EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
Epidemiological analyses of Africanswine fever in the Baltic States and
Poland
Andrey Gogin, SNE, AHAW
33rd Meeting of theFocal Point Network
2
ASF SITUATION IN EASTERN EUROPE
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
3
1. Analyse the epidemiological data on ASF from affectedMember States
• Include an analysis of the temporal and spatial patterns ofASF in wild boar and domestic pigs.
• Include an analysis of the risk factors involved in theoccurrence, spread and persistence of the ASF virus
2. Review the management options for wild boar identified inthe EFSA Scientific Opinion of June 2015
TERMS OF REFERENCE
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
4
1. Extensive literature overview
2. Descriptive epidemiological
analysis
• Update of the ASF situation
• Temporal distribution
• Spatial distribution
1. Risk factor analysis
• Bayesian hierarchical model (BYM)
• Generalized additive model (GAM)
2. Review of the management options forwild boar (EpiModel)
STRUCTURE
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5068/pdf
5
The capacity and willingness ofhunters, the social context andregional diversity need to beintegrated into policy to manage wildboar populations
There is a need for a betterunderstanding of the wildlifepopulation dynamics and for goodbaseline data on wildlife populationtrends
1. EXTENSIVE LITERATURE REVIEW: CONCLUSIONS
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
6
Rapid detection and removalof contaminated carcasses isregarded as an importantcontrol measure against ASF inwild boar
Wild boar are unlikely to stoptheir current (mostly northward)expansion and populationgrowth unless changes in gamemanagement take place
1. EXTENSIVE LITERATURE REVIEW
Source FAO/ASFORCE, MAY 2015
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
7
Spatio-temporal data of ASF detections
• ADNS
• Laboratory tests
Sample based
Positive and negative
Collected via DCF directly from LIMSs
Population distribution data (contain temporal component)
• Wild boar population size and density
• Number and distribution of domestic pigs
Spatial data
• Shape files (administrative units or hunting grounds)
• Environmental data, human settlements and regional roads
2. DESCRIPTIVE EPIDEMIOLOGY
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
8
Temporal distribution
Both the proportions ofPCR and antibodypositive samples fromthe hunted wild boar ofEstonia, Latvia andLithuania remained lowsince the first detection ofASF.
2. DESCRIPTIVE EPIDEMIOLOGY
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
9
Temporal distribution
The modelled time trendsindicated a peak in the numberof ASF cases around 6 monthsafter the first case was reported.At the end of the follow-up periodof 38 months, a significantreduction of the number of caseswas predicted, but at the sametime there the possibility for ASFto circulate at low levels
2. DESCRIPTIVE EPIDEMIOLOGY
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
10
3. Spatial distribution
Identification of hot-spots: behaviour hotspots difficult topredict
2. DESCRIPTIVE EPIDEMIOLOGY
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
11
3. Spatial distribution
Human-mediated spread of ASFVcontinues to play a critical role inASF epidemiology, despite allmeasures currently taken
2. DESCRIPTIVE EPIDEMIOLOGY
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
12
According to both models the wild boardensity was a significant indicator for theoccurrence of ASF in the wild boar population
BYM: the total road length (as proxy ofhuman activity) and the average suitablewild boar habitat
GAM: the density of pig farms are significantindicators associated with the occurrence of ASF
3. RISK FACTOR ANALYSIS (ESTONIA)
Human-mediated spread
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
13
4. ASSESSMENT OF WB MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
Parameters:
Width of the treatment zone
Efficiency of proposedmeasures in terms ofpercentage achievement
Depopulation: 30%,50%,…, 90%)
Targeted Hunting:Percent effective (30%,50%,…, 90%)
Carcass removal: 0%,30%, 50%,…, 90%)
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
14
Measures to reduce wild boar population to finally halt theexpansion of ASFV, are the most effective when applied in theregions outside or adjacent to already affected part (treatmentzone)
Additionally, any carcass should be removed as fast as possiblefrom the infected areas as well as its surrounding areas
4. ASSESSMENT OF WB MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
15
Drastic depopulation, targeted hunting of female wild boar andcarcass removal implemented as only measure to control ASF in theWB population need to be implemented in a highly effectivemanner (at or beyond the limit of reported effectivity in wild boarmanagement) to sustainably halt the spread of ASF
Carcass removal 2 to 6 weeks after death of the infected wild boar(median 4 weeks) would provide a very limited contribution to thesuccess of control measures
4. ASSESSMENT OF WB MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
16
The model predicted that a very limited effect of the simulatedmeasures for a wild boar population density above 1.5/km² in themodel landscape prior to reproduction. Early management would berequired to preventively reduce greater population densities.
Early detection of entry of ASFV might facilitate theimplementation of intensive focused emergency measures differentfrom those on large spatio-temporal scales studied in the modelsimulations.
4. ASSESSMENT OF WB MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
17
This report, including the model simulations, will need to beupdated if new scientific knowledge in contradiction to theassumptions used in the model becomes available.
Detailed analysis using simulations on true landscapes withmultiple habitat predictors would improve the understanding of theperformance of the measures.
Standardised methods of wild boar density assessment areneeded.
RECOMMENDATIONS
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
18
Human-mediated spread needsto be urgently addressed byintensified awareness building ofall persons that might bepotentially in contact with infectedwild boar or pigs
The existing approaches to localemergency measures using drasticdepopulation and/or fencing shouldbe evaluated with existingempirical an epidemiological data.
RECOMMENDATIONS
19
Countries at risk
Domestic pigs distribution(location, type, population)
Wild boar population data
Contact points – nationalservices and authorities (dataholders)
REPORT III
20
ASF WORKING GROUP
Simon More
Hans-Hermann Thulke
Klaus Depner
Christian Gortázar Schmidt
Arvo Viltrop
Edvīns Oļševskis
Marius Masiulis
Grzegorz Woźniakowski
Vittorio Guberti
Sofie Dhollander
Jose Cortinas Abrahantes
Jane Richardson
Andrey Gogin
Frank Verdonck
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
21
DATA PROVIDERS
Ana de la Torre Reoyo
Peep Männil
Katrin Lõhmus
Gediminas Pridotkas
Marius Judickas
Ilgvars Zihmanis
Dina Ivanova
Mārtiņš Seržants
Richard Wallo
Maria Mihaita
Jolanta Urbelionytė
Łukasz Bocian
Tomasz Podgórski
Karolina Wadecka
Michał Popiołek
Krzysztof Jażdżewski
Krystyna Pędrakowska
Anna Hoffman
Petr Šatrán
EFSA AuditoriumParma, 15th – 16th November 2017
Top Related