Epidemiology and Molecular Characterization of Multiple Avian Influenza A/H5 Subtypes Circulating in House Crow (Corvus splendens) and Poultry in Bangladesh

Farm biosecurity practices affecting avian influenza virus circulation in commercial chicken farms in Bangladesh

Avian influenza virus (AIV) is of major concern to livestock, wildlife, and human health. In many countries in the world, including Bangladesh, AIV is endemic in poultry, requiring improving biosecurity. In Bangladesh, we investigated how variation in biosecurity practices in commercial chicken farms affected their AIV infection status to help guide AIV mitigation strategies. We collected pooled fecal swabs from 225 farms and tested the samples for the AIV matrix gene followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtyping using rRT-PCR. We found that 39.6% of chicken farms were AIV positive, with 13% and 14% being positive for subtypes H5 and H9, respectively. Using a generalized linear mixed effects model, we identified as many as 12 significant AIV risk factors. Two major factors promoting AIV risk that cannot be easily addressed in the short term were farm size and the proximity of the farm to a live bird market. However, the other ten significant determinants of AIV risk can be more readily addressed, of which the most important ones were limiting access by visitors (reducing predicted AIV risk from 42 to 6%), isolation and treatment of sick birds (42 to 7%), prohibiting access of vehicles to poultry sheds (38 to 8%), improving hand hygiene (from 42 to 9%), not sharing farm workers across farms (37 to 8%), and limiting access by wild birds to poultry sheds (37 to 8%). Our findings can be applied to developing practical and cost-effective measures that significantly decrease the prevalence of AIV in chicken farms. Notably, in settings with limited resources, such as Bangladesh, these measures can help governments strengthen biosecurity practices in their poultry industry to limit and possibly prevent the spread of AIV.

The role of vaccination and environmental factors on outbreaks of high pathogenicity avian influenza H5N1 in Bangladesh

High Pathogenicity Avian Influenza (HPAI) H5N1 outbreaks continue to wreak havoc on the global poultry industry and threaten the health of wild bird populations, with sporadic spillover in humans and other mammals, resulting in widespread calls to vaccinate poultry. Bangladesh has been vaccinating poultry since 2012, presenting a prime opportunity to study the effects of vaccination on HPAI H5N1circulation in both poultry and wild birds. We investigated the efficacy of vaccinating commercial poultry against HPAI H5N1 along with climatic and socio-economic factors considered potential drivers of HPAI H5N1 outbreak risk in Bangladesh. Using a multivariate modeling approach, we estimated that the rate of outbreaks was 18 times higher before compared to after vaccination, with winter months having a three times higher chance of outbreaks than summer months. Variables resulting in small but significant increases in outbreak rate were relatively low ambient temperatures for the time of year, literacy rate, chicken and duck density, crop density, and presence of highways; this may be attributable to low temperatures supporting viral survival outside the host, higher literacy driving reporting rate, density of the host reservoir, and spread of the virus through increased connectivity. Despite the substantial impact of vaccination on outbreaks, we note that HPAI H5N1 is still enzootic in Bangladesh; vaccinated poultry flocks have high rates of H5N1 prevalence, and spillover to wild birds has increased. Vaccination in Bangladesh thus bears the risk of supporting "silent spread," where the vaccine only provides protection against disease and not also infection. Our findings underscore that poultry vaccination can be part of holistic HPAI mitigation strategies when accompanied by monitoring to avoid silent spread.

Epidemiology and phylodynamics of multiple clades of H5N1 circulating in domestic duck farms in different production systems in Bangladesh

