Susceptibility of wild passerines to subtype H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses

Characterizing the domestic-wild bird interface through camera traps in an area at risk for avian influenza introduction in Northern Italy

Direct or indirect interactions between sympatric wildlife and poultry can lead to interspecies disease transmission. Particularly, avian influenza (AI) is a viral epidemic disease for which the poultry-wild bird interface shapes the risks of new viral introductions into poultry holdings. Given this background, the study hereby presented aimed to identify wild bird species in poultry house surroundings and characterize the spatiotemporal patterns of these visits. Eight camera traps were deployed for a year (January to December 2021) in 3 commercial chicken layer farms, including free-range and barn-type setups, located in a densely populated poultry area in Northern Italy at high risk for AI introduction via wild birds. Camera traps' positions were chosen based on wildlife signs identified during preliminary visits to the establishments studied. Various methods, including time series analysis, correspondence analysis, and generalized linear models, were employed to analyze the daily wild bird visits. A total of 1,958 camera trap days yielded 5,978 videos of wild birds from 27 different species and 16 taxonomic families. The animals were predominantly engaged in foraging activities nearby poultry houses. Eurasian magpies (Pica pica), ring-necked pheasants (Phasianus colchicus), and Eurasian collared doves (Streptopelia decaocto) were the most frequent visitors. Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos), an AI reservoir species, were observed only in a farm located next to a fishing sport lake. Time series analysis indicated that wild bird visits increased during spring and winter. Farm and camera trap location also influenced visit frequencies. Overall, the results highlighted specific species that could be prioritized for future AI epidemiological surveys. However, further research is required to assess their susceptibility and infectivity to currently circulating AI viruses, essential for identifying novel bridge hosts.

Impact of inland waters on highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreaks in neighboring poultry farms in South Korea

Background

Since 2003, the H5 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) subtype has caused massive economic losses in the poultry industry in South Korea. The role of inland water bodies in avian influenza (AI) outbreaks has not been investigated. Identifying water bodies that facilitate risk pathways leading to the incursion of the HPAI virus (HPAIV) into poultry farms is essential for implementing specific precautionary measures to prevent viral transmission.

Objectives

This matched case-control study (1:4) examined whether inland waters were associated with a higher risk of AI outbreaks in the neighboring poultry farms.

Methods

Rivers, irrigation canals, lakes, and ponds were considered inland water bodies. The cases and controls were chosen based on the matching criteria. The nearest possible farms located within a radius of 3 km of the case farms were chosen as the control farms. The poultry farms were selected randomly, and two HPAI epidemics (H5N8 [2014–2016] and H5N6 [2016–2017]) were studied. Conditional logistic regression analysis was applied.

Results

Statistical analysis revealed that inland waters near poultry farms were significant risk factors for AI outbreaks. The study speculated that freely wandering wild waterfowl and small animals contaminate areas surrounding poultry farms.

Conclusions

Pet birds and animals raised alongside poultry birds on farm premises may wander easily to nearby waters, potentially increasing the risk of AI infection in poultry farms. Mechanical transmission of the AI virus occurs when poultry farm workers or visitors come into contact with infected water bodies or their surroundings. To prevent AI outbreaks in the future, poultry farms should adopt strict precautions to avoid contact with nearby water bodies and their surroundings.

Matched case-control study of the influence of inland waters surrounding poultry farms on avian influenza outbreaks in Japan

To successfully control highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), understanding the risk factors related to the incursion of the virus into poultry farms is essential. In this study, we focused on the presence of inland waters surrounding poultry farms as a potential risk factor of incursion of the virus. To evaluate the influence of inland waters surrounding poultry farms on HPAI outbreaks in Japan, a simple matched case-control study was conducted. The results of the conditional regression analyses indicated that the number of farms with neighbouring inland waters was significantly high among the affected farms during the 2016-2017 outbreak period. These results provide good grounds for strengthening biosecurity management at farms located near inland waters.

Spatial transmission of H5N6 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses among wild birds in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan, 2016-2017

From 29 November 2016 to 24 January 2017, sixty-three cases of H5N6 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) infections were detected in wild birds in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan. Here, we analyzed the genetic, temporal, and geographic correlations of these 63 HPAIVs to elucidate their dissemination throughout the prefecture. Full-genome sequence analysis of the Ibaraki isolates showed that 7 segments (PB2, PB1, PA, HA, NP, NA, NS) were derived from G1.1.9 strains while the M segment was from G1.1 strains; both groups of strains circulated in south China. Pathological studies revealed severe systemic infection in dead swans (the majority of dead birds and the only species necropsied), thus indicating high susceptibility to H5N6 HPAIVs. Coalescent phylogenetic analysis using the 7 G1.1.9-derived segments enabled detailed analysis of the short-term evolution of these highly homologous HPAIVs. This analysis revealed that the H5N6 HPAIVs isolated from wild birds in Ibaraki Prefecture were divided into 7 groups. Spatial analysis demonstrated that most of the cases concentrated around Senba Lake originated from a single source, and progeny viruses were transmitted to other locations after the infection expanded in mute swans. In contrast, within just a 5-km radius of the area in which cases were concentrated, three different intrusions of H5N6 HPAIVs were evident. Multi-segment analysis of short-term evolution showed that not only was the invading virus spread throughout Ibaraki Prefecture but also that, despite the small size of this region, multiple invasions had occurred during winter 2016-2017.

Avian influenza

Previous introductions of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) to the EU were most likely via migratory wild birds. A mathematical model has been developed which indicated that virus amplification and spread may take place when wild bird populations of sufficient size within EU become infected. Low pathogenic avian influenza virus (LPAIV) may reach similar maximum prevalence levels in wild bird populations to HPAIV but the risk of LPAIV infection of a poultry holding was estimated to be lower than that of HPAIV. Only few non-wild bird pathways were identified having a non-negligible risk of AI introduction. The transmission rate between animals within a flock is assessed to be higher for HPAIV than LPAIV. In very few cases, it could be proven that HPAI outbreaks were caused by intrinsic mutation of LPAIV to HPAIV but current knowledge does not allow a prediction as to if, and when this could occur. In gallinaceous poultry, passive surveillance through notification of suspicious clinical signs/mortality was identified as the most effective method for early detection of HPAI outbreaks. For effective surveillance in anseriform poultry, passive surveillance through notification of suspicious clinical signs/mortality needs to be accompanied by serological surveillance and/or a virological surveillance programme of birds found dead (bucket sampling). Serosurveillance is unfit for early warning of LPAI outbreaks at the individual holding level but could be effective in tracing clusters of LPAIV-infected holdings. In wild birds, passive surveillance is an appropriate method for HPAIV surveillance if the HPAIV infections are associated with mortality whereas active wild bird surveillance has a very low efficiency for detecting HPAIV. Experts estimated and emphasised the effect of implementing specific biosecurity measures on reducing the probability of AIV entering into a poultry holding. Human diligence is pivotal to select, implement and maintain specific, effective biosecurity measures.