1
|
Tonchiangsai K, Wiratsudakul A, Kasemsuwan S, Buddhirongawatr R, Thanapongtharm W, Kledmanee K, Chamsai T, Sangkachai N, Sangkharak B, Aramsirirujiwet P, Suwanpakdee S. Quantitative risk assessment and interventional recommendations for preventing canine distemper virus infection in captive tigers at selected wildlife stations in Thailand. PLoS One 2025; 20:e0320657. [PMID: 40245051 PMCID: PMC12005548 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0320657] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/23/2025] [Indexed: 04/19/2025] Open
Abstract
Canine distemper virus (CDV) can cause high morbidity and mortality in large felids and pose a significant threat to the conservation of captive and non-captive tiger (Panthera tigris). This study conducted in Thailand's wildlife stations aimed to assess the risks of CDV introduction to captive tiger populations. A stochastic quantitative risk assessment model was employed to determine the pathways and estimate the risk probabilities through humans, animal reservoirs, and fomites. The final risk probability of entry, obtained from a combination of six entry pathways, indicated that the absence of measures resulted in a relatively high risk at 0.858. The sensitivity analysis identified CDV-contaminated human hands, followed by other CDV-infected wild animals, and CDV-contaminated equipment, as the most influential pathways of CDV spread. Risk probabilities were compared among those without intervention, with routine intervention at wildlife stations, and with full intervention implementation. Implementing all interventions at the captive wildlife stations significantly reduced the risk of CDV introduction. These interventions included control measures such as quarantining and isolating infected animals and providing treatment to reduce infectiousness. Preventive measures included screening tests for healthy individuals for early detection of asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic cases, preventing further spread or complications, CDV vaccination campaigns, and promoting hand hygiene among staff and visitors. Environmental interventions involve restricting dogs and cats from accessing tiger enclosures, disinfecting animal transport vehicles, using separate equipment for each cage, etc. Together, these interventions lowered the median risk of CDV introduction to 0.089, representing an 89.6% risk reduction. This approach assessed CDV infection risks and adapted interventions to specific situations at wildlife stations. Consistent implementation of these measures is essential to minimize CDV spread. Wildlife stations must strictly implement these interventions as standard procedures to protect the health of captive tigers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kanittha Tonchiangsai
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Anuwat Wiratsudakul
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Suwicha Kasemsuwan
- Department of Veterinary Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Kampangsan, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Ruangrat Buddhirongawatr
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Weerapong Thanapongtharm
- Bureau of Disease Control and Veterinary Services, Department of Livestock Development, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Kan Kledmanee
- Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Tatiyanuch Chamsai
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Nareerat Sangkachai
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| | - Bencharong Sangkharak
- Wildlife Conservation Office, Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, Chatuchak, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Pakpoom Aramsirirujiwet
- Wildlife Conservation Office, Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, Chatuchak, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Sarin Suwanpakdee
- Department of Clinical Sciences and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
- The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|