南非克鲁格国家公园和纳米比亚埃托沙国家公园选定野生动物中口蹄疫、布鲁氏菌病和Q热共感染和共暴露的蜱传病原体检测

IF 3.5 2区农林科学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1155/tbed/2417717

Carlo Andrea Cossu, Sunday Ochonu Ochai, Milana Troskie, Axel Hartmann, Jacques Godfroid, Lin-Mari de Klerk, Wendy Turner, Pauline Kamath, Ockert Louis van Schalkwyk, Rudi Cassini, Raksha Bhoora, Henriette van Heerden

{"title":"南非克鲁格国家公园和纳米比亚埃托沙国家公园选定野生动物中口蹄疫、布鲁氏菌病和Q热共感染和共暴露的蜱传病原体检测","authors":"Carlo Andrea Cossu, Sunday Ochonu Ochai, Milana Troskie, Axel Hartmann, Jacques Godfroid, Lin-Mari de Klerk, Wendy Turner, Pauline Kamath, Ockert Louis van Schalkwyk, Rudi Cassini, Raksha Bhoora, Henriette van Heerden","doi":"10.1155/tbed/2417717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n Background: Although the rate of emerging infectious diseases that originate in wildlife has been increasing globally in recent decades, there is currently a lack of epidemiological data from wild animals.\n Methodology: We used serology to determine prior exposure to foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), Brucella spp., and Coxiella burnetii and used genetic testing to detect blood-borne parasitic infections in the genera Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, Theileria, and Babesia from wildlife in two national parks, Kruger National Park (KNP), South Africa, and Etosha National Park (ENP), Namibia. Serum and whole blood samples were obtained from free-roaming plains zebra (Equus quagga), greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros), impala (Aepyceros melampus), and blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus). Risk factors (host species, sex, and sampling park) for infection with each pathogen were assessed, as well as the prevalence and distribution of co-occurring infections.\n Results: In KNP 13/29 (45%; confidence interval [CI]: 26%–64%) kudus tested positive for FMD, but none of these reacted to SAT serotypes. For brucellosis, seropositive results were obtained for 3/29 (10%; CI: 2%–27%) kudu samples. Antibodies against C. burnetii were detected in 6/29 (21%; CI: 8%–40%) kudus, 14/21 (67%; CI: 43%–85%) impalas, and 18/39 (46%; CI: 30%–63%) zebras. A total of 28/28 kudus tested positive for Theileria spp. (100%; CI: 88%–100%) and 27/28 for Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. (96%; CI: 82%–100%), whereas 12/19 impalas (63%) and 2/39 zebra (5%) tested positive for Anaplasma centrale. In ENP, only 1/29 (3%; CI: 0%–18%) wildebeest samples tested positive for FMD. None of the samples tested positive for brucellosis, while C. burnetii antibodies were detected in 26/30 wildebeests (87%; CI: 69%–96%), 16/40 kudus (40%; CI: 25%–57%), and 26/26 plains zebras (100%; CI: 87%–100%). A total of 60% Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. and 35% Theileria/Babesia spp. in kudu and 37% wildebeest tested positive to Theileria sp. (sable), 30% to Babesia occultans, and 3%–7% to Anaplasma spp. The seroprevalence of Q fever was significantly higher in ENP, while Brucella spp., Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Theileria, and Babesia species were significantly higher in KNP. Significant coinfections were also identified.\n Conclusion: This work provided baseline serological and molecular data on 40+ pathogens in four wildlife species from two national parks in southern Africa.\n </div>","PeriodicalId":234,"journal":{"name":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/tbed/2417717","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of Tick-Borne Pathogen Coinfections and Coexposures to Foot-and-Mouth Disease, Brucellosis, and Q Fever in Selected Wildlife From Kruger National Park, South Africa, and Etosha National Park, Namibia\",\"authors\":\"Carlo Andrea Cossu, Sunday Ochonu Ochai, Milana Troskie, Axel Hartmann, Jacques Godfroid, Lin-Mari de Klerk, Wendy Turner, Pauline Kamath, Ockert Louis van Schalkwyk, Rudi Cassini, Raksha Bhoora, Henriette van Heerden\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/tbed/2417717\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n Background: Although the rate of emerging infectious diseases that originate in wildlife has been increasing globally in recent decades, there is currently a lack of epidemiological data from wild animals.