tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Prev Vet Med. 2018 Aug 1;156:22-27. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.05.003. Epub 2018 May 2.
[h=1]Live bird markets in Bangladesh as a potentially important source for Avian Influenza Virus transmission.[/h] Hassan MM[SUP]1[/SUP], Hoque MA[SUP]2[/SUP], Ujvari B[SUP]3[/SUP], Klaassen M[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Live bird markets (LBM) are important for trading poultry in many developing countries where they are being considered hotspots of Avian Influenza Virus (AIV) prevalence and contamination. An active surveillance for Avian Influenza Virus (AIV) was conducted on four species of LBM birds (chickens, ducks, quails and pigeons) from 10 of the largest LBM in Chittagong, Bangladesh, and two species of peri-domestic wild birds (house crow and Asian pied starling) in their direct vicinity from November 2012 until September 2016. Our aim was to identify the scale and annual pattern of AIV circulation in both the LBM birds and the two per-domestic wild bird species living in close proximity of the LBM. In the latter two species, the annual pattern in AIV antibody prevalence was additionally investigated. A total of 4770 LBM birds and 1119 peri-domestic wild birds were sampled. We used rt-PCR for detection of the AIV M-gene and AIV subtypes H5, H7 and H9 from swab samples. We used c-ELISA for AIV antibody detection from serum samples of peri-domestic wild birds. Average AIV prevalence among the four LBM species varied between 16 and 28%, whereas no AIV was detected in peri-domestic wild birds by rt-PCR. In all LBM species we found significantly higher AIV prevalence in winter compared to summer. A similar pattern was found in AIV antibody prevalence in peri-domestic wild birds feeding in the direct vicinity of LBM. For the subtypes of AIV investigated, we found a significantly higher proportion of AIV H5 in LBM chickens and H9 in LBM ducks. No H7 was detected in any of the investigated samples. We conclude that AIV and notably AIV H5 and H9 were circulating in the investigated LBM of Bangladesh with clear seasonality that matched the prevalence of AIV antibodies of peri-domestic wild birds. These patterns show great resemblance to the annual outbreak patterns in Bangladeshi poultry industry. Our data suggest considerable exchange of AIV within and among the four LBM bird species and peri-domestic wild birds, which likely contributes to the maintenance of the AIV problems in Bangladesh. Increasing biosecurity and notably reducing the direct and indirect mixing of various domestic bird species and peri-domestic wild birds and developing all-in-all-out selling systems with regular use of disinfectant are likely to reduce the risk of transmission and spread of AIV, including HPAI.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] AIV antibodies; Avian Influenza Virus; H5, H7 and H9 subtype; Live bird markets; Peri-domestic wild birds; Poultry; Zoonosis
PMID: 29891142 DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.05.003
[h=1]Live bird markets in Bangladesh as a potentially important source for Avian Influenza Virus transmission.[/h] Hassan MM[SUP]1[/SUP], Hoque MA[SUP]2[/SUP], Ujvari B[SUP]3[/SUP], Klaassen M[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Live bird markets (LBM) are important for trading poultry in many developing countries where they are being considered hotspots of Avian Influenza Virus (AIV) prevalence and contamination. An active surveillance for Avian Influenza Virus (AIV) was conducted on four species of LBM birds (chickens, ducks, quails and pigeons) from 10 of the largest LBM in Chittagong, Bangladesh, and two species of peri-domestic wild birds (house crow and Asian pied starling) in their direct vicinity from November 2012 until September 2016. Our aim was to identify the scale and annual pattern of AIV circulation in both the LBM birds and the two per-domestic wild bird species living in close proximity of the LBM. In the latter two species, the annual pattern in AIV antibody prevalence was additionally investigated. A total of 4770 LBM birds and 1119 peri-domestic wild birds were sampled. We used rt-PCR for detection of the AIV M-gene and AIV subtypes H5, H7 and H9 from swab samples. We used c-ELISA for AIV antibody detection from serum samples of peri-domestic wild birds. Average AIV prevalence among the four LBM species varied between 16 and 28%, whereas no AIV was detected in peri-domestic wild birds by rt-PCR. In all LBM species we found significantly higher AIV prevalence in winter compared to summer. A similar pattern was found in AIV antibody prevalence in peri-domestic wild birds feeding in the direct vicinity of LBM. For the subtypes of AIV investigated, we found a significantly higher proportion of AIV H5 in LBM chickens and H9 in LBM ducks. No H7 was detected in any of the investigated samples. We conclude that AIV and notably AIV H5 and H9 were circulating in the investigated LBM of Bangladesh with clear seasonality that matched the prevalence of AIV antibodies of peri-domestic wild birds. These patterns show great resemblance to the annual outbreak patterns in Bangladeshi poultry industry. Our data suggest considerable exchange of AIV within and among the four LBM bird species and peri-domestic wild birds, which likely contributes to the maintenance of the AIV problems in Bangladesh. Increasing biosecurity and notably reducing the direct and indirect mixing of various domestic bird species and peri-domestic wild birds and developing all-in-all-out selling systems with regular use of disinfectant are likely to reduce the risk of transmission and spread of AIV, including HPAI.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] AIV antibodies; Avian Influenza Virus; H5, H7 and H9 subtype; Live bird markets; Peri-domestic wild birds; Poultry; Zoonosis
PMID: 29891142 DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.05.003