Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Estimating the Postmortem Interval of Wild Boar Carcasses
Previous Article in Journal
A Case of Mortality Caused by Aeromonas hydrophila in Wild-Caught Red-Eyed Crocodile Skinks (Tribolonotus gracilis)
Previous Article in Special Issue
R0 Estimation for the African Swine Fever Epidemics in Wild Boar of Czech Republic and Belgium
Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of the Efficiency of Active and Passive Surveillance in the Detection of African Swine Fever in Wild Boar

1
Wildlife Department, Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale, 40064 Ozzano Emilia (BO), Italy
2
Istituto Zooprofilattico della Lombardia ed Emilia-Romagna, 25124 Brescia, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vet. Sci. 2020, 7(1), 5; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci7010005
Received: 1 December 2019 / Revised: 26 December 2019 / Accepted: 29 December 2019 / Published: 30 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue African Swine Fever (ASF))
African swine fever (ASF) is one of the most severe diseases of pigs and has a drastic impact on pig industry. Wild boar populations play the role of ASF genotype II virus epidemiological reservoir. Disease surveillance in wild boar is carried out either by testing all the wild boar found sick or dead for virus detection (passive surveillance) or by testing for virus (and antibodies) all hunted wild boar (active surveillance). When virus prevalence and wild boar density are low as it happens close to eradication, the question on which kind of surveillance is more efficient in detecting the virus is still open. We built a simulation model to mimic the evolution of the host-parasite interaction in the European wild boar and to assess the efficiency of different surveillance strategies. We constructed a deterministic SIR model, which estimated the probability to detect the virus during the 8 years following its introduction, using both passive and active surveillance. Overall, passive surveillance provided a much larger number of ASF detections than active surveillance during the first year. During subsequent years, both active and passive surveillance exhibited a decrease in their probability to detect ASF. Such decrease, though, was more pronounced for passive surveillance. Under the assumption of 50% of carcasses detection, active surveillance became the best detection method when the endemic disease prevalence was lower than 1.5%, when hunting rate was >60% and when population density was lower than 0.1 individuals/km2. In such a situation, though, the absolute probability to detect the disease was very low with both methods, and finding almost every carcass is the only way to ensure virus detection. The sensitivity analysis shows that carcass search effort is the sole parameter that increases proportionally the chance of ASF virus detection. Therefore, an effort should be made to promote active search of dead wild boar also in endemic areas, since reporting wild boar carcasses is crucial to understand the epidemiological situation in any of the different phases of ASF infection at any wild boar density. View Full-Text
Keywords: African swine fever; wild boar; surveillance; early detection; endemic; SIR model African swine fever; wild boar; surveillance; early detection; endemic; SIR model
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Gervasi, V.; Marcon, A.; Bellini, S.; Guberti, V. Evaluation of the Efficiency of Active and Passive Surveillance in the Detection of African Swine Fever in Wild Boar. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 5.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop