Submit to Special Issue Submit Abstract to Special Issue Review for Animals Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

Biosecuring Animal Populations

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal System and Management".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 1 August 2024 | Viewed by 9555

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Scott Dee

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Pipestone Research, Pipestone, MN, USA
Interests: PRRSV; PEDV; ASFV; viral transmission; biosecurity

Dr. Gordon Spronk

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, USA
Interests: biosecurity; ASFV; PEDV; PRRSV; traceability; prevention

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

It is with great enthusiasm that we agree to lead this Special Issue on the topic of Biosecuring Animal Populations. This is indeed a timely topic, based on the domestic and transboundary challenges of pathogens such as African swine fever virus, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, and highly pathogenic avian influenza virus. This Special Issue will strive to be multi-organismal, cross species, and global in nature. Topics will include reviews, new research on disease transmission and biosecurity, new advances in biosurveillance, the role of human behavior in biosecurity compliance, and data from the field, describing the efforts of veterinary practitioners and scientists to measure the impact of next-generation biosecurity interventions on the control of these significant diseases of herds and flocks.

Now is clearly the perfect time for a publication of this type!

All the best.

Dr. Scott Dee
Dr. Gordon Spronk
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

biosecurity
transmission
prevention
PRRSV
ASFV
porcine
avian
herds
flocks

Published Papers (10 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

13 pages, 8071 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Biosecurity Insights from the United States Swine Health Improvement Plan: Analyzing Data to Enhance Industry Practices

by Michael Harlow, Montserrat Torremorell, Cristopher J. Rademacher, Jordan Gebhardt, Tyler Holck, Leticia C. M. Linhares, Rodger G. Main and Giovani Trevisan

Animals 2024, 14(7), 1134; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14071134 - 8 Apr 2024

Viewed by 837

Abstract

Biosecurity practices aim to reduce the frequency of disease outbreaks in a farm, region, or country and play a pivotal role in fortifying the country’s pork industry against emerging threats, particularly foreign animal diseases (FADs). This article addresses the current biosecurity landscape of the US swine industry by summarizing the biosecurity practices reported by the producers through the United States Swine Health Improvement Plan (US SHIP) enrollment surveys, and it provides a general assessment of practices implemented. US SHIP is a voluntary, collaborative effort between industry, state, and federal entities regarding health certification programs for the swine industry. With 12,195 sites surveyed across 31 states, the study provides a comprehensive snapshot of current biosecurity practices. Key findings include variability by site types that have completed Secure Pork Supply plans, variability in outdoor access and presence of perimeter fencing, and diverse farm entry protocols for visitors. The data also reflect the industry’s response to the threat of FADs, exemplified by the implementation of the US SHIP in 2020. As the US SHIP program advances, these insights will guide industry stakeholders in refining biosecurity practices, fostering endemic re-emerging and FAD preparedness, and ensuring the sustainability of the swine industry in the face of evolving challenges. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2492 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Risk Awareness and Attitude of German Farmers towards Biosecurity Measures

by Anna Herrmann, Katja Schulz, Natalie Wischnewski, Jule Brüssau, Eva Zeiler and Carola Sauter-Louis

Animals 2024, 14(7), 1102; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14071102 - 4 Apr 2024

Viewed by 556

Abstract

The implementation of management activities depends on both the attitude of the people performing the work and their understanding of why the work should be performed. In the context of animal husbandry, the implementation of such practices is crucial for the functionality of biosecurity. Therefore, it is important to know how farmers perceive biosecurity as a whole. An anonymous online survey was conducted among German farmers. In addition to general data about their farm, information about their existing concept of biosecurity, as well as about the assessment of possible introduction routes for animal diseases into the farm with regard to their likelihood, was gathered. Furthermore, information on measures to protect their farm against disease introduction were retrieved. Analysis showed that in general, farmers were aware of the importance of biosecurity and consequently had concepts of biosecurity on their farms. However, awareness about dangerous introduction routes for animal diseases into a farm was associated with a lack of knowledge of how to improve the measures in these areas. The role of the veterinarian in the context of biosecurity was highlighted and further problematic areas were indicated. Overall, the high level of commitment from farmers indicated a good implementation of daily practices. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 423 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Pen-Based Swine Oral Fluid Samples Contain Both Environmental and Pig-Derived Targets

by Grzegorz Tarasiuk, Marta D. Remmenga, Kathleen C. O’Hara, Marian K. Talbert, Marisa L. Rotolo, Pam Zaabel, Danyang Zhang, Luis G. Giménez-Lirola and Jeffrey J. Zimmerman

Animals 2024, 14(5), 766; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14050766 - 29 Feb 2024

