You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Animals
  • Review
  • Open Access

31 August 2022

European Regulations on Camel Germplasm Movement within the European Union: A Current Framework Based on Safety

,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Veterinary Practitioner, Via Caserta Crocevia, 89124 Reggio Calabria, Italy
2
Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Messina, 98168 Messina, Italy
3
Department of Livestock and Poultry Production, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Multan 6000, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Trends in Camel Health and Production

Simple Summary

Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/686 (hereafter Reg. 686) regulates the traceability and animal health for the movement of germinal material of camels within the EU. Given that the camel breeding industry is in a strong phase of growth, an amount of germinal material of terrestrial animals—including those belonging to the Camelidae family—is moved between the member states. The authors performed an analysis of Reg. 686 addressing veterinarians and breeders who want to sell high-quality germinal material or genetically improve their herds.

Abstract

With the aim of developing livestock breeding, the Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/686 (hereafter referred to as Reg. 686) has taken steps to define traceability and animal health for the movement of germ material within the European Union (EU), including that of camelid species. Despite the economic importance of the camel market and the efforts of the EU to regulate their movements, there are considerable difficulties in the collection of semen and its freezing, limiting the use of artificial insemination in this species. If, on the one hand, there is little diffusion of the camel breeding and, consequently, limited diffusion of animals and germplasm, there will probably be a significant increase over the years. To avoid the spread of emerging diseases—or even those no longer present in Europe—the entry of genetic material from non-EU countries must be strictly monitored. Camels are rarely clinically compliant, but can transfer even fatal diseases to domestic ungulate farms in the EU. Based on these considerations, we conducted a narrative review of the European regulations on this issue, focusing on aspects related to their application in camels.

1. Introduction

Camel breeding has always played an important role in world agriculture, and is now also becoming a source of income for breeders in the European Union (EU). It is necessary to encourage the production of animals with appropriate genetic characteristics by applying defined criteria that meet good performance while protecting animal health requirements. Disparities in these standards may create technical barriers to trade in breeding animals and their germinal products. For this reason, the European legislator issuing delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/686 (hereafter referred to as Reg. 686) has established rules regarding the approval of germinal products (e.g., semen, oocytes, and embryos)—and the traceability of these products in the EU—from certain terrestrial animals, including camelid species. Relating to the other aspects concerning entry of camelid animals into the EU and their movements between member states, Commission Regulations (EU) 2021/403 and 2021/404 should be applied.
Animal genetic resources are an essential basis for the sustainable development of the livestock sector, and offer the opportunity for animals to adapt to changing production conditions and markets.
The reproductive efficiency of camels is considered poor, resulting in low production and profitability. The main causes of their reproductive inefficiency include the late onset of puberty, seasonality, a long gestation period, high neonatal mortality, and a long interval between births. Moreover, the fact that diagnostic procedures and investigations related to infertility are not routinely implemented according to standard procedures might also be a contributing factor. Assisted reproductive techniques and related biotechnology may improve genetics, increasing birth rates and, thus, the production of this species [1].
Although the use of AI for camels has been described since the 1960s [2], it has been only recently employed for potential use on a large scale to improve genetic traits such as milk production, meat, wool, and the ability to compete in the Middle East [2,3]. However, some drawbacks have been pointed out regarding AI in camels—the reproductive behavior of the male, the type and quantity of ejaculate, the lack of knowledge of the optimal insemination time and semen dosage per insemination session, and the lack of a standard storage technique may be limiting factors [3,4]. Furthermore, the poor welfare and inappropriate management of these animals may be a critical point for the quality of semen. In fact, Fatnassi et al. (2021) [5] highlighted that male camels utilized for AI should be reared taking into consideration strategies to improve their housing conditions and safeguard their welfare, given that these factors are also linked with production and reproduction. According to some authors [6,7,8], it may be useful to increase the space allowance, provide an appropriate diet, and facilitate greater social contact with conspecifics of the same or different gender.
Despite significant progress having been made regarding AI in camels, such assisted reproductive technology is probably still far from giving the results that might be obtained with the transfer of chilled or frozen–thawed embryos, when also considering the impact of such technology in speeding up the genetic improvement [9].
The camel breeding industry is set to grow significantly [10]. Globally, although it is not possible to accurately determine the current official number of camelids [10], camels are valorized on the international market for milk and meat production and/or for export of live animals [10].
As an increasing amount of germinal material of terrestrial animals is moved between the EU member states (MSs) [11], including animals of the Camelidae family, we found it interesting to carry out an analysis of the Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/686 (hereafter referred to as Reg. 686) [12] with respect to traceability and animal health for the movement of germinal material of camels within the EU.

