::Introducing the ANIMO Concept::

Transcription

1 ::Introducing the ANIMO Concept:: When FootandMouth Disease goes wild, it forces a rethink and demands new approaches Keith Sumption (EuFMD) Sergei Khomenko, Sinan Aktas, Daniel Beltran (FAO), Tsviatko Alexandrov (BFSA), Naci Bulut (SAP, Ankara) EC Wildlife Conference 5 th May 2015

2 FootandMouth Disease (FMD) and wildlife FMDV extremely infectious and rightly feared EU is recognised as free also the European part of Turkey (Thrace) Even a single small outbreak in Europe is extremely damaging (100 m +, to countries if involved in extensive trade).

3 FootandMouth Disease (FMD) and wildlife Short lived period of infectivity (hit and run agent) : (NB carcasses may aid persistence)) Domestic and wild pigs easily infected by oral route and shed very large quantities of virus WIDE Range of wildlife species can be infected (ruminants mainly by aerosols) European wildlife species susceptible: wild boar, all deer species, chamois, mouflon, ibex, (hedgehogs) Natural reservoir in African buffalo (long term carriers), probably original host before adaptation in evolution to cattle/other species Wildlife might acquire from domestic animals /carcasses of dead wildlife (gazellewild boar cycle Israel)

4 Experimental infection of wild boar incubation period 4 days; most severe and evident lesions 7th Day PI; Viraemia: 1 DPI through at least 9 DPI; NSP antibodies detected 78 DPI; Virus RNA in saliva normally found up to 14 DPI and up to DPI 24 DPI (intermittently). Later and less severe signs than domesticated pigs CREDITS: A. Breithaupt, K. Depner, B. Haas, M. Beer (FLI Federal Research Institute for Animal Health Institute of Diagnostic Virology)

5 + = 1*1 km resolution density data product If wild boar important as natural long term reservoir might expect intra and interregional spread of FMDV strains through wildlife No evidence Khomenko, Robinson, Gilbert (in prep.)

6 Historical range of Sus scrofa FMD in wild boar: Caucasus Kazakhstan 3. Kyrgyzstan ? Israel ? Marek & Hutÿra, 1931; Sludskiy, 1956; Danilkin, Europe 1920s? 2011

7 FootandMouth Disease and European wildlife Until 2011 No evidence of wildlife involvement in the recent major epidemics in Europe 1920s2007 It was assumed wildlife will have limited role in domestic FMD outbreaks (spillovers of limited consequence) SHOCK!!!! FMD in Bulgaria 2011 Detected first in hunted wild boar lab staff familiar with FMD Lesions along coronary band FMDV detected and reported

8 South East Bulgaria 2011 bovines 194 Kosti the village of the bones. Index Case sheep 117 goats 149 pigs 72 30th Dec 2010: wild boar shot nr Kosti with lesions 9h January 7th April: 11 outbreaks in domestic animals Two main foci separated in time and space

9 FAOEU FMD /EC/OIE Tripartitt Group Meeting,Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 25 March,2011

10 FAOEU FMD /EC/OIE Tripartite Group Meeting, Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 25 March,2011

11 Bulgarian FMD epidemic: many missing links between the waves of domestic animal cases Secon Phase/wave March April Goliamo Bukovo Black Sea Fakia Kirovo Granichar Kosti Wild boar First phase/wave January/February Rezovo Turkey

12 FMD virus genome sequencing: evidence for undetected transmissions did these occur in wild life? Credit: Begoña ValdazoGonzalez, Nick J. Knowles, Donald P. King 26/07/ nt changes TUR/926/2010 (Bursa) 30/12/2010 BUL/1/2010 Wild boar 31 nt changes 8 nt changes 13 nt changes 14 nt changes 4 nt changes 02/ LPN1 Kosti 6 nt changes 28/03/2011 BUL/26/11 Granichar BUL/30/11 Fakia 01/04/ / LPN3 Rezovo BUL/11/11 Kirovo 19/03/ nt changes 28/03/2011 BUL/20/11 Golyamo Bukovo Putative common ancestor of Bulgarian wild board and first phase of the outbreaks Putative common ancestor of the second phase of the Bulgarian outbreaks

13 FMD antibody +ve Wild Boar in Thrace

14 Problems the FMD epidemic in Thrace Entry of infection to free region unable to prove if started in wild animals or domestic Duration of epidemic in domestic stock: 4 months Total period to regain freedom : 17 months (UK 2001, 11 months) Extremely difficult to prove freedom when wildlife have been shown to be involved Issues between neighbouring countries re: wildlife fear of being infection being driven across borders EFSA, 2012; Alexandrov et al (in prep.), Dhollander et al (in prep.)

15 Modelling of the Thrace epidemic (EFSA Opinion 2012, Lange 2012) : suggested wildlife alone in this area will not maintain infection but timescales are NOT comforting (duration ~14 years, 80 km radius). Note: WB density 2.2/km Every day lost to FMD costs in lost trade. Duration: B Boar, D deer. B+D = mixed species model Distance of spread from origin

16 Conclusions the FMD epidemic in Thrace Very well analysed and reported in the EFSA Opinion (10) 4, : 2635, 2012 Epidemiologically: Fade out in wildlife within months Transmission between livestock and wildlife was both ways (facilitated by humans?); Disease event in wildlife developed in winter and died away end of spring NOT highest density wildlife and domestic interactions in Europe longer persistence elsewhere??? On surveillance Hunting or trapping wild boar problematic, severe limitations Antibodies in wildlife do not indicate WHEN infection occurred Far more intensive sampling of wildlife (for active infection) needed than possible Early detection (~1 month after introduction) needs 59 shot per week throughout year)* Tragetted, risk based surveillace needed but how?

