Search

Background and Aim: In Indonesia, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 outbreaks in poultry are still reported. The disease causes a decrease in egg production and an increase in mortality; this has an impact on the economic losses of farmers. Several studies have considered that ducks play a role in the HPAI endemicity in the country; however, little is known about whether or not the type of duck farming is associated with HPAI H5 virus infection, particularly within clade 2.3.2.1c, which has been predominantly found in poultry since 2014. A cross-sectional study was conducted to determine the HPAI seroprevalence for H5 subtype clade 2.3.2.1c in laying ducks that are kept intensively and nomadically and to determine the associated risk factors. Materials and Methods: Forty-nine duck farmers were randomly selected from ten sub-districts in Purbalingga District, Central Java, Indonesia; a cross-sectional study was implemented to collect field data. Based on an expected HPAI prevalence level of 10%, estimated accuracy of ± 5%, and 95% confidence interval (CI), the total sample size was calculated at 36 individuals. Samples must be multiplied by 7 to reduce bias; thus, 252 ducks were taken as samples in this study. Considering that the maintenance and duck handling were uniform and farmers complained that the effect of activity to take duck samples would reduce egg production, this study only took samples from 245 ducks (oropharyngeal swabs and serum). Those samples were taken from five birds on each farm. Hemagglutination inhibition tests examined the serum samples for HPAI H5 Clade 2.3.2.1c, and pool swab samples (five swabs in one viral media transport) were examined by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) test for influenza Type A and H5 subtype virus. Information regarding farm management was obtained using a questionnaire; face-to-face interviews were conducted with the duck farmers using native Javanese language. Results: Serum and swabs from 245 ducks were collected in total. For individual birds, 54.69% (134/245) of serum samples were H5 seropositive. Seroprevalence among nomadic ducks was 59.28% (95% CI: 0.48-0.61), which was higher than among intensively farmed ducks (48.57%, 95% CI: 0.38-0.58). Farm-level seroprevalence was 50% (95% CI: 0.30-0.69) for nomadic ducks but only 28.57% (95% CI: 0.11-0.51) for intensively farmed ducks. The farm-level virus prevalence (proportion of flocks with at least one bird positive for influenza Type A) was 17.85% (95% CI: 0.07-0.35) for nomadic ducks and 4.76% (1/21) for intensively farmed ducks (95% CI: 0.008-0.23). All influenza Type A positive samples were negative for the H5 subtype, indicating that another HA subtype AI viruses might have been circulating in ducks in the study area. A relationship between duck farms that were H5 seropositive and their maintenance system was present; however, this relationship was not significant, the nomadic duck system detected 2 times higher H5-seropositive ducks than the intensive farming system (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 0.33-14.31). Conclusion: This study found that the seroprevalence of HPAI in the duck population level in Purbalingga was 54.69% and demonstrated that the nomadic duck farming system was more likely to acquire HPAI H5 infection than the intensive farming duck system. Other risk factors should be further investigated as the diversity of the farming system is partially related to HPAI H5 infection.

In July 2016, an avian influenza outbreak in duck farms in Yogyakarta province was reported to Disease Investigation Center (DIC), Wates, Indonesia, with approximately 1,000 ducks died or culled. In this study, two avian influenza (AI) virus subtypes, A/duck/Bantul/04161291-OR/2016 (H5N1) and A/duck/Bantul/04161291-OP/2016 (H9N2) isolated from ducks in the same farm during an AI outbreak in Bantul district, Yogyakarta province, were sequenced and characterized. Our results showed that H5N1 virus was closely related to the highly pathogenic AI (HPAI) H5N1 of clade 2.3.2.1c, while the H9N2 virus was clustered with LPAI viruses from China, Vietnam and Indonesia H9N2 (CVI lineage). Genetic analysis revealed virulence characteristics for both in avian and in mammalian species. In summary, co-circulation of HPAI-H5N1 of clade 2.3.2.1c and LPAI-H9N2 was identified in a duck farm during an AI outbreak in Yogyakarta province, Indonesia. Our findings raise a concern of the potential risk of the viruses, which could increase viral transmission and/or threat to human health. Routine surveillance of avian influenza viruses should be continuously conducted to understand the dynamic and diversity of the viruses for influenza prevention and control in Indonesia and SEA region.

