Ability of different matrices to transmit African swine fever virus.
African swine fever
feed
vehicles
virus survival
virus transmission
Journal
EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority
ISSN: 1831-4732
Titre abrégé: EFSA J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101642076
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
entrez:
3
5
2021
pubmed:
4
5
2021
medline:
4
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This opinion assesses the risk posed by different matrices to introduce African swine fever virus (ASFV) to non-affected regions of the EU. Matrices assessed are feed materials, enrichment/bedding materials and empty live pigs transport vehicles returning from affected areas. Although the risk from feed is considered to be lower than several other pathways (e.g. contact with infected live animals and swill feeding), it cannot be ruled out that matrices assessed in this opinion pose a risk. Evidence on survival of ASFV in different matrices from literature and a public consultation was used in an Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) on the possible contamination of products and traded or imported product volumes used on pig farms. The EKE results were used in a model that provided a risk-rank for each product's contamination likelihood ('q'), its trade or import volume from affected EU or Eurasian areas (N) and the modelled number of potentially infected pig farms (N × q). The products ranking higher regardless of origin or destination were mash and pelleted compound feed, feed additives and cereals. Bedding/enrichment materials, hydrolysed proteins and blood products ranked lowest regardless of origin or destination. Empty vehicles ranked lower than compound feed but higher than non-compound feed or bedding/enrichment material. It is very likely (95-99% certainty) that compound feed and cereals rank higher than feed materials, which rank higher than bedding/enrichment material and forage. As this is an assessment based on several parameters including the contamination and delivery to a pig farm, all of which have the same impact on the final ranking, risk managers should consider how the relative rank of each product may change with an effective storage period or a virus inactivation step.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33936310
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6558
pii: EFS26558
pmc: PMC8077412
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e06558Informations de copyright
© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.
Références
Prev Vet Med. 2019 Jan 1;162:126-130
pubmed: 30621891
J Appl Microbiol. 1999 Jul;87(1):148-57
pubmed: 10432596
Arch Gesamte Virusforsch. 1967;21(3):383-402
pubmed: 5628715
Vet Microbiol. 2019 Nov;238:108424
pubmed: 31648720
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017 Apr;64(2):425-431
pubmed: 26104842
Vet Microbiol. 2018 Jun;219:144-149
pubmed: 29778187
J Dairy Sci. 2009 Jun;92(6):2875-95
pubmed: 19448020
EFSA J. 2019 Nov 05;17(11):e05861
pubmed: 32626162
Emerg Infect Dis. 2019 Dec;25(12):2261-2263
pubmed: 31524583
Vet Microbiol. 2014 Nov 7;174(1-2):86-92
pubmed: 25281254
J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2017 Mar 7;8:24
pubmed: 28286649
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 20;13(3):e0194509
pubmed: 29558524
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2020 Nov;67(6):2318-2323
pubmed: 32460443
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1978 Jan;35(1):142-5
pubmed: 564162