Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The role of wildlife as a brucellosis reservoir for humans and domestic livestock remains to be properly established. The aim of this work was to determine the aetiology, apparent prevalence, spatial distribution and risk factors for...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: de la Fuente José, Prieto José M, Marín Clara M, Ruiz-Fons Francisco, Oleaga Álvaro, Acevedo Pelayo, Vicente Joaquín, Martínez David, Revilla Miguel, de Miguel María J, Arnal Maricruz, Boadella Mariana, Muñoz Pilar M, Barral Marta, Barberán Montserrat, de Luco Daniel, Blasco José M, Gortázar Christian
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-03-01
Series:BMC Infectious Diseases
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/10/46
id doaj-2cfb5adb84ab49bc96c348bc3e62bc18
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2cfb5adb84ab49bc96c348bc3e62bc182020-11-25T01:19:28ZengBMCBMC Infectious Diseases1471-23342010-03-011014610.1186/1471-2334-10-46Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulatesde la Fuente JoséPrieto José MMarín Clara MRuiz-Fons FranciscoOleaga ÁlvaroAcevedo PelayoVicente JoaquínMartínez DavidRevilla Miguelde Miguel María JArnal MaricruzBoadella MarianaMuñoz Pilar MBarral MartaBarberán Montserratde Luco DanielBlasco José MGortázar Christian<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The role of wildlife as a brucellosis reservoir for humans and domestic livestock remains to be properly established. The aim of this work was to determine the aetiology, apparent prevalence, spatial distribution and risk factors for brucellosis transmission in several Iberian wild ungulates.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A multi-species indirect immunosorbent assay (iELISA) using <it>Brucella </it>S-LPS antigen was developed. In several regions having brucellosis in livestock, individual serum samples were taken between 1999 and 2009 from 2,579 wild bovids, 6,448 wild cervids and4,454 Eurasian wild boar (<it>Sus scrofa</it>), and tested to assess brucellosis apparent prevalence. Strains isolated from wild boar were characterized to identify the presence of markers shared with the strains isolated from domestic pigs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean apparent prevalence below 0.5% was identified in chamois (<it>Rupicapra pyrenaica</it>), Iberian wild goat (<it>Capra pyrenaica</it>), and red deer (<it>Cervus elaphus</it>). Roe deer (<it>Capreolus capreolus</it>), fallow deer (<it>Dama dama</it>), mouflon (<it>Ovis aries</it>) and Barbary sheep (<it>Ammotragus lervia</it>) tested were seronegative. Only one red deer and one Iberian wild goat resulted positive in culture, isolating <it>B. abortus </it>biovar 1 and <it>B. melitensis </it>biovar 1, respectively. Apparent prevalence in wild boar ranged from 25% to 46% in the different regions studied, with the highest figures detected in South-Central Spain. The probability of wild boar being positive in the iELISA was also affected by age, age-by-sex interaction, sampling month, and the density of outdoor domestic pigs. A total of 104 bacterial isolates were obtained from wild boar, being all identified as <it>B. suis </it>biovar 2. DNA polymorphisms were similar to those found in domestic pigs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In conclusion, brucellosis in wild boar is widespread in the Iberian Peninsula, thus representing an important threat for domestic pigs. By contrast, wild ruminants were not identified as a significant brucellosis reservoir for livestock.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/10/46
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author de la Fuente José
Prieto José M
Marín Clara M
Ruiz-Fons Francisco
Oleaga Álvaro
Acevedo Pelayo
Vicente Joaquín
Martínez David
Revilla Miguel
de Miguel María J
Arnal Maricruz
Boadella Mariana
Muñoz Pilar M
Barral Marta
Barberán Montserrat
de Luco Daniel
Blasco José M
Gortázar Christian
spellingShingle de la Fuente José
Prieto José M
Marín Clara M
Ruiz-Fons Francisco
Oleaga Álvaro
Acevedo Pelayo
Vicente Joaquín
Martínez David
Revilla Miguel
de Miguel María J
Arnal Maricruz
Boadella Mariana
Muñoz Pilar M
Barral Marta
Barberán Montserrat
de Luco Daniel
Blasco José M
Gortázar Christian
Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
BMC Infectious Diseases
author_facet de la Fuente José
Prieto José M
Marín Clara M
Ruiz-Fons Francisco
Oleaga Álvaro
Acevedo Pelayo
Vicente Joaquín
Martínez David
Revilla Miguel
de Miguel María J
Arnal Maricruz
Boadella Mariana
Muñoz Pilar M
Barral Marta
Barberán Montserrat
de Luco Daniel
Blasco José M
Gortázar Christian
author_sort de la Fuente José
title Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
title_short Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
title_full Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
title_fullStr Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
title_full_unstemmed Spatial distribution and risk factors of Brucellosis in Iberian wild ungulates
title_sort spatial distribution and risk factors of brucellosis in iberian wild ungulates
publisher BMC
series BMC Infectious Diseases
issn 1471-2334
publishDate 2010-03-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The role of wildlife as a brucellosis reservoir for humans and domestic livestock remains to be properly established. The aim of this work was to determine the aetiology, apparent prevalence, spatial distribution and risk factors for brucellosis transmission in several Iberian wild ungulates.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A multi-species indirect immunosorbent assay (iELISA) using <it>Brucella </it>S-LPS antigen was developed. In several regions having brucellosis in livestock, individual serum samples were taken between 1999 and 2009 from 2,579 wild bovids, 6,448 wild cervids and4,454 Eurasian wild boar (<it>Sus scrofa</it>), and tested to assess brucellosis apparent prevalence. Strains isolated from wild boar were characterized to identify the presence of markers shared with the strains isolated from domestic pigs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean apparent prevalence below 0.5% was identified in chamois (<it>Rupicapra pyrenaica</it>), Iberian wild goat (<it>Capra pyrenaica</it>), and red deer (<it>Cervus elaphus</it>). Roe deer (<it>Capreolus capreolus</it>), fallow deer (<it>Dama dama</it>), mouflon (<it>Ovis aries</it>) and Barbary sheep (<it>Ammotragus lervia</it>) tested were seronegative. Only one red deer and one Iberian wild goat resulted positive in culture, isolating <it>B. abortus </it>biovar 1 and <it>B. melitensis </it>biovar 1, respectively. Apparent prevalence in wild boar ranged from 25% to 46% in the different regions studied, with the highest figures detected in South-Central Spain. The probability of wild boar being positive in the iELISA was also affected by age, age-by-sex interaction, sampling month, and the density of outdoor domestic pigs. A total of 104 bacterial isolates were obtained from wild boar, being all identified as <it>B. suis </it>biovar 2. DNA polymorphisms were similar to those found in domestic pigs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In conclusion, brucellosis in wild boar is widespread in the Iberian Peninsula, thus representing an important threat for domestic pigs. By contrast, wild ruminants were not identified as a significant brucellosis reservoir for livestock.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/10/46
work_keys_str_mv AT delafuentejose spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT prietojosem spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT marinclaram spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT ruizfonsfrancisco spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT oleagaalvaro spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT acevedopelayo spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT vicentejoaquin spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT martinezdavid spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT revillamiguel spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT demiguelmariaj spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT arnalmaricruz spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT boadellamariana spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT munozpilarm spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT barralmarta spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT barberanmontserrat spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT delucodaniel spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT blascojosem spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
AT gortazarchristian spatialdistributionandriskfactorsofbrucellosisiniberianwildungulates
_version_ 1725138098309824512