Seroprevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Foot and Mouth Disease in Cattle in West Shewa Zone, Ethiopia

Abstract

Foot and mouth disease (FMD) is a highly contagious viral disease of cloven-hoofed animals and one of the endemic diseases in Ethiopia. The study was aimed to estimate the seroprevalence and to assess associated risk factors of foot and mouth disease seroprevalence in West Shewa Zone. A total of 384 sera samples were collected from randomly selected cattle and tested using ELISA for antibodies against nonstructural proteins of foot and mouth disease viruses based on IDEXX FMD Multispecies Ab Test (IDEXX Laboratories Inc, USA). The seroprevalence of foot and mouth disease in West Shewa Zone was found to be 40.4% (95% CI: 35.46–45.27) at an animal and 74.7% (95% CI: 65.58–83.85) at the herd level. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that districts, breed, and animal composition were the potential risk factors of FMD seropositivity. Accordingly, cattle found in Abuna Ginde Beret (odds ratio (OR): 9.1, 95% CI: 2.4–34.1, p=0.001), Cheliya (OR: 8.8, 95% CI: 2.5–31.3, p=0.001), Bako Tibe (OR: 7.6, 95% CI: 2.1–28.3, p=0.002), Tokekutaye (OR: 5.8, 95% CI: 1.7–19.5, p=0.004), and Jeldu (OR: 5.3, 95% CI: 1.3–21.5, p=0.020) districts were more at risk to be infected with FMD than cattle from Ambo. The odds of FMD seropositivity was significantly higher in cattle kept with small ruminants (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.3–3.3, p=0.003) than cattle alone. The analysis also revealed that the odds of seropositivity were 6 times higher in crossbred compared with local cattle (p=0.003). The current study found high seroprevalence of FMD in West Shewa Zone. Therefore, cattle should be vaccinated regularly after the identification of specific FMD serotypes circulating in the study area.

Seroprevalence and Molecular Detection of Foot and Mouth Disease Virus in Dairy Cattle Around Addis Ababa, Central Ethiopia

“…This is in agreement with the report of Thrusfield, 14 which states that young cattle with less prior exposure did not show a measurable response against FMD. In contrast to previous reports by Rufael et al 39 in Borena pastoral area; Megersa et al 34 in Gamo Gofa and Sidama Zones; and Ahmed et al 41 in West Shewa zone Oromia of Regional State; revealed significantly higher FMD seroprevalence in young as compared with adult and old cattle. On the other hand, Gelaye et al 45 in the Bench Maji Zone of southern Ethiopia documented no significant association between seropositivity of FMD between groups of different ages of cattle.…”

“…Thus, prevalence of 12.5-30% in Addis Ababa; 31,32 24-41.5% in districts of Tigray region; 31,33 4.9-13.5% in areas of southern nation and nationalities; 34,35 38.7-52.5% in Amhara region; 36 12.5-55.6% in Oromia region, 3,37-39 and 14.2-15.1% in Somali regional state by Mohamoud et al 40 were reported from Ethiopia. According to previous reports, the eastern Tigray has 41.5% FMD seroprevalence, followed by the selected districts of West Shewa, 41 Guji region of Oromia, and the Yeka district of Addis Ababa city, which have 40.4%, 32.7%, and 30% FMD seroprevalence,…”

Epidemiological study on foot-and-mouth disease in small ruminants: Sero-prevalence and risk factor assessment in Kenya

“…Further, there was high sero-prevalence in animals whose production type was not identified hence the need for further investigation of sero-prevalence between the production types. The proportion of herds with at least one animal sero-positive for FMD (herd prevalence) was high at 77.6% similar to 74.7% reported by Ahmed et al [ 41 ] in Ethiopian cattle but higher than that in the reports of Megersa et al [ 64 ] in southern Ethiopian cattle and Hussain et al [ 65 ] in Omani cattle with sero-prevalence of 48.1% and 55.2%, respectively. This comparison of SR herds and cattle herds is relevant given possible transmission from cattle to SR.…”

“…This comparison of SR herds and cattle herds is relevant given possible transmission from cattle to SR. The high prevalence of FMD at the herd level in our study might be due to the common practice of communal grazing and watering in the study area as was also alluded to by Ahmed et al [ 41 ].…”

“…The formula used was that by Humphry et al [ 40 ]. The assumptions that were made were: number of herds >10,000 in each zone; confidence level = 95%; accepted margin of error = 5%; expected proportion of positive herds in the population = 70% (expert opinion, confirmed now by Ahmed et al [ 41 ]; intra-class correlation coefficient (measure of variation between clusters) = 0.1 [ 42 ]; design effect = 2 [ 43 ]; test specificity = 99% [ 23 ]; test sensitivity = 100% [ 23 ]. The calculated sample size was 323 x design effect (2) = 646 herds countrywide.…”