V. Lizana , A. Martí-Marco , C. Gortázar , J. López-Ramon , J. Cerezo Valverde , J. Aguilo-Gisbert , J. Cardells
{"title":"Epidemiological factors conditioning sarcoptic mange spreading in wild boar (Sus scrofa)","authors":"V. Lizana , A. Martí-Marco , C. Gortázar , J. López-Ramon , J. Cerezo Valverde , J. Aguilo-Gisbert , J. Cardells","doi":"10.1016/j.rvsc.2024.105351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sarcoptic mange is a widely distributed disease, with numerous potential hosts among domestic and wild animals. Nowadays it is considered a neglected re-emergent infection in humans. As a difference with domestic pigs, and even with several clinical cases reported in some European countries, it seems that Eurasian wild boars (<em>Sus scrofa</em>) have a low susceptibility to clinical mange. However, because of a case of confirmed transmission from Spanish ibex (<em>Capra pyrenaica</em>) to wild boar in the province of Tarragona, we planned a large-scale ELISA survey in the neighboring Valencian Community (SE Spain). We compared 419 wild boar sera from different management systems (fenced vs. open game estates), different ages (piglets, juveniles, and adults), with different behaviour (gregarious females of all ages and male piglets vs. solitary juveniles and adult males), from areas with different wild boar densities, different wild ruminant densities and different sarcoptic mange epidemiologic situations. The whole prevalence of antibodies against sarcoptic mange in the tested wild boars was 10.5%. No significant differences were found when comparing fenced and free ranging wild boars, males and females, gregarious vs. solitary individuals or among different ages. However, wild boar density was a relevant factor. In areas with a hunting bag of <1 wild boar/km<sup>2</sup>, considered as a low density of suids, the seroprevalence was 2.94%, but rose to 11.52% in high density districts, constituting a significant difference (<em>p</em> = 0.037). Low wild boar populations would act as a protective factor (OR 0.233; <em>p</em> = 0.049) against coming into contact with the mite. The wild ruminant densities or their sarcoptic mange status did not show any effect on wild boars seroprevalence against this disease. These results reinforce the suggested host-taxon <em>Sarcoptes scabiei</em> specificity and the independence of host-species foci.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21083,"journal":{"name":"Research in veterinary science","volume":"176 ","pages":"Article 105351"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in veterinary science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034528824002170","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Sarcoptic mange is a widely distributed disease, with numerous potential hosts among domestic and wild animals. Nowadays it is considered a neglected re-emergent infection in humans. As a difference with domestic pigs, and even with several clinical cases reported in some European countries, it seems that Eurasian wild boars (Sus scrofa) have a low susceptibility to clinical mange. However, because of a case of confirmed transmission from Spanish ibex (Capra pyrenaica) to wild boar in the province of Tarragona, we planned a large-scale ELISA survey in the neighboring Valencian Community (SE Spain). We compared 419 wild boar sera from different management systems (fenced vs. open game estates), different ages (piglets, juveniles, and adults), with different behaviour (gregarious females of all ages and male piglets vs. solitary juveniles and adult males), from areas with different wild boar densities, different wild ruminant densities and different sarcoptic mange epidemiologic situations. The whole prevalence of antibodies against sarcoptic mange in the tested wild boars was 10.5%. No significant differences were found when comparing fenced and free ranging wild boars, males and females, gregarious vs. solitary individuals or among different ages. However, wild boar density was a relevant factor. In areas with a hunting bag of <1 wild boar/km2, considered as a low density of suids, the seroprevalence was 2.94%, but rose to 11.52% in high density districts, constituting a significant difference (p = 0.037). Low wild boar populations would act as a protective factor (OR 0.233; p = 0.049) against coming into contact with the mite. The wild ruminant densities or their sarcoptic mange status did not show any effect on wild boars seroprevalence against this disease. These results reinforce the suggested host-taxon Sarcoptes scabiei specificity and the independence of host-species foci.
期刊介绍:
Research in Veterinary Science is an International multi-disciplinary journal publishing original articles, reviews and short communications of a high scientific and ethical standard in all aspects of veterinary and biomedical research.
The primary aim of the journal is to inform veterinary and biomedical scientists of significant advances in veterinary and related research through prompt publication and dissemination. Secondly, the journal aims to provide a general multi-disciplinary forum for discussion and debate of news and issues concerning veterinary science. Thirdly, to promote the dissemination of knowledge to a broader range of professions, globally.
High quality papers on all species of animals are considered, particularly those considered to be of high scientific importance and originality, and with interdisciplinary interest. The journal encourages papers providing results that have clear implications for understanding disease pathogenesis and for the development of control measures or treatments, as well as those dealing with a comparative biomedical approach, which represents a substantial improvement to animal and human health.
Studies without a robust scientific hypothesis or that are preliminary, or of weak originality, as well as negative results, are not appropriate for the journal. Furthermore, observational approaches, case studies or field reports lacking an advancement in general knowledge do not fall within the scope of the journal.