;Mustonen et al, 2017;Kempe, 2018;Devaux et al, 2021;Klockiewicz et al, 2021;Linzey and Linzey, 2022) High premature mortality = e.g., 15 -50% mortality to weaning among foxes, 99% mortality among mink kits. (Picket and Harris, 2015;Linzey and Linzey, 2022) Physical mistreatment and abuse = rough treatment of animals during handling and (Picket and Harris, 2015;Arney, 2022;Linzey and Linzey, 2022) (Continued)…”

“…Furthermore, widespread populations of the American mink and racoon dog have their origins clearly traced to releases in the Russian Federation from fur farms, where the species were first recorded (Balakirev and Tinaeva, 2001). A study in Denmark on the invasive racoon dog, (Nordgren, 2017) used 4000 SNPs to show that the species originated from Danish fur farm escapes and releases. Genetic studies have shown that often animals from different fur farms have genetically distinct profiles so it is possible to track their spread.…”