Waterfowl are considered to be natural reservoirs of the avian influenza virus (AIV). However, the dynamics of transmission and evolutionary patterns of AIV and its subtypes within duck farms in Bangladesh remain poorly documented. Hence, a cross-sectional study was conducted in nine districts of Bangladesh between 2019 and 2021, to determine the prevalence of AIV and its subtypes H5 and H9, as well as to identify risk factors and the phylodynamics of H5N1 clades circulating in domestic duck farms. The oropharyngeal and cloacal swab samples were tested for the AIV Matrix gene (M-gene) followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtypes using rRT-PCR. The exploratory analysis was performed to estimate AIV and its subtype prevalence in different production systems, and multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify the risk factors that influence AIV infection in ducks. Bayesian phylogenetic analysis was conducted to generate a maximum clade credibility (MCC) tree and the maximum likelihood method to determine the phylogenetic relationships of the H5N1 viruses isolated from ducks. AIV was detected in 40% (95% CI: 33.0-48.1) of the duck farms. The prevalence of AIV was highest in nomadic ducks (39.8%; 95% CI: 32.9-47.1), followed by commercial ducks (24.6%; 95% CI: 14.5-37.3) and backyard ducks (14.4%; 95% CI: 10.5-19.2). The H5 prevalence was also highest in nomadic ducks (19.4%; 95% CI: 14.0-25.7). The multivariable logistic regression model revealed that ducks from nomadic farms (AOR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.45-3.93), juvenile (AOR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.37-3.61), and sick ducks (AOR: 11.59; 95% CI: 4.82-32.44) had a higher risk of AIV. Similarly, the likelihood of H5 detection was higher in sick ducks (AOR: 40.8; 95% CI: 16.3-115.3). Bayesian phylogenetic analysis revealed that H5N1 viruses in ducks belong to two distinct clades, 2.3.2.1a, and 2.3.4.4b. The clade 2.3.2.1a (reassorted) has been evolving silently since 2015 and forming at least nine subgroups based on >90% posterior probability. Notably, clade 2.3.4.4b was introduced in ducks in Bangladesh by the end of the year 2020, which was genetically similar to viruses detected in wild birds in Japan, China, and Africa, indicating migration-associated transmission of an emerging panzootic clade. We recommend continuing AIV surveillance in the duck production system and preventing the intermingling of domestic ducks with migratory waterfowl in wetlands.

Annual trading patterns and risk factors of avian influenza A/H5 and A/H9 virus circulation in turkey birds (Meleagris gallopavo) at live bird markets in Dhaka city, Bangladesh

The impacts of the avian influenza virus (AIV) on farmed poultry and wild birds affect human health, livelihoods, food security, and international trade. The movement patterns of turkey birds from farms to live bird markets (LBMs) and infection of AIV are poorly understood in Bangladesh. Thus, we conducted weekly longitudinal surveillance in LBMs to understand the trading patterns, temporal trends, and risk factors of AIV circulation in turkey birds. We sampled a total of 423 turkeys from two LBMs in Dhaka between May 2018 and September 2019. We tested the swab samples for the AIV matrix gene (M-gene) followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtypes using real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). We used exploratory analysis to investigate trading patterns, annual cyclic trends of AIV and its subtypes, and a generalized estimating equation (GEE) logistic model to determine the factors that influence the infection of H5 and H9 in turkeys. Furthermore, we conducted an observational study and informal interviews with traders and vendors to record turkey trading patterns, demand, and supply and turkey handling practices in LBM. We found that all trade routes of turkey birds to northern Dhaka are unidirectional and originate from the northwestern and southern regions of Bangladesh. The number of trades from the source district to Dhaka depends on the turkey density. The median distance that turkey was traded from its source district to Dhaka was 188 km (Q1 = 165, Q3 = 210, IQR = 45.5). We observed seasonal variation in the median and average distance of turkey. The qualitative findings revealed that turkey farming initially became reasonably profitable in 2018 and at the beginning of 2019. However, the fall in demand and production in the middle of 2019 may be related to unstable market pricing, high feed costs, a shortfall of adequate marketing facilities, poor consumer knowledge, and a lack of advertising. The overall prevalence of AIV, H5, and H9 subtypes in turkeys was 31% (95% CI: 26.6-35.4), 16.3% (95% CI: 12.8-19.8), and 10.2% (95% CI: 7.3-13.1) respectively. None of the samples were positive for H7. The circulation of AIV and H9 across the annual cycle showed no seasonality, whereas the circulation of H5 showed significant seasonality. The GEE revealed that detection of AIV increases in retail vendor business (OR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.12-2.62) and the bird's health status is sick (OR: 10.77; 95% CI: 4.31-26.94) or dead (OR: 11.33; 95% CI: 4.30-29.89). We also observed that winter season (OR: 5.83; 95% CI: 2.80-12.14) than summer season, dead birds (OR: 61.71; 95% CI: 25.78-147.75) and sick birds (OR 8.33; 95% CI: 3.36-20.64) compared to healthy birds has a higher risk of H5 infection in turkeys. This study revealed that the turkeys movements vary by time and season from the farm to the LBM. This surveillance indicated year-round circulation of AIV with H5 and H9 subtypes in turkey birds in LBMs. The seasonality and health condition of birds influence H5 infection in birds. The trading pattern of turkey may play a role in the transmission of AIV viruses in the birds. The selling of sick turkeys infected with H5 and H9 highlights the possibility of virus transmission to other species of birds sold at LBMs and to people.

Prevalence and risk factors for avian influenza virus (H5 and H9) contamination in peri-urban and rural live bird markets in Bangladesh

Avian influenza viruses (AIV) have been frequently detected in live bird markets (LBMs) around the world, primarily in urban areas, and have the ability to spillover to other species, including humans. Despite frequent detection of AIV in urban LBMs, the contamination of AIV on environmental surfaces in rural and peri-urban LBMs in Bangladesh is poorly documented. Therefore, we conducted this study to determine the prevalence of AIV subtypes within a subset of peri-urban and rural LBMs in Bangladesh and to further identify associated risk factors. Between 2017 and 2018, we collected faecal and offal samples from 200 stalls in 63 LBMs across four sub-districts. We tested the samples for the AIV matrix gene (M-gene) followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtypes using real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). We performed a descriptive analysis of market cleanliness and sanitation practices in order to further elucidate the relationship between LBM biosecurity and AIV subtypes by species, sample types, and landscape. Subsequently, we conducted a univariate analysis and a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) to determine the risk factors associated with AIV contamination at individual stalls within LBMs. Our findings indicate that practices related to hygiene and the circulation of AIV significantly differed between rural and peri-urban live bird markets. 42.5% (95% CI: 35.56-49.67) of stalls were positive for AIV. A/H5, A/H9, and A HA/Untyped were detected in 10.5% (95% CI: 6.62-15.60), 9% (95% CI: 5.42-13.85), and 24.0% (95% CI: 18.26-30.53) of stalls respectively, with no detection of A/H7. Significantly higher levels of AIV were found in the Sonali chicken strain compared to the exotic broiler, and in offal samples compared to fecal samples. In the GLMM analysis, we identified several significant risk factors associated with AIV contamination in LBMs at the stall level. These include: landscape (AOR: 3.02; 95% CI: 1.18-7.72), the number of chicken breeds present (AOR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.01-5.67), source of birds (AOR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.0-5.53), separation of sick birds (AOR: 3.04; 95% CI: 1.34-6.92), disposal of waste/dead birds (AOR: 3.16; 95% CI: 1.41-7.05), cleaning agent (AOR: 5.99; 95% CI: 2.26-15.82), access of dogs (AOR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.12-5.7), wild birds observed on site (AOR: 2.31; 95% CI: 1.01-5.3). The study further revealed a substantial prevalence of AIV with H5 and H9 subtypes in peri-urban and rural LBMs. The inadequate biosecurity measures at poultry stalls in Bangladesh increase the risk of AIV transmission from poultry to humans. To prevent the spread of AIV to humans and wild birds, we suggest implementing regular surveillance at live bird markets and enhancing biosecurity practices in peri-urban and rural areas in Bangladesh.

Patterns and risk factors of avian influenza A(H5) and A(H9) virus infection in pigeons and quail at live bird markets in Bangladesh, 2017-2021