Viewed by 611

Abstract

Laboratory methods for detecting specific pathogens in oral fluids are widely reported, but there is little research on the oral fluid sampling process itself. In this study, a fluorescent tracer (diluted red food coloring) was used to test the transfer of a target directly from pigs or indirectly from the environment to pen-based oral fluid samples. Pens of ~30, ~60, and ~125 14-week-old pigs (32 pens/size) on commercial swine farms received one of two treatments: (1) pig exposure, i.e., ~3.5 mL of tracer solution sprayed into the mouth of 10% of the pigs in the pen; (2) environmental exposure, i.e., 20 mL of tracer solution was poured on the floor in the center of the pen. Oral fluids collected one day prior to treatment (baseline fluorescence control) and immediately after treatment were tested for fluorescence. Data were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, with Youden’s J statistic used to set a threshold. Pretreatment oral fluid samples with fluorescence responses above the ROC threshold were removed from further analysis (7 of 96 samples). Based on the ROC analyses, oral fluid samples from 78 of 89 pens (87.6%), contained red food coloring, including 43 of 47 (91.5%) pens receiving pig exposure and 35 of 42 (83.3%) pens receiving environmental exposure. Thus, oral fluid samples contain both pig-derived and environmental targets. This methodology provides a safe and quantifiable method to evaluate oral fluid sampling vis-à-vis pen behavior, pen size, sampling protocol, and target distribution in the pen. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1405 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessment of Cleaning and Disinfection Practices on Pig Farms across Ten European Countries

by Iryna Makovska, Ilias Chantziaras, Nele Caekebeke, Pankaj Dhaka and Jeroen Dewulf

Animals 2024, 14(4), 593; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040593 - 11 Feb 2024

Viewed by 1424

Abstract

This study delves into the assessment of cleaning and disinfection (C&D) measures within the context of European pig farming, employing the Biocheck.UGent™ tool as an effective instrument for evaluation. A comprehensive set of relevant parameters was examined to enable meaningful comparisons across farms from 10 European countries during four years (2019–2022). Findings indicate a notable increase in C&D measure implementation in select countries (Belgium, Finland, Italy, and Spain), reflecting heightened awareness and responsibility among farmers. Additionally, the overall score for the C&D subcategory highlights variation across countries, with Italy (75), Poland (74), and Belgium (72) displaying the highest scores, while Ireland (56), Slovenia (55), and Serbia (50) reported the lowest scores. However, the considerable variation in the number of participating farms necessitates cautious comparisons. The study identifies well-implemented C&D measures in the frame of external biosecurity but underscores gaps in the application of C&D measures for the material introduction practices across farms (22% of farms), which are attributed to awareness gaps and resource limitations. In the areas of internal biosecurity, strong points include C&D procedures after each production cycle (79%), implementing different stages in the C&D process (65%) and sufficient sanitary break (82%), while gaps are evident in the presence and using of hand hygiene stations (19% of farms) and boots disinfection equipment (40% of farms) between compartments/units. Notably, the study reveals a lack of evaluation of hygiene after C&D procedures (only 1% of farms), signaling critical knowledge gaps among farmers regarding proper assessment tools and methods. In conclusion, this comprehensive analysis sheds light on the implementation status of C&D measures in European pig farming, offering insights into both areas of progress and those requiring improvement. The findings emphasize the need for targeted awareness campaigns and training initiatives to bolster biosecurity practices within the industry. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 520 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Biological Containment for African Swine Fever (ASF) Laboratories and Animal Facilities: The Italian Challenge in Bridging the Present Regulatory Gap and Enhancing Biosafety and Biosecurity Measures

by Silvia Pavone, Carmen Iscaro, Monica Giammarioli, Maria Serena Beato, Cecilia Righi, Stefano Petrini, Silva Costarelli and Francesco Feliziani

Animals 2024, 14(3), 454; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030454 - 30 Jan 2024

Viewed by 899

Abstract

The African Swine Fever Virus (ASFV) is a DNA virus of the Asfarviridae family, Asfivirus genus. It is responsible for massive losses in pig populations and drastic direct and indirect economic impacts. The ever-growing handling of ASFV pathological material in laboratories, necessary for either diagnostic or research activities, requires particular attention to avoid accidental virus release from laboratories and its detrimental economic and environmental effects. Recently, the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 of 17 December 2019 repealed the Commission Decision of 26 May 2003 reporting an ASF diagnostic manual (2003/422/EC) with the minimum and supplementary requirements for ASF laboratories. This decision generated a regulatory gap that has not been addressed yet. This paper aims to describe the Italian National Reference Laboratory (NRL) efforts to develop an effective and reliable biological containment tool for ASF laboratories and animal facilities. The tool consists of comprehensive and harmonized structural and procedural requirements for ASF laboratories and animal facilities that have been developed based on both current and repealed legislation, further entailing a risk assessment and internal audit as indispensable tools to design, adjust, and improve biological containment measures. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2737 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Evaluation of Extended Storage of Swine Complete Feed for Inactivation of Viral Contamination and Effect on Nutritional, Microbiological, and Toxicological Profiles

by Jordan T. Gebhardt, Scott A. Dee, Erin Little, Brittney N. Scales and Doug R. Kern