Objective: A phylogenetic study was carried out on the avian influenza virus (AIV) isolated from a disease outbreak in Sidenreng Rappang Regency, South Sulawesi, Indonesia, in 2018. Material and Methods: Oropharyngeal swabs and organ samples were obtained from ducks that showed clinical symptoms: torticollis, fascial edema, neurological disorders, the corneas appear cloudy, and death occurs less than 1 day after symptoms appear. In this study, isolate A/duck/ Sidenreng Rappang/07180110-11/2018 from duck was sequenced and characterized. Results: It was found that each gene segment of the virus has the highest nucleotide homology to the Indonesian highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 clade 2.3.2.1c. Multiple alignments of the sample Hemagglutinin (HA) gene with the avian influenza references virus showed that the pattern of amino acid arrangement in the cleavage site PQRERRRK-RGLF is the characteristic of the HPAI virus. In addition, the HA gene contained Q222 (glutamine) and G224 (glycine), signify¬ing a high affinity to avian receptor binding specificity (SA α2,3 Gal). Furthermore, there was no genetic reassortment of this virus based on the phylogenetic analysis of HA, NA, PB1, PB2, PA, NP, M, and NS genes. Conclusion: The HPAI H5N1 clade 2.3.2.1c virus was identified in duck farms in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. [J Adv Vet Anim Res 2021; 8(2.000): 346-354]

H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus causes high mortality of infected birds, with infection in multiple organs, including in feathers. Feathers have been proposed as samples for diagnosis of HPAI infection in birds, and this study is part of a broader investigation validating the use of feathers for diagnostic purposes. To understand and characterize the morphological basis for feather infection, sections from 7 different skin tracts of ducks and chickens infected with 3 different clades of H5N1 HPAI virus from Indonesia and Vietnam were examined histologically. Results showed that in ducks, lesions and viral antigen were mainly detected in the epidermis of feathers and follicles, whereas in chickens, they were mostly found in the dermis of these structures. Abundant viral antigen was found in nearly all the feathers examined from chickens, and there was no apparent difference between virus isolates or skin tracts in the proportion of feathers that were antigen positive. By immunohistochemistry, the majority of feathers from most skin tracts from ducks infected with a Vietnamese H5N1 HPAI virus contained abundant levels of viral antigen, while few feathers were antigen positive from ducks infected with 2 Indonesian viruses. These results support and inform the use of feathers for diagnostic detection of H5N1 HPAI virus in birds.

Oropharyngeal and cloacal swabs have been widely used for the detection of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian Influenza A virus (HPAI virus) in birds. Previous studies have shown that the feather calamus is a site of H5N1 virus replication and therefore has potential for diagnosis of avian influenza. However, studies characterizing the value of feathers for this purpose are not available, to our knowledge; herein we present a study investigating feathers for detection of H5N1 virus. Ducks and chickens were experimentally infected with H5N1 HPAI virus belonging to 1 of 3 clades (Indonesian clades 2.1.1 and 2.1.3, Vietnamese clade 1). Different types of feathers and oropharyngeal and cloacal swab samples were compared by virus isolation. In chickens, virus was detected from all sample types: oral and cloacal swabs, and immature pectorosternal, flight, and tail feathers. During clinical disease, the viral titers were higher in feathers than swabs. In ducks, the proportion of virus-positive samples was variable depending on viral strain and time from challenge; cloacal swabs and mature pectorosternal feathers were clearly inferior to oral swabs and immature pectorosternal, tail, and flight feathers. In ducks infected with Indonesian strains, in which most birds did not develop clinical signs, all sampling methods gave intermittent positive results; 3–23% of immature pectorosternal feathers were positive during the acute infection period; oropharyngeal swabs had slightly higher positivity during early infection, while feathers performed better during late infection. Our results indicate that immature feathers are an alternative sample for the diagnosis of HPAI in chickens and ducks.

To determine the pathobiology of Indonesian H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza, two viruses representing clades 2.1.1 and 2.1.3 were inoculated into broiler chickens and Pekin ducks via the eyes, nostrils and oropharynx. In chickens, both viruses produced fulminant disease; tissue tropism was broad but predominantly endothelial and viral loads in tissues were high. Except for one case of meningoencephalitis, the infection in ducks was sub-clinical, leading only to seroconversion. In these ducks, virus and viral antigen occurred in lower amounts, mainly in the respiratory tract (airsac and sinuses), prior to day 7 after inoculation. During clinical disease, chickens shed high virus titres orally and cloacally. Ducks intermittently shed low virus titres from the oral route for up to 8 days post-inoculation. We discuss the significance of the data for understanding the pathogenesis and pathobiology of Indonesian H5N1 in chickens and ducks.

