Search

Backyard pig populations are not monitored for influenza A virus (IAV) in Brazil and there are limited data about seroprevalence and risk factors in these populations. Our goal was to assess possible factors associated with IAV seroprevalence in backyard pig populations using an indirect ELISA protocol based on a recombinant nucleoprotein. Following the IAV screening using NP‐ELISA, subtype‐specific serology based on hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay of the ELISA‐positive pigs was conducted. The survey comprised a total of 1,667 sera samples collected in 2012 and 2014 in 479 holdings and the estimated seroprevalence was 5.3% (3.84%–7.33%) and 2.3% (1.34%–3.71%) in the respective years. In both years, H1N1pdm09 was the most prevalent subtype. The multivariable analysis showed main factors such as "age," "sex," "number of suckling pigs" and "neighbours raising pigs" that presented the greatest effect on IAV seroprevalence in these pig populations. These factors may be associated with the low biosecurity measures and management of backyard holdings. In addition, the low IAV seroprevalences found in these backyard pig populations could be related to a low number of animals in each pig holding and low animal movement/replacement that do not favour IAV transmission dynamics. This low frequency of H1N1pdm09 seropositive pigs could also be due to sporadic human‐to‐pig transmission of what is now a human seasonal influenza A virus; however, these factors should be explored in future studies. Herein, these results highlight the importance of IAV continued surveillance in backyard pig holdings, since it is poorly known which IAVs are circulating in these populations and the risk they could pose to public health and virus transmission to commercial farms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Results of national serological surveys for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) conducted in Switzerland in 2001 and 2004 were analyzed. In 2001, 41,124 breeding sows from 2540 herds out of 6406 were sampled, and in 2004 7498 animals were sampled from 1074 herds out of 5320. All serum samples were tested for PRRS using an ELISA developed at the Institute of Virology and Immunoprophylaxis (IVI), Switzerland with a sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of 94 and 97%, respectively. Positive samples were re-tested with a commercial ELISA (IDEXX) with Se of 100% and Sp of 99%. Samples positive in the second test were confirmed with the fluorescent antibody test (FAT). A stochastic model using data from the main survey conducted in 2001 was done to verify whether the sampling scheme used could detect at least one infected herd with 99% confidence level if the herd designed prevalence was at 0.1 or 0.2%. Additionally, a Bayesian approach was conducted to calculate the post-survey probability of freedom from PRRS using data from the 2001 and 2004 surveys. A Monte Carlo simulation with 5000 iteration was run for each model. Eleven samples in 2001 and six in 2004, all from different farms, could not be conclusively confirmed as negative by the FAT. All other samples were negative. Truly infected animals and herds were not predicted by a stochastic model at the 99% confidence level and 0.1% herd prevalence using data from the 2001 survey. However, it was demonstrated that the prior probability of freedom from PRRS increased from 89.3 to 99.2% after the 2001 survey. Upon completion of the 2004 survey, the probability of freedom from PRRS reached a value of 99.7%. Based on our results, we could conclude that the pig industry in Switzerland is free of PRRS virus with this level of confidence. Restricted import activities over the last decades are a possible explanation for the continuing absence of PRRS-infection in the Swiss swine population. Import requirements defined by the pig industry minimize the risk of introduction of PRRS-infected animals in the future. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]