3. Discussion

European legislation on animal breeding—including that of camels—has also contributed to the conservation of animal genetic resources, the protection of genetic biodiversity, and the production of typical regional high-quality products based on the specific hereditary characteristics of local domestic animal breeds. Indeed, it has promoted sound breeding programs for the improvement of breeds, their preservation, and the conservation of genetic diversity.
These established procedural rules also seek to contain the circulation of infectious animal diseases—both contagious and non-contagious—that can spread between the MSs. Germinal material—especially semen—is most incriminated as a vector for the spread of infectious animal diseases, due to its inherent nature.
The aim of Reg. 686 is to limit the risk of transmission of diseases through AI and other assisted reproductive technologies. Semen must be collected and processed in approved and controlled semen collection centers, obtained from animals whose health status guarantees that there is no risk of spreading diseases, and collected, processed, stored, and transported according to rules that preserve their health status.
Since camels are present in Europe in negligible numbers—certainly not comparable to those of other farm animals—they are not subject to the same conditions, because they are less at risk of spreading communicable diseases.
However, since they are susceptible to various infections with contagious diseases belonging to category A (i.e., those that do not normally occur in the EU, and which require immediate eradication measures as soon as they are detected), common to several species of domestic ungulates—such as foot-and-mouth disease or rinderpest—it is considered that they should be better monitored in this respect.
It is considered important to emphasize that establishments where germinal material is processed together with that of other breeding species could also be regulated, in order to make a possible development of the camelid breeding sector and the consequent exchange of germinal material in the EU more effective, with a view to the trend towards more sustainable and diversified animal production—especially in those areas of the EU where semi-arid pasture areas exist or may develop in the future.
An analysis of the impacts on animal welfare should also be carried out alongside biotechnological research.

4. Conclusions

Reg. 686 is the first European law to harmonize the rules on the movement of camel germplasm within the EU. Although this regulation is complex, it provides important technical indications and the minimal contents of health certification. More traceability is also needed for germplasm movements, where veterinary services exercise strict controls. The importance of this legislation and its associated regulations is related to the control of the germinal products’ movements and, of course, to the reduction in infectious diseases to improve animal welfare and increase production. Therefore, in conclusion, the cornerstone of this regulatory framework is based on “safe”.