\\n Methodology: We used serology to determine prior exposure to foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), Brucella spp., and Coxiella burnetii and used genetic testing to detect blood-borne parasitic infections in the genera Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, Theileria, and Babesia from wildlife in two national parks, Kruger National Park (KNP), South Africa, and Etosha National Park (ENP), Namibia. Serum and whole blood samples were obtained from free-roaming plains zebra (Equus quagga), greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros), impala (Aepyceros melampus), and blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus). Risk factors (host species, sex, and sampling park) for infection with each pathogen were assessed, as well as the prevalence and distribution of co-occurring infections.\\n Results: In KNP 13/29 (45%; confidence interval [CI]: 26%–64%) kudus tested positive for FMD, but none of these reacted to SAT serotypes. For brucellosis, seropositive results were obtained for 3/29 (10%; CI: 2%–27%) kudu samples. Antibodies against C. burnetii were detected in 6/29 (21%; CI: 8%–40%) kudus, 14/21 (67%; CI: 43%–85%) impalas, and 18/39 (46%; CI: 30%–63%) zebras. A total of 28/28 kudus tested positive for Theileria spp. (100%; CI: 88%–100%) and 27/28 for Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. (96%; CI: 82%–100%), whereas 12/19 impalas (63%) and 2/39 zebra (5%) tested positive for Anaplasma centrale. In ENP, only 1/29 (3%; CI: 0%–18%) wildebeest samples tested positive for FMD. None of the samples tested positive for brucellosis, while C. burnetii antibodies were detected in 26/30 wildebeests (87%; CI: 69%–96%), 16/40 kudus (40%; CI: 25%–57%), and 26/26 plains zebras (100%; CI: 87%–100%). A total of 60% Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. and 35% Theileria/Babesia spp. in kudu and 37% wildebeest tested positive to Theileria sp. (sable), 30% to Babesia occultans, and 3%–7% to Anaplasma spp. The seroprevalence of Q fever was significantly higher in ENP, while Brucella spp., Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Theileria, and Babesia species were significantly higher in KNP. Significant coinfections were also identified.\\n Conclusion: This work provided baseline serological and molecular data on 40+ pathogens in four wildlife species from two national parks in southern Africa.\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases\",\"volume\":\"2024 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/tbed/2417717\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/tbed/2417717\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/tbed/2417717","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景：尽管近几十年来，源于野生动物的新发传染病的发病率在全球范围内不断上升，但目前尚缺乏来自野生动物的流行病学数据。研究方法我们使用血清学方法确定野生动物之前是否接触过口蹄疫病毒（FMDV）、布鲁氏菌属和烧伤柯西氏菌，并使用基因检测方法检测两个国家公园（南非克鲁格国家公园（KNP）和纳米比亚埃托沙国家公园（ENP））中野生动物血液中的埃里希菌属、阿那普拉斯马属、泰勒菌属和巴贝西亚菌属寄生虫感染情况。血清和全血样本取自自由活动的平原斑马（Equus quagga）、大库杜（Tragelaphus strepsiceros）、黑斑羚（Aepyceros melampus）和蓝角马（Connochaetes taurinus）。评估了感染每种病原体的风险因素（宿主种类、性别和采样公园），以及同时感染的流行率和分布情况。结果：在 KNP，13/29（45%；置信区间 [CI]：26%-64%）只库尔德犬的口蹄疫检测呈阳性，但其中没有一只库尔德犬对 SAT 血清型有反应。在布鲁氏菌病方面，3/29（10%；置信区间：2%-27%）份库杜样本的血清检测结果呈阳性。6/29（21%；CI：8%-40%）只库杜、14/21（67%；CI：43%-85%）只黑斑羚和 18/39（46%；CI：30%-63%）只斑马检测到了布鲁氏菌抗体。共有 28/28 只黑斑羚的泰勒氏菌检测呈阳性（100%；CI：88%-100%），27/28 只黑斑羚的阿纳疟原虫/埃立疟原虫检测呈阳性（96%；CI：82%-100%），而 12/19 只黑斑羚（63%）和 2/39 只斑马（5%）的中央阿纳疟原虫检测呈阳性。在 ENP，只有 1/29 头角马样本（3%；CI：0%-18%）的口蹄疫检测呈阳性。没有一个样本对布鲁氏杆菌病检测呈阳性，而在 26/30 头角马（87%；CI：69%-96%）、16/40 头库杜（40%；CI：25%-57%）和 26/26 头平原斑马（100%；CI：87%-100%）中检测到了布氏菌抗体。在库杜和37%的角马中，共有60%的阿纳普拉原虫/艾氏原虫和35%的毛地黄杆菌/巴贝西亚原虫检测呈阳性（黑貂），30%的潜伏巴贝西亚原虫检测呈阳性，3%-7%的阿纳普拉原虫检测呈阳性。 Q热的血清流行率在 ENP 中明显较高，而布鲁氏菌属、阿纳普拉原虫、艾氏原虫、毛地黄杆菌和巴贝西亚原虫的血清流行率在 KNP 中明显较高。此外，还发现了一些重要的合并感染病例。结论这项工作提供了南部非洲两个国家公园中四种野生动物体内 40 多种病原体的血清学和分子学基线数据。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Detection of Tick-Borne Pathogen Coinfections and Coexposures to Foot-and-Mouth Disease, Brucellosis, and Q Fever in Selected Wildlife From Kruger National Park, South Africa, and Etosha National Park, Namibia

