Search

Managing infectious disease demands understanding pathogen transmission. In Britain, transmission of Mycobacterium bovis from badgers (Meles meles) to cattle hinders the control of bovine tuberculosis (TB), but the mechanism of such transmission is uncertain. As badgers and cattle seldom interact directly, transmission might occur in their shared environment through contact with contamination such as faeces, urine and saliva. We used concurrent GPS collar tracking of badgers and cattle at four sites in Cornwall, southwest Britain, to test whether each species used locations previously occupied by the other species, within the survival time of M. bovis bacteria. Although analyses of the same data set showed that badgers avoided cattle, we found no evidence that this avoidance persisted over time: neither GPS‐collared badgers nor cattle avoided space which had been occupied by the other species in the preceding 36 h. Defining a contact event as an animal being located

Diseases transmitted from wildlife to livestock or people may be managed more effectively if it is known where transmission occurs. In Britain, farm buildings have been proposed as important sites of Mycobacterium bovis transmission between wild badgers (Meles meles) and cattle, contributing to the maintenance of bovine tuberculosis (TB). Farmers are therefore advised to exclude badgers from buildings. We used Global Positioning System (GPS) collars and remote cameras to characterise badgers’ use of farm buildings at four TB-affected sites in southwestern Britain. Across 54 GPS-collared badgers, 99.8% of locations fell ≥3 m from farm buildings. Remote cameras deployed in feed stores recorded just 12 nights with badger visits among 3134 store nights of monitoring. GPS-collared badgers used space near farm buildings less than expected based on availability, significantly preferring land ≥100 m from buildings. There was no positive association between badgers’ use of farm buildings and the infection status of either badgers or cattle. Six GPS-collared badgers which regularly visited farm buildings all tested negative for M. bovis. Overall, test-positive badgers spent less time close to farm buildings than did test-negative animals. Badger visits to farm buildings were more frequent where badger population densities were high. Our findings suggest that, while buildings may offer important opportunities for M. bovis transmission between badgers and cattle, building use by badgers is not a prerequisite for such transmission. Identifying ways to minimise infectious contact between badgers and cattle away from buildings is therefore a management priority.

Effective management of infectious disease relies upon understanding mechanisms of pathogen transmission. In particular, while models of disease dynamics usually assume transmission through direct contact, transmission through environmental contamination can cause different dynamics. We used Global Positioning System (GPS) collars and proximity-sensing contact-collars to explore opportunities for transmission of Mycobacterium bovis [causal agent of bovine tuberculosis] between cattle and badgers (Meles meles). Cattle pasture was badgers’ most preferred habitat. Nevertheless, although collared cattle spent 2914 collar-nights in the home ranges of contact-collared badgers, and 5380 collar-nights in the home ranges of GPS-collared badgers, we detected no direct contacts between the two species. Simultaneous GPS-tracking revealed that badgers preferred land > 50 m from cattle. Very infrequent direct contact indicates that badger-to-cattle and cattle-to-badger M. bovis transmission may typically occur through contamination of the two species’ shared environment. This information should help to inform tuberculosis control by guiding both modelling and farm management.