The avian influenza virus (AIV) impacts poultry production, food security, livelihoods, and the risk of transmission to humans. Poultry, like pigeons and quail farming, is a growing sector in Bangladesh. However, the role of pigeons and quails in AIV transmission is not fully understood. Hence, we conducted this study to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of AIV subtypes in pigeons and quails at live bird markets (LBMs) in Bangladesh. We collected oropharyngeal and cloacal swab samples from 626 birds in 8 districts of Bangladesh from 2017 to 2021. We tested the swab samples for the matrix gene (M gene) followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtypes using real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). We then used exploratory analysis to investigate the seasonal and temporal patterns of AIV and a mixed effect logistic model to identify the variable that influences the presence of AIV in pigeons and quails. The overall prevalence of AIV was 25.56%. We found that the prevalence of AIV in pigeons is 17.36%, and in quail is 38.75%. The prevalence of A/H5, A/H9, and A/H5/H9 in quail is 4.17, 17.92, and 1.67%, respectively. Furthermore, the prevalence of A/H5, A/H9, and A/H5/H9 in pigeons is 2.85, 2.59, and 0.26%. We also found that the prevalence of AIV was higher in the dry season than in the wet season in both pigeons and quail. In pigeons, the prevalence of A/untyped (40%) increased considerably in 2020. In quail, however, the prevalence of A/H9 (56%) significantly increased in 2020. The mixed-effect logistic regression model showed that the vendors having waterfowl (AOR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.04-4.33), purchasing birds from the wholesale market (AOR: 2.96; 95% CI: 1.48-5.92) instead of farms, mixing sick birds with the healthy ones (AOR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.04-2.45) and mingling unsold birds with new birds (AOR: 3.07; 95% CI: 2.01-4.70) were significantly more likely to be positive for AIV compared with vendors that did not have these characteristics. We also found that the odds of AIV were more than twice as high in quail (AOR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.61-4.11) as in pigeons. Furthermore, the likelihood of AIV detection was 4.19 times higher in sick and dead birds (95% CI: 2.38-7.35) than in healthy birds. Our study revealed that proper hygienic practices at the vendors in LBM are not maintained. We recommend improving biosecurity practices at the vendor level in LBM to limit the risk of AIV infection in pigeons and quail in Bangladesh.

Assessment of poultry rearing practices and risk factors of H5N1 and H9N2 virus circulating among backyard chickens and ducks in rural communities

Background

The avian influenza virus (AIV) causes significant economic losses by infecting poultry and occasional spillover to humans. Backyard farms are vulnerable to AIV epidemics due to poor health management and biosecurity practices, threatening rural households’ economic stability and nutrition. We have limited information about the risk factors associated with AIV infection in backyard poultry in Bangladesh. Hence, we conducted a cross-sectional survey comprising epidemiological and anthropological investigations to understand the poultry rearing practices and risk factors of AIV circulation among backyard poultry in selected rural communities.

Methods

We sampled 120 poultry from backyard farms (n = 30) of the three selected communities between February 2017 and January 2018. We tested swab samples for the matrix gene (M gene) followed by H5, H7, and H9 subtypes using real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). We applied multivariable logistic regression for risk factor analysis. Furthermore, we conducted an observational study (42 hours) and informal interviews (n = 30) with backyard farmers to record poultry-raising activities in rural communities.

Results

We detected that 25.2% of the backyard poultry tested positive for AIV, whereas 5% tested positive for H5N1 and 10.8% tested positive for H9N2. Results showed that scavenging in both household garden and other crop fields has higher odds of AIV than scavenging in the household garden (AOR: 24.811; 95% CI: 2.11–292.28), and keeping a cage inside the house has higher odds (AOR:14.5; 95% CI: 1.06–198.51) than keeping it in the veranda, cleaning the cage twice a week or weekly has a higher risk than cleaning daily (AOR: 34.45; 95% CI: 1.04–1139.65), dumping litter or droppings (AOR: 82.80; 95% CI: 3.91–1754.59) and dead birds or wastage (AOR: 109.92, 95% CI: 4.34–2785.29) near water bodies and bushes have a higher risk than burring in the ground, slaughtering and consuming sick birds also had a higher odd of AIV (AOR: 73.45, 95% CI: 1.56–3457.73) than treating the birds. The anthropological investigation revealed that household members had direct contact with the poultry in different ways, including touching, feeding, slaughtering, and contacting poultry feces. Poultry is usually kept inside the house, sick poultry are traditionally slaughtered and eaten, and most poultry raisers do not know that diseases can transmit from backyard poultry to humans.

Conclusions

This study showed the circulation of H5N1 and H9N2 virus in backyard poultry in rural communities; associated with species, scavenging area of the poultry, location of the poultry cage, the practice of litter, wastage, droppings, and dead bird disposal, and practice of handling sick poultry. We suggest improving biosecurity practices in backyard poultry and mass awareness campaigns to reduce incidences of AIV in household-level poultry farms in rural communities in Bangladesh.