Ducks are considered to play an important role in the transmission and maintenance of the Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus. However, there is limited information on duck management practices in countries where HPAI is endemic. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on 96 'stationary' smallholder duck farms in Indonesia to describe the management of ducks and to identify practices that could potentially promote the risk of HPAI spread. The mean flock size was 29 ducks, ranging from 1 up to 150 birds. Both the sale and the consumption of eggs were the most important purposes of duck keeping, followed by the use of droppings for fertilizer and the production of meat ducks. About 77% of duck owners allowed their ducks to scavenge. Important hazards for interspecies HPAI virus transmission related to scavenging were identified: 1) intermingling between ducks and chickens on duck farms (48%); 2) frequent contact with neighbours' chickens (44%); 3) visits to the same paddies by duck flocks from other farms (88%); 4) in the paddies, contact between duck flock and other ducks, chickens, people and wild birds as reported by 88%, 30%, 80% and 77% of duck owners respectively; 5) the keeping of singing birds by 17% of farmers; 6) predators such as the small Asian mongoose (Herpestes javanicus) (25%) and feral cats (20%) visiting the duck farms (these species are susceptible to HPAI infection and might play a role in the spread of the HPAI virus). Many duck owners associated deaths of their birds with the use of pesticides in the rice paddies, and appeared to be more concerned about pesticide toxicity, problems that inhibit scavenging ability and external parasites than about HPAI, which in general was not considered to be of high importance. Hence HPAI vaccination or preventive culling of ducks during disease outbreaks was not conducted on the study farms.

These ducks may be a source of infection for chickens and humans., In Java, Indonesia, during March 2007–March 2008, 96 farms with scavenging ducks that were not vaccinated against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) were monitored bimonthly. Bird-level (prevalence among individual birds) H5 seroprevalence was 2.6% for ducks and 0.5% for chickens in contact with ducks. At least 1 seropositive bird was detected during 19.5% and 2.0% of duck- and chicken-flock visits, respectively. Duck flocks were 12.4× more likely than chicken flocks to have seropositive birds. During 21.4% of farm visits, ≥1 sampled duck was H5 seropositive when all sampled in-contact chickens were seronegative. Subtype H5 virus was detected during 2.5% of duck-flock visits and 1.5% of chicken-flock visits. When deaths from HPAI infection occurred, H5 virus shedding occurred in apparently healthy birds on 68.8% of farms. Of 180 poultry deaths investigated, 43.9% were attributed to H5 virus. These longitudinal study results indicate that ducks are a source of infection for chickens and, potentially, for humans.

Ducks are important maintenance hosts for avian influenza, including H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses. A previous study indicated that persistence of H5N1 viruses in ducks after the development of humoral immunity may drive viral evolution following immune selection. As H5N1 HPAI is endemic in Indonesia, this mechanism may be important in understanding H5N1 evolution in that region. To determine the capability of domestic ducks to maintain prolonged shedding of Indonesian clade 2.1 H5N1 virus, two groups of Pekin ducks were inoculated through the eyes, nostrils and oropharynx and viral shedding and transmission investigated. Inoculated ducks (n = 15), which were mostly asymptomatic, shed infectious virus from the oral route from 1 to 8 days post inoculation, and from the cloacal route from 2-8 dpi. Viral ribonucleic acid was detected from 1-15 days post inoculation from the oral route and 1-24 days post inoculation from the cloacal route (cycle threshold

Background Chicken red blood cells (RBCs) are commonly used in hemagglutination inhibition (HI) tests to measure hemagglutinating antibodies against influenza viruses. The use of horse RBCs in the HI test can reportedly increase its sensitivity when testing human sera for avian influenza antibodies. This study aims to compare the proportion of positives detected and the agreement between two HI tests using either chicken or horse red blood cells for antibody detection in sera of ducks experimentally infected or naturally exposed to Indonesian H5 subtype avian influenza virus. In addition, comparison with a virus neutralisation (VN) test was conducted with the experimental sera. Results In the experimental study, the proportion of HI antibody-positive ducks increased slightly, from 0.57 when using chicken RBCs to 0.60 when using horse RBCs. The HI tests indicated almost perfect agreement (kappa = 0.86) when results were dichotomised (titre ≥ 4 log2), and substantial agreement (weighted kappa = 0.80) for log titres. Overall agreements between the two HI tests were greater than between either of the HI tests and the VN test. The use of horse RBCs also identified a higher proportion of antibody positives in field duck sera (0.08, compared to chicken RBCs 0.02), with also almost perfect agreements for dichotomized results (Prevalence and bias adjusted Kappa (PABAK) = 0.88) and for log titres (weighted PABAK = 0.93), respectively. Factors that might explain observed differences in the proportion of antibody-positive ducks and in the agreements between HI tests are discussed. Conclusion In conclusion, we identified a good agreement between HI tests. However, when horse RBCs were used, a higher proportion of sera was positive (titre ≥ 4 log2) than using chicken RBCs, especially during the early response against H5N1 virus. The HRBC-HI might be more responsive in identifying early H5N1 HPAI serological response and could be a recommended assay for avian influenza sero-surveillance in both wild and domestic birds.