Animals 2024, 14(3), 393; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030393 - 25 Jan 2024

Viewed by 692

Abstract

The extended storage of feed ingredients has been suggested as a method to mitigate the risk of pathogen transmission through contaminated ingredients. To validate the approach of extended storage of complete swine feed for the inactivation of swine viruses, an experiment was conducted wherein swine feed was inoculated with 10 mL of 1 × 10⁵ TCID₅₀/mL of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), and Senecavirus A (SVA) and stored for 58 d at 23.9 °C. Measures of feed quality were also evaluated at the initiation and conclusion of the storage period including screening for mycotoxins, characterization of select microbiological measures, and stability of phytase and dietary vitamins. Storing feed for 58 d under either ambient or anaerobic and temperature-controlled storage conditions did not result in substantial concerns related to microbiological profiles. Upon exposure to the feed following 58 d of storage in a swine bioassay, previously confirmed naïve pigs showed no signs of PEDV or SVA replication as detected by the PCR screening of oral fluids and serum antibody screening. Infection with SVA was documented in the positive control room through diagnostic testing through the State of Minnesota. For PRRSV, the positive control room demonstrated infection. For rooms consuming inoculated feed stored for 58 d, there was no evidence of PRRSV infection with the exception of unintentional aerosol transmission via a documented biocontainment breach. In summary, storing feed for 58 d at anaerobic and temperature-controlled environmental conditions of 23.9 °C validates that the extended storage of complete swine feed can be a method to reduce risks associated with pathogen transmission through feed while having minimal effects on measures of nutritional quality. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 465 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of Truck Cab Decontamination Procedures following Inoculation with Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus and Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus

by Grace E. Houston, Cassandra K. Jones, Caitlin Evans, Haley K. Otott, Charles R. Stark, Jianfa Bai, Elizabeth G. Poulsen Porter, Marcelo N. de Almeida, Jianqiang Zhang, Phillip C. Gauger, Allison K. Blomme, Jason C. Woodworth, Chad B. Paulk and Jordan T. Gebhardt

Animals 2024, 14(2), 280; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14020280 - 16 Jan 2024

Viewed by 809

Abstract

This experiment aimed to evaluate commercially available disinfectants and their application methods against porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) on truck cab surfaces. Plastic, fabric, and rubber surfaces inoculated with PEDV or PRRSV were placed in a full-scale truck cab and then treated with one of eight randomly assigned disinfectant treatments. After application, surfaces were environmentally sampled with cotton gauze and tested for PEDV and PRRSV using qPCR duplex analysis. There was a disinfectant × surface interaction (p < 0.0001), indicating a detectable amount of PEDV or PRRSV RNA was impacted by disinfectant treatment and surface material. For rubber surfaces, 10% bleach application had lower detectable amounts of RNA compared to all other treatments (p < 0.05) except Intervention via misting fumigation, which was intermediate. In both fabric and plastic surfaces, there was no evidence (p > 0.05) of a difference in detectable RNA between disinfectant treatments. For disinfectant treatments, fabric surfaces with no chemical treatment had less detectable viral RNA compared to the corresponding plastic and rubber (p < 0.05). Intervention applied via pump sprayer to fabric surfaces had less detectable viral RNA than plastic (p < 0.05). Furthermore, 10% bleach applied via pump sprayer to fabric and rubber surfaces had less detectable viral RNA than plastic (p < 0.05). Also, a 10 h downtime, with no chemical application or gaseous fumigation for 10 h, applied to fabric surfaces had less detectable viral RNA than other surfaces (p < 0.05). Sixteen treatments were evaluated via swine bioassay, but all samples failed to produce infectivity. In summary, commercially available disinfectants successfully reduced detectable viral RNA on surfaces but did not eliminate viral genetic material, highlighting the importance of bioexclusion of pathogens of interest. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 1023 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Active Participatory Regional Surveillance for Notifiable Swine Pathogens

by Giovani Trevisan, Paul Morris, Gustavo S. Silva, Pormate Nakkirt, Chong Wang, Rodger Main and Jeffrey Zimmerman

Animals 2024, 14(2), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14020233 - 11 Jan 2024

