Studies on the 1967–68 foot and mouth disease epidemic: incubation period and herd serial interval

Hugh‐Jones, Martin; Tinline, Rowland R.

doi:10.1017/s0022172400024566

Cited by 20 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These factors will have compromised the validity of the estimates of the age of the lesions, and the age of the disease in sheep was more likely to have been incorrectly estimated than its age in cattle. Hugh‐Jones and Tinline (1976) had similar concerns with their estimates of the incubation period and herd serial interval in the 1967/68 epidemic, and also found differences in the expression of the disease between sheep and cattle. In the 2001 epidemic, early lesions in cattle were easier to recognise and describe, and older lesions in sheep were more difficult.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot‐and‐mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain

Gibbens¹,

Wilesmith

2002

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimates of the likely dates of infection of the early cases of the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) epidemic indicate that at least 57 premises in 16 counties in Great Britain were infected before the first case was disclosed. Nationwide animal movement controls were imposed within three days of the first case being confirmed on February 20, when FMD was only known to be in two counties, and these controls limited its geographical spread. After the first few cases were confirmed, new cases were rapidly discovered, and the epidemic curve for the daily number of confirmed cases peaked five weeks later, 11 days later than the peak of the curve based on the estimated dates of infection. In the peak week, both curves showed an average daily number of 43 new cases. The estimated dates of infection are believed to be relatively unbiased for the early cases, for which they were derived from a known contact with infection. However, for the later cases they were estimated mainly from the age of the clinical signs of the disease, and were biased by species and other factors, a bias which would probably have made the estimated dates later than was in fact the case.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot‐and‐mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain

Gibbens¹,

Wilesmith

2002

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The light blue shading represents incubation periods for each holding, estimated to begin no more than 14 days prior to appearance of lesions [23] . The dark blue shading is the infection date based on the most likely incubation time for this strain of 2–5 days [24] . Each UK 2007 outbreak virus haplotype is plotted according to the time the sample was taken from the affected animal (x axis).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transmission Pathways of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus in the United Kingdom in 2007

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) virus causes an acute vesicular disease of domesticated and wild ruminants and pigs. Identifying sources of FMD outbreaks is often confounded by incomplete epidemiological evidence and the numerous routes by which virus can spread (movements of infected animals or their products, contaminated persons, objects, and aerosols). Here, we show that the outbreaks of FMD in the United Kingdom in August 2007 were caused by a derivative of FMDV O1 BFS 1860, a virus strain handled at two FMD laboratories located on a single site at Pirbright in Surrey. Genetic analysis of complete viral genomes generated in real-time reveals a probable chain of transmission events, predicting undisclosed infected premises, and connecting the second cluster of outbreaks in September to those in August. Complete genome sequence analysis of FMD viruses conducted in real-time have identified the initial and intermediate sources of these outbreaks and demonstrate the value of such techniques in providing information useful to contemporary disease control programmes.

show abstract

“…Since that time, Great Britain has been free of FMD , except for a minor outbreak in which a single farm was infected in 1981 (Donaldson and others 1982). There have been relatively few very large epidemics of FMD in the world in recent years and publications from those that have occurred tend to address specific aspects such as reporting of disease, incubation periods or control measures and costs (Hugh‐Jones 1976, Hugh‐Jones and Tinline 1976, Yang and others 1999). This paper presents a detailed overview of the epidemiological features of the first five months of a major epidemic which, although largely controlled in most areas of Great Britain, was still ongoing at the time of writing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Descriptive epidemiology of the 2001 foot‐and‐mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain: the first five months

Gibbens¹,

Wilesmith

Sharpe³

et al. 2001

Veterinary Record

318

267

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In February 2001, foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) was confirmed in Great Britain. A major epidemic developed, which peaked around 50 cases a day in late March, declining to under 10 a day by May. By mid-July, 1849 cases had been detected. The main control measures employed were livestock movement restrictions and the rapid slaughter of infected and exposed livestock. The first detected case was in south-east England; infection was traced to a farm in north-east England to which all other cases were linked. The epidemic was large as a result of a combination of events, including a delay in the diagnosis of the index case, the movement of infected sheep to market before FMD was first diagnosed, and the time of year. Virus was introduced at a time when there were many sheep movements around the country and weather conditions supported survival of the virus. The consequence was multiple, effectively primary, introductions of FMD virus into major sheep-keeping areas. Subsequent local spread from these introductions accounted for the majority of cases. The largest local epidemics were in areas with dense sheep populations and livestock dealers who were active during the key period. Most affected farms kept both sheep and cattle. At the time of writing the epidemic was still ongoing; however, this paper provides a basis for scientific discussion of the first five months.

show abstract

Studies on the 1967–68 foot and mouth disease epidemic: incubation period and herd serial interval

Cited by 20 publications

References 7 publications

Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot‐and‐mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain

Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot‐and‐mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain

Transmission Pathways of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus in the United Kingdom in 2007

Descriptive epidemiology of the 2001 foot‐and‐mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain: the first five months

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About