查看原文本刊更多论文

Background: Although the rate of emerging infectious diseases that originate in wildlife has been increasing globally in recent decades, there is currently a lack of epidemiological data from wild animals.

Methodology: We used serology to determine prior exposure to foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), Brucella spp., and Coxiella burnetii and used genetic testing to detect blood-borne parasitic infections in the genera Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, Theileria, and Babesia from wildlife in two national parks, Kruger National Park (KNP), South Africa, and Etosha National Park (ENP), Namibia. Serum and whole blood samples were obtained from free-roaming plains zebra (Equus quagga), greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros), impala (Aepyceros melampus), and blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus). Risk factors (host species, sex, and sampling park) for infection with each pathogen were assessed, as well as the prevalence and distribution of co-occurring infections.

Results: In KNP 13/29 (45%; confidence interval [CI]: 26%–64%) kudus tested positive for FMD, but none of these reacted to SAT serotypes. For brucellosis, seropositive results were obtained for 3/29 (10%; CI: 2%–27%) kudu samples. Antibodies against C. burnetii were detected in 6/29 (21%; CI: 8%–40%) kudus, 14/21 (67%; CI: 43%–85%) impalas, and 18/39 (46%; CI: 30%–63%) zebras. A total of 28/28 kudus tested positive for Theileria spp. (100%; CI: 88%–100%) and 27/28 for Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. (96%; CI: 82%–100%), whereas 12/19 impalas (63%) and 2/39 zebra (5%) tested positive for Anaplasma centrale. In ENP, only 1/29 (3%; CI: 0%–18%) wildebeest samples tested positive for FMD. None of the samples tested positive for brucellosis, while C. burnetii antibodies were detected in 26/30 wildebeests (87%; CI: 69%–96%), 16/40 kudus (40%; CI: 25%–57%), and 26/26 plains zebras (100%; CI: 87%–100%). A total of 60% Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. and 35% Theileria/Babesia spp. in kudu and 37% wildebeest tested positive to Theileria sp. (sable), 30% to Babesia occultans, and 3%–7% to Anaplasma spp. The seroprevalence of Q fever was significantly higher in ENP, while Brucella spp., Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Theileria, and Babesia species were significantly higher in KNP. Significant coinfections were also identified.

Conclusion: This work provided baseline serological and molecular data on 40+ pathogens in four wildlife species from two national parks in southern Africa.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases 农林科学-传染病学

CiteScore

8.90

自引率

9.30%

发文量

350

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： Transboundary and Emerging Diseases brings together in one place the latest research on infectious diseases considered to hold the greatest economic threat to animals and humans worldwide. The journal provides a venue for global research on their diagnosis, prevention and management, and for papers on public health, pathogenesis, epidemiology, statistical modeling, diagnostics, biosecurity issues, genomics, vaccine development and rapid communication of new outbreaks. Papers should include timely research approaches using state-of-the-art technologies. The editors encourage papers adopting a science-based approach on socio-economic and environmental factors influencing the management of the bio-security threat posed by these diseases, including risk analysis and disease spread modeling. Preference will be given to communications focusing on novel science-based approaches to controlling transboundary and emerging diseases. The following topics are generally considered out-of-scope, but decisions are made on a case-by-case basis (for example, studies on cryptic wildlife populations, and those on potential species extinctions): Pathogen discovery: a common pathogen newly recognised in a specific country, or a new pathogen or genetic sequence for which there is little context about — or insights regarding — its emergence or spread. Prevalence estimation surveys and risk factor studies based on survey (rather than longitudinal) methodology, except when such studies are unique. Surveys of knowledge, attitudes and practices are within scope. Diagnostic test development if not accompanied by robust sensitivity and specificity estimation from field studies. Studies focused only on laboratory methods in which relevance to disease emergence and spread is not obvious or can not be inferred (“pure research” type studies). Narrative literature reviews which do not generate new knowledge. Systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses are within scope.