Viewed by 729

Abstract

We evaluated an active participatory design for the regional surveillance of notifiable swine pathogens based on testing 10 samples collected by farm personnel in each participating farm. To evaluate the performance of the design, public domain software was used to simulate the introduction and spread of a pathogen among 17,521 farms in a geographic region of 1,615,246 km². Using the simulated pathogen spread data, the probability of detecting ≥ 1 positive farms in the region was estimated as a function of the percent of participating farms (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%), farm-level detection probability (10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%), and regional farm-level prevalence. At 0.1% prevalence (18 positive farms among 17,521 farms) and a farm-level detection probability of 30%, the participatory surveillance design achieved 67%, 90%, and 97% probability of detecting ≥ 1 positive farms in the region when producer participation was 20%, 40%, and 60%, respectively. The cost analysis assumed that 10 individual pig samples per farm would be pooled into 2 samples (5 pigs each) for testing. Depending on the specimen collected (serum or swab sample) and test format (nucleic acid or antibody detection), the cost per round of sampling ranged from EUR 0.017 to EUR 0.032 (USD 0.017 to USD 0.034) per pig in the region. Thus, the analysis suggested that an active regional participatory surveillance design could achieve detection at low prevalence and at a sustainable cost. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 2610 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Performance of a Differentiation of Infected from Vaccinated Animals (DIVA) Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV) Serum and Oral Fluid Erns Antibody AlphaLISA Assay

by Yaowalak Panyasing, Luis Gimenez-Lirola, Roongroje Thanawongnuwech, Phakawan Prakobsuk, Yanee Kawilaphan, Apisit Kittawornrat, Ting-Yu Cheng and Jeffrey Zimmerman

Animals 2023, 13(24), 3802; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13243802 - 9 Dec 2023

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 948

Abstract

Classical swine fever virus (CSFV) is an OIE-listed disease that requires effective surveillance tools for its detection and control. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel CSFV Erns IgG AlphaLISA for both serum and oral fluid specimens that would likewise be compatible with the use of CSFV E2 DIVA vaccines. Test performance was evaluated using a panel of well-characterized serum (n = 760) and individual (n = 528) or pen-based (n = 30) oral fluid samples from four groups of animals: (1) negative controls (n = 60 pigs); (2) inoculated with ALD strain wild-type CSFV (n = 30 pigs); (3) vaccinated with LOM strain live CSFV vaccine (n = 30 pigs); and (4) vaccinated with live CSFV marker vaccine on commercial farms (n = 120 pigs). At a cutoff of S/P ≥ 0.7, the aggregate estimated diagnostic sensitivities and specificities of the assay were, respectively, 97.4% (95% CI 95.9%, 98.3%) and 100% for serum and 95.4% (95% CI 92.9%, 97.0%) and 100% for oral fluid. The Erns IgG antibody AlphaLISA combined DIVA capability with solid diagnostic performance, rapid turnaround, ease of use, and compatibility with both serum and oral fluid specimens. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 3189 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Situation Analysis and Recommendations for the Biosecurity Status of Dairy Farms in Punjab, India: A Cross-Sectional Survey

by Pankaj Dhaka, Ilias Chantziaras, Deepthi Vijay, Manmeet Singh, Jasbir Singh Bedi, Nele Caekebeke and Jeroen Dewulf

Animals 2023, 13(22), 3458; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13223458 - 9 Nov 2023

Viewed by 807

Abstract

Farm biosecurity is an important herd management strategy to assure infection prevention and animal health. The present study aimed to evaluate the implementation of biosecurity measures on dairy farms in Punjab, India, using the standardized Biocheck.UGent™ scoring system. Convenience sampling was used to select 94 dairy farms, comprising both cattle and buffaloes, with a mean herd size of 74.8 animals. The study found that the mean external and internal biosecurity scores for the selected dairy farms were 45.4% and 43.7%, respectively. Among the subcategories, the highest external biosecurity score was observed for ‘vermin control and other animals’ (63%), and the highest internal biosecurity score was observed for ‘adult cattle management’ (76.6%). Whereas the lowest score for external biosecurity was observed for ‘purchase and reproduction’ (30.6%), and the lowest score for internal biosecurity was observed for ‘health management’ (33.6%). The overall mean biosecurity score of the present study was 44.8%, which was lower than the overall mean global score of 52%. The correlation analysis indicated a positive correlation between herd size and overall biosecurity scores, indicating that larger farms had, on average, higher biosecurity scores. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the implementation of biosecurity measures on dairy farms in Punjab needs improvement, especially in the subcategories of ‘purchase and reproduction’ and ‘health management’. Further research to identify the factors influencing the implementation of biosecurity measures on dairy farms in the region is recommended. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biosecuring Animal Populations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Biosecuring Animal Populations

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (10 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI