Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission

Contact between wild animals and farmed livestock may result in disease transmission with huge financial, welfare and ethical consequences. Conflicts between people and wildlife can also arise when species such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) consume crops or dig up pasture. This is a relatively recent pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of wildlife research 2022-12, Vol.68 (6), p.69-69, Article 69
Hauptverfasser: Bacigalupo, Sonny A., Dixon, Linda K., Gubbins, Simon, Kucharski, Adam J., Drewe, Julian A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 69
container_issue 6
container_start_page 69
container_title European journal of wildlife research
container_volume 68
creator Bacigalupo, Sonny A.
Dixon, Linda K.
Gubbins, Simon
Kucharski, Adam J.
Drewe, Julian A.
description Contact between wild animals and farmed livestock may result in disease transmission with huge financial, welfare and ethical consequences. Conflicts between people and wildlife can also arise when species such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) consume crops or dig up pasture. This is a relatively recent problem in England where wild boar populations have become re-established in the last 20 years following a 500-year absence. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if and how often free-living wild boar visited two commercial pig farms near the Forest of Dean in southwest England. We placed 20 motion-sensitive camera traps at potential entry points to, and trails surrounding, the perimeter of two farmyards housing domestic pigs between August 2019 and February 2021, covering a total of 6030 trap nights. Forty wild boar detections were recorded on one farm spread across 27 nights, with a median (range) of 1 (0 to 7) night of wild boar activity per calendar month. Most of these wild boar detections occurred between ten and twenty metres of housed domestic pigs. No wild boar was detected at the other farm. These results confirm wild boar do visit commercial pig farms, and therefore, there is potential for contact and pathogen exchange between wild boar and domestic pigs. The visitation rates derived from this study could be used to parameterise disease transmission models of pathogens common to domestic pigs and wild boars, such as the African swine fever virus, and subsequently to develop mitigation strategies to reduce unwanted contacts.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9532280</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2723487041</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-705504a85104af6ac4fd760e42f056737f59c075711971e77b1ccd3ca98d17f33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1rFTEUxYMotj79B1xIwI2b0XvzMZlxIZTSqlBwo7gMeZnMa8pM8sydqfjfm_bV-rFwkwTO757cw2HsOcJrBDBvCEEq1YAQDWCLXSMesGNUsm9AG_WwvlsUjWqVOGJPiK4ARA9SP2ZHshUoUYljNnyN08C32RV-HSkuxJfMfZ7nUHx0E9_HHR9dmYnHxCmvy-X3QAs_S7vJpeEtj_N-it4tMSfiYy58iBQcBb4Ul2iORFV5yh6NbqLw7O7esC_nZ59PPzQXn95_PD25aLwyamkMaA3KdRrrObbOq3EwLQQlRtCtkWbUvQejDWJvMBizRe8H6V3fDWhGKTfs3cF3v27nMPiQ6haT3Zc4u_LDZhft30qKl3aXr22vpRAdVINXdwYlf1trUFsT-DDVrCGvZIURUnUGFFb05T_oVV5LqvFuKASjZF15w8SB8iUTlTDeL4Ngb0q0hxJtLdHelmhFHXrxZ4z7kV-tVUAeAKpS2oXy--__2P4EBjyofw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2721074367</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Bacigalupo, Sonny A. ; Dixon, Linda K. ; Gubbins, Simon ; Kucharski, Adam J. ; Drewe, Julian A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bacigalupo, Sonny A. ; Dixon, Linda K. ; Gubbins, Simon ; Kucharski, Adam J. ; Drewe, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><description>Contact between wild animals and farmed livestock may result in disease transmission with huge financial, welfare and ethical consequences. Conflicts between people and wildlife can also arise when species such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) consume crops or dig up pasture. This is a relatively recent problem in England where wild boar populations have become re-established in the last 20 years following a 500-year absence. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if and how often free-living wild boar visited two commercial pig farms near the Forest of Dean in southwest England. We placed 20 motion-sensitive camera traps at potential entry points to, and trails surrounding, the perimeter of two farmyards housing domestic pigs between August 2019 and February 2021, covering a total of 6030 trap nights. Forty wild boar detections were recorded on one farm spread across 27 nights, with a median (range) of 1 (0 to 7) night of wild boar activity per calendar month. Most of these wild boar detections occurred between ten and twenty metres of housed domestic pigs. No wild boar was detected at the other farm. These results confirm wild boar do visit commercial pig farms, and therefore, there is potential for contact and pathogen exchange between wild boar and domestic pigs. The visitation rates derived from this study could be used to parameterise disease transmission models of pathogens common to domestic pigs and wild boars, such as the African swine fever virus, and subsequently to develop mitigation strategies to reduce unwanted contacts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1612-4642</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1439-0574</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36213142</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>African swine fever ; Animal diseases ; Asfarviridae ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Commercial farms ; Contact potentials ; Disease control ; Disease transmission ; Domestic animals ; Ecology ; Farms ; Fish &amp; Wildlife Biology &amp; Management ; Hogs ; Life Sciences ; Livestock ; Motion detection ; Original ; Original Article ; Pasture ; Pathogens ; Sus scrofa ; Swine ; Wild animals ; Wildlife ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>European journal of wildlife research, 2022-12, Vol.68 (6), p.69-69, Article 69</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-705504a85104af6ac4fd760e42f056737f59c075711971e77b1ccd3ca98d17f33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-705504a85104af6ac4fd760e42f056737f59c075711971e77b1ccd3ca98d17f33</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1491-2476</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36213142$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bacigalupo, Sonny A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dixon, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gubbins, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kucharski, Adam J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drewe, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><title>Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission</title><title>European journal of wildlife research</title><addtitle>Eur J Wildl Res</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Wildl Res</addtitle><description>Contact between wild animals and farmed livestock may result in disease transmission with huge financial, welfare and ethical consequences. Conflicts between people and wildlife can also arise when species such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) consume crops or dig up pasture. This is a relatively recent problem in England where wild boar populations have become re-established in the last 20 years following a 500-year absence. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if and how often free-living wild boar visited two commercial pig farms near the Forest of Dean in southwest England. We placed 20 motion-sensitive camera traps at potential entry points to, and trails surrounding, the perimeter of two farmyards housing domestic pigs between August 2019 and February 2021, covering a total of 6030 trap nights. Forty wild boar detections were recorded on one farm spread across 27 nights, with a median (range) of 1 (0 to 7) night of wild boar activity per calendar month. Most of these wild boar detections occurred between ten and twenty metres of housed domestic pigs. No wild boar was detected at the other farm. These results confirm wild boar do visit commercial pig farms, and therefore, there is potential for contact and pathogen exchange between wild boar and domestic pigs. The visitation rates derived from this study could be used to parameterise disease transmission models of pathogens common to domestic pigs and wild boars, such as the African swine fever virus, and subsequently to develop mitigation strategies to reduce unwanted contacts.</description><subject>African swine fever</subject><subject>Animal diseases</subject><subject>Asfarviridae</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Commercial farms</subject><subject>Contact potentials</subject><subject>Disease control</subject><subject>Disease transmission</subject><subject>Domestic animals</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Fish &amp; Wildlife Biology &amp; Management</subject><subject>Hogs</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Motion detection</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Pasture</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>Sus scrofa</subject><subject>Swine</subject><subject>Wild animals</subject><subject>Wildlife</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>1612-4642</issn><issn>1439-0574</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1rFTEUxYMotj79B1xIwI2b0XvzMZlxIZTSqlBwo7gMeZnMa8pM8sydqfjfm_bV-rFwkwTO757cw2HsOcJrBDBvCEEq1YAQDWCLXSMesGNUsm9AG_WwvlsUjWqVOGJPiK4ARA9SP2ZHshUoUYljNnyN08C32RV-HSkuxJfMfZ7nUHx0E9_HHR9dmYnHxCmvy-X3QAs_S7vJpeEtj_N-it4tMSfiYy58iBQcBb4Ul2iORFV5yh6NbqLw7O7esC_nZ59PPzQXn95_PD25aLwyamkMaA3KdRrrObbOq3EwLQQlRtCtkWbUvQejDWJvMBizRe8H6V3fDWhGKTfs3cF3v27nMPiQ6haT3Zc4u_LDZhft30qKl3aXr22vpRAdVINXdwYlf1trUFsT-DDVrCGvZIURUnUGFFb05T_oVV5LqvFuKASjZF15w8SB8iUTlTDeL4Ngb0q0hxJtLdHelmhFHXrxZ4z7kV-tVUAeAKpS2oXy--__2P4EBjyofw</recordid><startdate>20221201</startdate><enddate>20221201</enddate><creator>Bacigalupo, Sonny A.</creator><creator>Dixon, Linda K.</creator><creator>Gubbins, Simon</creator><creator>Kucharski, Adam J.</creator><creator>Drewe, Julian A.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1491-2476</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221201</creationdate><title>Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission</title><author>Bacigalupo, Sonny A. ; Dixon, Linda K. ; Gubbins, Simon ; Kucharski, Adam J. ; Drewe, Julian A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-705504a85104af6ac4fd760e42f056737f59c075711971e77b1ccd3ca98d17f33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>African swine fever</topic><topic>Animal diseases</topic><topic>Asfarviridae</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Commercial farms</topic><topic>Contact potentials</topic><topic>Disease control</topic><topic>Disease transmission</topic><topic>Domestic animals</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Fish &amp; Wildlife Biology &amp; Management</topic><topic>Hogs</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Motion detection</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Pasture</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>Sus scrofa</topic><topic>Swine</topic><topic>Wild animals</topic><topic>Wildlife</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bacigalupo, Sonny A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dixon, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gubbins, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kucharski, Adam J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drewe, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>European journal of wildlife research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bacigalupo, Sonny A.</au><au>Dixon, Linda K.</au><au>Gubbins, Simon</au><au>Kucharski, Adam J.</au><au>Drewe, Julian A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission</atitle><jtitle>European journal of wildlife research</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Wildl Res</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Wildl Res</addtitle><date>2022-12-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>68</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>69</spage><epage>69</epage><pages>69-69</pages><artnum>69</artnum><issn>1612-4642</issn><eissn>1439-0574</eissn><abstract>Contact between wild animals and farmed livestock may result in disease transmission with huge financial, welfare and ethical consequences. Conflicts between people and wildlife can also arise when species such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) consume crops or dig up pasture. This is a relatively recent problem in England where wild boar populations have become re-established in the last 20 years following a 500-year absence. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if and how often free-living wild boar visited two commercial pig farms near the Forest of Dean in southwest England. We placed 20 motion-sensitive camera traps at potential entry points to, and trails surrounding, the perimeter of two farmyards housing domestic pigs between August 2019 and February 2021, covering a total of 6030 trap nights. Forty wild boar detections were recorded on one farm spread across 27 nights, with a median (range) of 1 (0 to 7) night of wild boar activity per calendar month. Most of these wild boar detections occurred between ten and twenty metres of housed domestic pigs. No wild boar was detected at the other farm. These results confirm wild boar do visit commercial pig farms, and therefore, there is potential for contact and pathogen exchange between wild boar and domestic pigs. The visitation rates derived from this study could be used to parameterise disease transmission models of pathogens common to domestic pigs and wild boars, such as the African swine fever virus, and subsequently to develop mitigation strategies to reduce unwanted contacts.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>36213142</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1491-2476</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1612-4642
ispartof European journal of wildlife research, 2022-12, Vol.68 (6), p.69-69, Article 69
issn 1612-4642
1439-0574
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9532280
source Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects African swine fever
Animal diseases
Asfarviridae
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Commercial farms
Contact potentials
Disease control
Disease transmission
Domestic animals
Ecology
Farms
Fish & Wildlife Biology & Management
Hogs
Life Sciences
Livestock
Motion detection
Original
Original Article
Pasture
Pathogens
Sus scrofa
Swine
Wild animals
Wildlife
Zoology
title Wild boar visits to commercial pig farms in southwest England: implications for disease transmission
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T02%3A31%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Wild%20boar%20visits%20to%20commercial%20pig%20farms%20in%20southwest%20England:%20implications%20for%20disease%20transmission&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20wildlife%20research&rft.au=Bacigalupo,%20Sonny%20A.&rft.date=2022-12-01&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=69&rft.pages=69-69&rft.artnum=69&rft.issn=1612-4642&rft.eissn=1439-0574&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10344-022-01618-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2723487041%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2721074367&rft_id=info:pmid/36213142&rfr_iscdi=true