17 Research supported by DGSANTE through EuFMD, How frequent are FMD spillovers to wild boar? Studies in Turkey (Anatolia, ) 2. Tracking wild boar movements tools for potential in epidemic situations 3. Development of noninvasive approaches to survey wildlife without capture/killing (201215)

18 Surveillance in wild boar for FMD ANATOLIA (TR) Dec 2011 Feb 2012 N=252 THRACE (BG+TR) Jan 2011 Jan 2012 N=1004

19 Seropositivity to FMDV Thrace (epidemic O) versus Anatolia (endemic O, A, Asia) AGE GROUP THRACE ANATOLIA n NSP+ (95 % CI), % n NSP+ (95 % CI), % P ADULT ( ) ( ) <0.05 JUVENILE ( ) ( ) ns ALL (6.29.6) ( ) <0.05 NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SEXES FOUND, ONLY BETWEEN AGES

20 Implications for disease surveillance and control 1. FMD spillover to wild boar is a frequent event 2. Infection in WB correlates with disease occurrence in livestock, particularly in SR. 3. Spillovers may develop into localised epidemics (36 months) affecting up to 20 % of the population and virus spread for to 1520 km 4. Winter is most risky period for horizontal transmission of FMD in wild boar population; 5. Different serotypes may perform differently in wild boar.

21 Telemetry project BULGARIA Strandzha 4 (2) Tutrakan 15 (7) 20 GPS/GSM Tellus collars (1 year 24 fixes a day); 19 animals collared, 16 collars used (6 reused), 4 were destroyed / failed, 1 lost; Sex, age, and seasonal variation in home ranges; Individual movements and group interactions in a small population (70 animals) to simulate disease spread.

22

23 Tracking: year round study. Animals send multiple SMS per day on their locations Valuable insights on potential spillovers but very hard to use in a crisis 4year male, 1 Jan 22 March 894 positions a total of 338 km Crossed Danube into Romania one occasion

24 Development of natural sampling methods ( noninvasive ) Chichikin et al, 2012 Saliva contains pathogens of interest Uses baits attractive to animals to chew/suck Aims at early detection of pathogen, but might work for antibody No killing of animals involved (repeated sampling, cost effectiveness, logistical simplicity) Proof of concept studies 2012

25 EXPERIMENT WITH A TAME WILD BOAR EASY TO INCORPORATE ANY SWABS INTO SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL FEEDERS

26 Noninvasive sampling for FMD method optimisation Optimised tests or virus (PCR) Comparison of bait (pswab) and QTips in maize cobs Comparable sensitivities Detection of FMDV days 1 to 9 (experimental infection pigs) Promising stability (for field use) Studies commissioned by EuFMD at FLI, Insel Riems, 2014:

27 Putting it together : promising options for surveillance and control of FMD epidemics in wildlife 1. Use risk based, non invasive methods for DETECTING spread into wildlife Risk based, where spill over or incursion expected May require feeding wild boar prelude to NI sampling in risk locations

28 2. Manage: natural territoriality and anticipated local movements. Avoid dispersion peace time or crisis. Nighttime Escaping hunting Daytime Future farrowing area 1 hour resolution movements of a tracked wild boar sow in Bulgaria From Telemetry studies in BG: WB normally small home ranges 530 km 2 (more during hunting) Very boring schedules Disrupted by only food availability or disturbance Individuals may switch home ranges repeatedly

29 Use local expertise on expected local movements Movements of males and rut January Young male dispersal Farrowing Prehunting stock Movements to crops & foodrich areas June Reunification of female groups

30 3. Put this into Contingency Plans use of feeding sites and noninvasive measures if infection detected Consider: Integrated approach Use of feeding programmes to encourage bait use and avoid dispersion Use of feeding sites to accelerate natural process of infection and recovery (natural immunity, shorter duration epidemic) Risks Advantages active use of options for noninvasive surveillance to monitor impact of controls

31 ANIMO Active, NonInvasive Management of Outbreaks Suite of approaches including NI sampling and Accelerated Natural Immunity (ANI) Detect Manage Infection in one hunting area but not another: example of natural local burn out controlling spread? Prove free Natural spread? Antibody positive animals in more than one area

32 1. Low density feeding is used throughout the risk period; 2. FMDV detected through NI surveillance; 3. Hunting suspended & over feeding applied; 4. Increase transmission rate and fragment population; 5. Disease fades out and natural herd immunity will prevent further local spread( +useful immunity vs reintroduction from domestic cycle); 6. Use NI sampling for evidence for local virus extinction 7. Repeat cycle as needed ANIMO FUTURE FMD management scenario State border High risk of FMD introduction (e.g. Thrace, Caucasus) Feeding stations: a)early NI detection b)population management

33 The way ahead: an integrated approach? Contingency planning to protect wildlife populations and minimise impact if overspill occurs Operationalise plans to 1. Prevent reduce spillovers from domestic animal infections Risks practises identified, targetted measures/communication 2. Manage epidemics in wildlife more actively : Part of FMD contingency planning (not only domestic!) ANIMO approach including NI sampling of wildlife and ANI (accelerated natural immunity) 3. Recover : Use NI (noninvasive) sampling to prove freedom ANIMO approaches need optimisation and testing in the field options in Turkey, Caucasus and parts of mideast for FMD

34 Thank you Acknowledgement: the support that was provided rapidly from DGSANTE through the EuFMD Research Fund to enable these studies. The Government of Turkey for positive, continuous support to field work. Don t Forget! In Europe: million FMD susceptible ungulates after reproduction