Author Contributions

A.P.: conceptualization and supervision. M.P.: methodology. G.M. and M.P.: validation. S.M.: investigation. V.B.: data curation. E.Z. and S.M.: writing—original draft preparation. G.M., M.P., A.F. and A.P.: writing—review and editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by a grant from a FEASR-PSR Sicily 2014–2020, Misura 10, Sottomisura 10.2 b, CUP G49J 21003940009.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Nagy, P.; Skidmore, J.; Juhasz, J. Use of assisted reproduction for the improvement of milk production in dairy camels (Camelus dromedarius). Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2013, 136, 205–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Skidmore, J.; Morton, K.; Billah, M. Artificial insemination in dromedary camels. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2013, 136, 178–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Gherissi, D.; Lamraoui, R. Reproduction Management and Artificial Insemination in Dromedary Camel. In Sustainable Agriculture Reviews; Yata, V.K., Mohanty, A.K., Lichtfouse, E., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 54, pp. 55–106. [Google Scholar]
  4. Monaco, D.; Lacalandra, G. Considerations for the development of a dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) semen collection centre. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2019, 212, 106239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Fatnassi, M.; Padalino, B.; Monaco, D.; Khorchani, T.; Lacalandra, G.M.; Hammadi, M. Effects of two different management systems on hormonal, behavioral, and semen quality in male dromedary camels. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2021, 53, 275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hansen, L.T.; Berthelsen, H. The effect of environmental enrichment on the behavior of caged rabbits (Oryctaloguscuniculus). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2000, 68, 163–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Thorne, J.B.; Goodwin, D.; Kennedy, M.J.; Davidson, H.P.B.; Harris, P. Foraging enrichment for individually housed horses: Practicality and effects on behavior. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 94, 149–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Søndergaard, E.; Jensen, M.B.; Nicol, C. Motivation for social contact in horses measured by operant conditioning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 132, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Karen, A.; Abd-Elfattah, A.; Nasef, M.; Rahman, R.U.; Ihsan, M.B.; Muthukumaran, S. Factors affecting outcomes of embryo transfer in dromedary camels: A retrospective study. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2021, 57, 402–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Faye, B. How many large camelids in the world? A synthetic analysis of the world camel demographic changes. Pastoralism 2020, 10, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pugliese, M.; Monti, S.; Biondi, V.; Marino, G.; Passantino, A. Flashing Lights, Dark Shadows, and Future Prospects of the Current European Legislation for a Better Traceability and Animal Health Requirements for Movements of Small Animal Germinal Products. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 852894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/686 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council as Regards the Approval of Germinal Product Establishments and the Traceability and Animal Health Requirements for Movements within the Union of Germinal Products of Certain Kept Terrestrial Animals. OJ of 3.6.2020, 174, 1–63.
  13. Council Directive 88/407/EEC of 14 June 1988 Laying Down the Animal Health Requirements Applicable to Intra- Community Trade in and Imports of Deep-Frozen Semen of Domestic Animals of the Bovine Species. OJ of 22/07/1988, 194, 10–23.
  14. Council Directive 89/556/EEC of 25 September 1989 on Animal Health Conditions Governing Intra-Community Trade in and Importation from Third Countries of Embryos of Domestic Animals of the Bovine Species. OJ of 19/10/1989, 302, 1–11.
  15. Council Directive 90/429/EEC of 26 June 1990 Laying Down the Animal Health Requirements Applicable to intra- Community Trade in and Imports of Semen of Domestic Animals of the Porcine Species. OJ of 18/08/1990, 224, 62–72.
  16. Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 Laying Down Animal Health Requirements Governing Trade in and Imports into the Community of Animals, Semen, Ova and Embryos not Subject to Animal Health Requirements Laid Down in Specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC. OJ of 14/09/1992, 268, 54–72.
  17. Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on Transmissible Animal Diseases and Amending and Repealing Certain Acts in the Area of Animal Health (‘Animal Health Law’). OJ of 31.3.2016, 84, 1–208.
  18. OIE; World Organization For Animal Health. Terrestrial Animal Health Code; OIE: Paris, France, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  19. Mansour, N.; El-Ramah, A.; Silveira, M.C.; Bernardes, L.A. An easy, safe, and practical method for semen collection in dromedary camels. Emir. J. Food Agric. 2022, 34, 339–345. [Google Scholar]