SUMMARYA prospective longitudinal study was conducted on 96 smallholder duck farms in Indonesia over a period of 14 months in 2007 and 2008 to monitor bird- and flock-level incidence rates of H5 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) infection in duck flocks, and to identify risk factors associated with these flocks becoming H5 seropositive. Flocks that scavenged around neighbouring houses within the village were at increased risk of developing H5 antibodies, as were flocks from which carcases of birds that died during the 2 months between visits were consumed by the family. Duck flock confinement overnight on the farm and sudden deaths of birds between visits were associated with lower risk of the flock developing H5 antibodies. Scavenging around neighbouring houses and non-confinement overnight are likely to be causal risk factors for infection. With this study we have provided insights into farm-level risk factors of HPAI virus introduction into duck flocks. Preventive messages based on these risk factors should be included in HPAI awareness programmes.

Pekin ducks were infected by the mucosal route (oral, nasal, ocular) with one of two strains of Eurasian lineage H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus: A/Muscovy duck/Vietnam/453/2004 and A/duck/Indramayu/BBVW/109/2006 (from Indonesia). Ducks were killed humanely on days 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 after challenge, or whenever morbidity was severe enough to justify euthanasia. Morbidity was recorded by observation of clinical signs and cloacal temperatures; the disease was characterized by histopathology; tissue tropism was studied by immunohistochemistry and virus titration on tissue samples; and viral shedding patterns were determined by virus isolation and titration of oral and cloacal swabs. The Vietnamese strain caused severe morbidity with fever and depression; the Indonesian strain caused only transient fever. Both viruses had a predilection for a similar range of tissue types, but the quantity of tissue antigen and tissue virus titres were considerably higher with the Vietnamese strain. The Vietnamese strain caused severe myocarditis and skeletal myositis; both strains caused non-suppurative encephalitis and a range of other inflammatory reactions of varying severity. The principal epithelial tissue infected was that of the air sacs, but antigen was not abundant. Epithelium of the turbinates, trachea and bronchi had only rare infection with virus. Virus was shed from both the oral and cloacal routes; it was first detected 24 h after challenge and persisted until day 5 after challenge. The higher prevalence of virus from swabs from ducks infected with the Vietnamese strain indicates that this strain may be more adapted to ducks than the Indonesia strain.

The current study evaluated the test characteristics of 2 commercially available rapid antigen tests for highly pathogenic avian influenza. Diagnostic specimens were collected from free-ranging village chickens in Indonesia. A total of 174 healthy, sick, and dead birds were included in the study. The relative diagnostic test sensitivity and the relative diagnostic test specificity were calculated by using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as the confirmatory diagnosis. The AnigenR Rapid AIV Ag test had a relative diagnostic sensitivity of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56–0.80) and a relative diagnostic specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93–0.99). The Flu DetectTM Antigen Capture test strip had a relative diagnostic sensitivity of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.58–0.82) and a relative diagnostic specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93–0.99). These tests are a valuable tool for the Indonesian avian influenza control program by reliably and quickly detecting Influenza A virus from oropharyngeal swabs from sick or dying chickens.

Background Indonesia is one of the countries most severely affected by H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus in terms of poultry and human health. However, there is little information on the diversity of H5N1 viruses circulating in backyard farms, where chickens and ducks often intermingle. In this study, H5N1 virus infection occurring in 96 smallholder duck farms in central Java, Indonesia from 2007-2008 was investigated and the molecular and antigenic characteristics of H5N1 viruses isolated from these farms were analysed. Results All 84 characterised viruses belonged to H5N1 clade 2.1 with three virus sublineages being identified: clade 2.1.1 (1), clade 2.1.3 (80), and IDN/6/05-like viruses (3) that did not belong to any of the present clades. All three clades were found in ducks, while only clade 2.1.3 was isolated from chickens. There were no significant amino acid mutations of the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) sites of the viruses, including the receptor binding, glycosylation, antigenic and catalytic sites and NA inhibitor targets. All the viruses had polybasic amino acids at the HA cleavage site. No evidence of major antigenic variants was detected. Based on the HA gene, identical virus variants could be found on different farms across the study sites and multiple genetic variants could be isolated from HPAI outbreaks simultaneously or at different time points from single farms. HPAI virus was isolated from both ducks and chickens; however, the proportion of surviving duck cases was considerably higher than in chickens. Conclusions The 2.1.3 clade was the most common lineage found in this study. All the viruses had sequence characteristic of HPAI, but negligible variations in other recognized amino acids at the HA and NA proteins which determine virus phenotypes. Multiple genetic variants appeared to be circulating simultaneously within poultry communities. The high proportion of live duck cases compared to chickens over the study period suggests that ducks are more likely to survive infection and they may better suit the role of long-term maintenance host for H5N1. As some viruses were isolated from dead birds, there was no clear correlation between genetic variations and pathogenicity of these viruses.