Search

International audience; The past two decades have seen an accumulation of theoretical and empirical evidence for the interlinkages between human health and well-being, biodiversity and ecosystem services, and agriculture. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the devastating impacts that an emerging pathogen, of animal origin, can have on human societies and economies. A number of scholars have called for the wider adoption of "One Health integrated approaches" to better prevent, and respond to, the threats of emerging zoonotic diseases. However, there are theoretical and practical challenges that have precluded the full development and practical implementation of this approach. Whilst integrated approaches to health are increasingly adopting a social-ecological system framework (SES), the lack of clarity in framing the key concept of resilience in health contexts remains a major barrier to its implementation by scientists and practitioners. We propose an operational framework, based on a transdisciplinary definition of Socio-Ecological System Health (SESH) that explicitly links health and ecosystem management with the resilience of SES, and the adaptive capacity of the actors and agents within SES, to prevent and cope with emerging health and environmental risks. We focus on agricultural transitions that play a critical role in disease emergence and biodiversity conservation, to illustrate the proposed participatory framework to frame and co-design SESH interventions. Finally, we highlight critical changes that are needed from researchers, policy makers and donors, in order to engage communities and other stakeholders involved in the management of their own health and that of the underpinning ecosystems.

Growing evidence suggests that multiple wildlife species can be infected with peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV), with important consequences for the potential maintenance of PPRV in communities of susceptible hosts, and the threat that PPRV may pose to the conservation of wildlife populations and resilience of ecosystems. Significant knowledge gaps in the epidemiology of PPRV across the ruminant community (wildlife and domestic), and the understanding of infection in wildlife and other atypical host species groups (e.g., camelidae, suidae, and bovinae) hinder our ability to apply necessary integrated disease control and management interventions at the wildlife-livestock interface. Similarly, knowledge gaps limit the inclusion of wildlife in the FAO/OIE Global Strategy for the Control and Eradication of PPR, and the framework of activities in the PPR Global Eradication Programme that lays the foundation for eradicating PPR through national and regional efforts. This article reports on the first international meeting on, “Controlling PPR at the livestock-wildlife interface,” held in Rome, Italy, March 27–29, 2019. A large group representing national and international institutions discussed recent advances in our understanding of PPRV in wildlife, identified knowledge gaps and research priorities, and formulated recommendations. The need for a better understanding of PPRV epidemiology at the wildlife-livestock interface to support the integration of wildlife into PPR eradication efforts was highlighted by meeting participants along with the reminder that PPR eradication and wildlife conservation need not be viewed as competing priorities, but instead constitute two requisites of healthy socio-ecological systems.

The 2016–2017 introduction of peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV) into livestock in Mongolia was followed by mass mortality of the critically endangered Mongolian saiga antelope and other rare wild ungulates. To assess the nature and population effects of this outbreak among wild ungulates, we collected clinical, histopathologic, epidemiologic, and ecological evidence. Molecular characterization confirmed that the causative agent was PPRV lineage IV. The spatiotemporal patterns of cases among wildlife were similar to those among livestock affected by the PPRV outbreak, suggesting spillover of virus from livestock at multiple locations and time points and subsequent spread among wild ungulates. Estimates of saiga abundance suggested a population decline of 80%, raising substantial concerns for the species’ survival. Consideration of the entire ungulate community (wild and domestic) is essential for elucidating the epidemiology of PPRV in Mongolia, addressing the threats to wild ungulate conservation, and achieving global PPRV eradication.

The natural ecology of Ebola virus infection remains enigmatic. No clear reservoir species has been confirmed but there is evidence of infection in a wide spectrum of mammals, including humans, non-human primates, domestic and wild ungulates and a variety of bat species, both frugivorous and insectivorous. Humans and most other species examined appear to be spillover hosts and suffer disease. Bats are the exception and are tolerant to infection in some laboratory studies. Some surveys show a low prevalence of antibodies against Zaire Ebola virus\ud (ZEBOV) strains in bats during human outbreaks and inter-epidemic periods, and this order of mammals is considered to be the likely reservoir for the virus. Other putative sources include insects but this hypothesis is unproven in the field or laboratory. Moreover, some potential sources, such as aquatic species, have yet to be investigated. There are a number of environmental, human behavioural and ecological risk factors proposed with respect to spillover and spread. In the West African outbreak, which was unprecedented in scale and geographic spread, the source of the spillover remains unproven, although an association exists between the proposed index case and a colony of insectivorous bats. In all but a few Ebola virus disease events, spillover has only been superficially investigated and this was also the case in the West African epidemic. The authors suggest that, to\ud address risks at the human–animal–environmental interface, using a One Health approach, more effort is needed to investigate spillover factors at the time of a ZEBOV epidemic, in addition to conducting inter-epidemic surveys in peridomestic environments. The true prevalence of ZEBOV infection in any species of bats remains unknown. Large-scale, expensive, non-randomised surveys, with low sampling numbers per species, are unlikely to provide evidence for Ebola virus reservoirs or to improve our epidemiological understanding.

Mass mortality events in wildlife are a growing concern. Under conditions of rapid global change, opportunistic responses in bacterial commensals, triggered by environmental stressors, may be increasingly implicated in die‐offs. In 2015, over 200,000 saiga antelope died of hemorrhagic septicemia caused by the pathogen Pasteurella multocida serotype B. We use this case to explore die‐offs from commensal bacteria more broadly, looking at factors which might favor such extreme events. We review other recorded disease outbreaks caused by Pasteurellaceae organisms, firstly in saiga and secondly in other wild ungulates, and ask whether the 2015 die‐off was unprecedented in terms of mortality rates, numbers dead, spatial scale, and in the nature of the predisposing or environmental factors involved. We also compare these outbreaks with mass mortality events associated with commensal bacteria in wildlife more generally. We identify three additional major die‐offs in saiga in which Pasteurellaceae organisms may be implicated, of which one in 1988 closely resembles the 2015 hemorrhagic septicemia event. No other recorded cases in wild ungulates approach the magnitude of these cases for any of the metrics considered, possible exceptions being die‐offs in Mongolian gazelles, in which the role of these pathogens is poorly substantiated. Environmental triggers were the most commonly suggested factor leading to pathogenesis, with warm humid conditions most commonly associated with hemorrhagic septicemia. Life history may also be significant—saigas are migratory and the largest pasteurellosis outbreaks outside this species also occur in migratory species of bird or other temperate ungulates aggregating in large numbers. Cases provoked by other commensals tend to be small in magnitude. Exceptions involve interactions between multiple pathogens and climatic conditions or sets of climatic conditions acting on different stages of the host–pathogen life cycle, leading to time lags between infection and subsequent disease. Overall, the scale and rapidity of the saiga die‐offs appear unprecedented among mortality events caused by bacterial commensals in wild mammals. Experimental research into the genetics and microbiology of host–pathogen interactions upon changes in the external environment, and monitoring of animals and conditions at calving sites, may eventually reveal the underlying causes of these die‐offs.

Livestock meat and offal contribute significantly to human nutrition as sources of high‐quality protein and micronutrients. Livestock products are increasingly in demand, particularly in low‐ and middle‐income settings where economies are growing and meat is increasingly seen as an affordable and desirable food item. Demand is also driving intensification of livestock keeping and processing. An unintended consequence of intensification is increased exposure to zoonotic agents, and a contemporary emerging problem is infection with Campylobacter and Salmonella spp. from livestock (avian and mammalian), which can lead to disease, malabsorption and undernutrition through acute and chronic diarrhoea. This can occur at the farm, in households or through the food chain. Direct infection occurs when handling livestock and through bacteria shed into the environment, on food preparation surfaces or around the house and surroundings. This manuscript critically reviews Campylobacter and Salmonella infections in animals, examines the factors affecting colonization and faecal shedding of bacteria of these two genera as well as risk factors for human acquisition of the infection from infected animals or environment and analyses priority areas for preventive actions with a focus on resource‐poor settings.

The current fragmented framework of health governance for humans, animals and environment, together with the conventional linear approach to solving current health problems, is failing to meet today’s complex health challenges and is proving unsustainable. Advances in healthcare depend increasingly on intensive interventions, technological developments and expensive pharmaceuticals. The disconnect grows between human health, animal health and environmental and ecosystems health. Human development gains have come with often unrecognised negative externalities affecting ecosystems, notably loss of resilience, mostly through biodiversity loss and land degradation. Reduced capacity of the ecosystem to serve humanity threatens to reverse the health gains of the last century. A paradigm shift is urgently required to de-sectoralise human, animal, plant and ecosystem health and to take a more integrated approach to health, One Health (OH). The sustainable development goals (SDGs) offer a framework and unique opportunity for this and we argue the need of an OH approach towards achieving them. Feasibility assessments and outcome evaluations are often constrained by sectoral politics within a national framework, historic possession of expertise, as well as tried and tested metrics. OH calls for a better understanding, acceptance and use of a broader and transdisciplinary set of evaluation approaches and associated metrics, which is a key objective of NEOH. We need to shift our current sectoralised, linear focus to a more visible balanced health investment with more global benefits to all species. This is encapsulated in the movements for OH, EcoHealth, Planetary Health and Ecological Public Health, which are essentially converging towards a paradigm shift for a more integrated approach to health., peer-reviewed

