Risk factors and spatial relative risk assessment for influenza A virus in poultry and swine in backyard production systems of central Chile

Backyard production systems (BPS) are a common form of poultry and swine production worldwide. The limited implementation of biosecurity standards in these operations makes BPS a potential source for the emergence of pathogens that have an impact on both animal and public health. Information regardi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Veterinary medicine and science 2020-08, Vol.6 (3), p.518-526
Hauptverfasser: Bravo‐Vasquez, Nicolas, Baumberger, Cecilia, Jimenez‐Bluhm, Pedro, Di Pillo, Francisca, Lazo, Andres, Sanhueza, Juan, Schultz‐Cherry, Stacey, Hamilton‐West, Christopher
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Backyard production systems (BPS) are a common form of poultry and swine production worldwide. The limited implementation of biosecurity standards in these operations makes BPS a potential source for the emergence of pathogens that have an impact on both animal and public health. Information regarding circulation of influenza A virus (IAV) in poultry and swine raised in BPS is scarce; particularly in South American countries. The objective of this study was to estimate prevalence and seroprevalence of IAV in BPS in central Chile, identify subtype diversity, evaluate risk factors and spatial relative risk for IAV. Samples were collected from 329 BPS from central Chile. Seroprevalence at BPS level was 34.7% (95% CI: 23.1%–46.2%), 19.7% (95% CI: 9.9%–30.6%) and 11.7% (95% CI: 7.2%–16.4%), whereas prevalence at BPS level was 4.2% (95% CI: 0.0%–8.8%), 8.2% (95% CI: 0.8%–14.0%) and 9.2% (95% CI: 4.8%–13.1%), for the Metropolitan, Valparaiso and LGB O’Higgins regions, respectively. Spatial analysis revealed that central‐western area of Metropolitan region and the southern province of Valparaiso region could be considered as high‐risk areas for IAV (spatial relative risk = 2.2, p 
ISSN:2053-1095
2053-1095
DOI:10.1002/vms3.254