  20. Skidmore, J.A. The use of some assisted reproductive technologies in old world camelids. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2019, 207, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Al-Bulushi, S.; Manjunatha, B.M.; Bathgate, R.; Rickard, J.P.; de Graaf, S.P. Artificial insemination with fresh, liquid stored and frozen thawed semen in dromedary camels. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0224992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1629 of 25 July 2018 amending the list of diseases set out in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (‘Animal Health Law’). OJ of 31.10.2018, L 272, 11–15.
  23. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1882 of 3 December 2018, on the application of certain disease prevention and control rules to categories of listed diseases and establishing a list of species and groups of species posing a considerable risk for the spread of those listed diseases. OJ of 4.12.2018, L 308, 21–29.
  24. Wernery, U.; Kinne, J. Tuberculosis in camelids: A review. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2012, 31, 899–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Khalafalla, A.I.; Hussein, M.F. Infectious Diseases of Dromedary Camels; Springer Nature: Berlin, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  26. Ahmad, I.; Kudi, C.A.; Babashani, M.; Chafe, U.M.; Yakubu, Y.; Shittu, A. Tuberculosis in dromedary camels slaughtered in Nigeria: A documentation of lesions at postmortem. Trop Anim. Health Prod. 2019, 51, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/688 of 17 December 2019 Supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as Regards Animal Health Requirements for Movements within the Union of Terrestrial Animals and Hatching Eggs. OJ of 3.6.2020, 174, 140–210.
  28. Wegi, F.G.; Amenu, K.; Chalchisa, A.; Mamo, G. Brucellosis in Camels and Humans: Seroprevalence and Associated Risk Factors in Amibara District of Afar Region, Ethiopia. Vet. Med. Int. 2021, 2021, 5482725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tibary, A.; Fite, C.; Anouassi, A.; Sghiri, A. Infectious causes of reproductive loss in camelids. Theriogenology 2006, 66, 633–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wernery, U. Camelid brucellosis: A review. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2014, 33, 839–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gwida, M.; El-Gohary, A.; Melzer, F.; Khan, I.; Rösler, U.; Neubauer, H. Brucellosis in camels. Res. Vet. Sci. 2012, 92, 351–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Intisar, K.; Ali, Y.; Khalafalla, A.; Mahasin, E.; Amin, A. Natural exposure of Dromedary camels in Sudan to infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus (bovine herpes virus-1). Acta Trop 2009, 111, 243–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Benaissa, M.H.; Youngs, C.R.; Mimoune, N.; Faye, B.; Mimouni, F.Z.; Kaidi, R. First serological evidence of BHV-1 virus in Algerian dromedary camels: Seroprevalence and associated risk factors. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2021, 76, 101638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mejri, S.; Dhaou, S.B.; Jemli, M.; Bréard, E.; Sailleau, C.; Sghaier, S.; Zouari, M.; Lorusso, A.; Savini, G.; Zientara, S.; et al. Epizootic haemorrhagic disease virus circulation in Tunisia. Vet. Ital. 2018, 54, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. MacLachlan, N.; Zientara, S.; Savini, G.; Daniels, P. Epizootic haemorrhagic disease. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2015, 34, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Maclachlan, N.; Mayo, C.; Daniels, P.; Savini, G.; Zientara, S.; Gibbs, E. Bluetongue. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2015, 34, 329–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Aregawi, W.G.; Agga, G.E.; Abdi, R.D.; Büscher, P. Systematic review and meta-analysis on the global distribution, host range, and prevalence of Trypanosoma evansi. Parasit. Vector 2019, 12, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Gutiérrez, C.; Tamarit, A.; González-Martín, M.; Tejedor-Junco, M.T. Control and eventual eradication of Trypanosoma evansi infection in dromedary camels after an episodic outbreak in mainland Spain: An example in a non-endemic area. Vet. Parasitol. 2014, 204, 153–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Desquesnes, M.; Holzmuller, P.; Lai, D.H.; Dargantes, A.; Lun, Z.R.; Jittaplapong, S. Trypanosoma evansi and surra: A review and perspectives on origin, history, distribution, taxonomy, morphology, hosts, and pathogenic effects. Biomed. Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 194176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Batten, C.; Harif, B.; Henstock, M.; Ghizlane, S.; Edwards, L.; Loutfi, C.; Oura, C.; El Harrak, M. Experimental infection of camels with bluetongue virus. Res. Vet. Sci. 2011, 90, 533–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2235 of 16 December 2020 Laying Down Rules for the Application of Regulations (EU) 2016/429 and (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council as Regards Model Animal Health Certificates, Official Certification Regarding Such Certificates and Repealing Regulation (EC) No 599/2004, Implementing Regulations (EU) No 636/2014 and (EU) 2019/628, Directive 98/68/EC and Decisions 2000/572/EC, 2003/779/EC and 2007/240/EC. OJ of 30.12.2020, L 442, 1–409.
  42. Al-Busadah, K.A.; El-Bahr, S.M.; Khalafalla, A.I. Serum biochemical profile and molecular detection of pathogens in semen of infertile male dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius). Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2017, 180, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.