Infection of wild animals by bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is raising concern worldwide. This article reviews the current epidemiological situation, risk of emergence and control options at the wildlife-livestock-human interface in sub-Saharan Africa. In livestock, bTB has been confirmed in the majority of countries from all parts of the continent. Wildlife infection is confirmed in seven countries from southern and eastern Africa, apparently spreading in the southern Africa region. Mycobacterium bovis has been isolated from 17 wild mammal species, although only four are suspected to play a role as maintenance host. Zoonotic risks are a concern, but no direct spillover from wildlife to humans has been documented, and no case of bTB spillback from wildlife to livestock has been confirmed. In this paper we assess the main risk factors of bTB spillover at the wildlife-livestock-human interface and suggest several research themes which could improve the control of the disease in the African context

Background: Zoonoses account for the most commonly reported emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, there is limited knowledge on how pastoral communities perceive zoonoses in relation to their livelihoods, culture and their wider ecology. This study was carried out to explore local knowledge and perceptions on zoonoses among pastoralists in Tanzania. Methodology and principal findings: This study involved pastoralists in Ngorongoro district in northern Tanzania and Kibaha and Bagamoyo districts in eastern Tanzania. Qualitative methods of focus group discussions, participatory epidemiology and interviews were used. A total of 223 people were involved in the study. Among the pastoralists, there was no specific term in their local language that describes zoonosis. Pastoralists from northern Tanzania possessed a higher understanding on the existence of a number of zoonoses than their eastern districts' counterparts. Understanding of zoonoses could be categorized into two broad groups: a local syndromic framework, whereby specific symptoms of a particular illness in humans concurred with symptoms in animals, and the biomedical framework, where a case definition is supported by diagnostic tests. Some pastoralists understand the possibility of some infections that could cross over to humans from animals but harm from these are generally tolerated and are not considered as threats. A number of social and cultural practices aimed at maintaining specific cultural functions including social cohesion and rites of passage involve animal products, which present zoonotic risk. Conclusions: These findings show how zoonoses are locally understood, and how epidemiology and biomedicine are shaping pastoralists perceptions to zoonoses. Evidence is needed to understand better the true burden and impact of zoonoses in these communities. More studies are needed that seek to clarify the common understanding of zoonoses that could be used to guide effective and locally relevant interventions. Such studies should consider in their approaches the pastoralists' wider social, cultural and economic set up.

The transmission of diseases between livestock and wildlife can be a hindrance to effective disease control. Maintenance hosts and contact rates should be explored to further understand the transmission dynamics at the wildlife-livestock interface. Bovine tuberculosis (BTB) has been shown to have wildlife maintenance hosts and has been confirmed as present in the African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) in the Queen Elizabeth National Park (QENP) in Uganda since the 1960s. The first aim of this study was to explore the spatio-temporal spread of cattle illegally grazing within the QENP recorded by the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) rangers in a wildlife crime database. Secondly, we aimed to quantify wildlife-livestock interactions and cattle movements, on the border of QENP, using a longitudinal questionnaire completed by 30 livestock owners. From this database, 426 cattle sightings were recorded within QENP in 8 years. Thirteen (3.1%) of these came within a 300 m–4 week space-time window of a buffalo herd, using the recorded GPS data. Livestock owners reported an average of 1.04 (95% CI 0.97–1.11) sightings of Uganda kob, waterbuck, buffalo or warthog per day over a 3-month period, with a rate of 0.22 (95% CI 0.20–0.25) sightings of buffalo per farmer per day. Reports placed 85.3% of the ungulate sightings and 88.0% of the buffalo sightings as further than 50 m away. Ungulate sightings were more likely to be closer to cattle at the homestead (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1–3.6) compared with the grazing area. Each cattle herd mixed with an average of five other cattle herds at both the communal grazing and watering points on a daily basis. Although wildlife and cattle regularly shared grazing and watering areas, they seldom came into contact close enough for aerosol transmission. Between species infection transmission is therefore likely to be by indirect or non-respiratory routes, which is suspected to be an infrequent mechanism of transmission of BTB. Occasional cross-species spillover of infection is possible, and the interaction of multiple wildlife species needs further investigation. Controlling the interface between wildlife and cattle in a situation where eradication is not being considered may have little impact on BTB disease control in cattle.

The effectiveness of existing policies to control antimicrobial resistance is not yet fully understood. A strengthened evidence base is needed to inform effective policy interventions across countries with different income levels and the human health and animal sectors. We examine three policy domains—responsible use, surveillance, and infection prevention and control—and consider which will be the most effective at national and regional levels. Many complexities exist in the implementation of such policies across sectors and in varying political and regulatory environments. Therefore, we make recommendations for policy action, calling for comprehensive policy assessments, using standardised frameworks, of cost-effectiveness and generalisability. Such assessments are especially important in low-income and middle-income countries, and in the animal and environmental sectors. We also advocate a One Health approach that will enable the development of sensitive policies, accommodating the needs of each sector involved, and addressing concerns of specific countries and regions.