Prevalence of major infectious diseases in backyard chickens from rural markets in Morocco.
Newcastle disease
avian diseases
backyard chickens
low pathogenic avian influenza H9N2
risk factors
rural markets
Journal
Veterinary world
ISSN: 0972-8988
Titre abrégé: Vet World
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101504872
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
28
03
2023
accepted:
23
08
2023
medline:
20
10
2023
pubmed:
20
10
2023
entrez:
20
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Raising backyard chickens is a common practice in Morocco, mainly in rural or periurban areas. Constraints due to devastating avian diseases have been recognized as a major limiting factor in backyard poultry production. Consequently, these flocks could potentially be implicated as reservoirs for poultry diseases. However, there is a considerable lack of information on disease prevalence in this production system, and the risk represented by these small flocks remains under debate. This study aimed to estimate the seroprevalence and identify related risk factors of a range of bacterial and viral pathogens of outstanding importance for the economy and public health in backyard poultry in Morocco. A total of 712 sera samples and 258 cloacal swabs were collected from 712 backyard chickens from 15 rural markets in the Khemisset and Skhirat-Temara provinces. None of the sampled chickens received any vaccination. Sera samples were screened for antibodies against Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and low pathogenic avian influenza H9N2 subtype (LPAI H9N2) using a hemagglutination-inhibition test, against bursal infectious disease virus (IBDV) and infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and against The seroprevalences in backyard chickens for NDV, LPAI H9N2, IBDV, IBV, MG, and MS were 52.1% (371/712), 63.5% (452/712), 84.7% (603/712), 82.2% (585/712), 58% (413/712), and 74.8% (533/712), respectively. Based on the RT-PCR results, 2.3% (2/86), 62.8% (54/86), 2.3% (2/86), 63.9% (55/86), 40.7% (35/86), and 29.1% (25/86) of the pools were positive for NDV, H9N2 LPAI, IBDV, IBV, MG, and MS, respectively. Multiple coinfections (H9N2-IBV-MG), (H9N2-IBV-MS), or (IBV-MG-MS) were observed in 15.1%, 8.5%, and 8.5% of the tested samples, respectively. The results show that backyard chicken flocks and rural markets have the potential to serve as reservoirs or amplifiers for poultry pathogens and could pose a risk to the commercial poultry sector. This highlights the need for a comprehensive and adapted vaccination plan for backyard chickens, and extension of efforts to increase flock owners' awareness of avian diseases and incite the implementation of biosecurity measures at the farm level.
Sections du résumé
Background and Aim
UNASSIGNED
Raising backyard chickens is a common practice in Morocco, mainly in rural or periurban areas. Constraints due to devastating avian diseases have been recognized as a major limiting factor in backyard poultry production. Consequently, these flocks could potentially be implicated as reservoirs for poultry diseases. However, there is a considerable lack of information on disease prevalence in this production system, and the risk represented by these small flocks remains under debate. This study aimed to estimate the seroprevalence and identify related risk factors of a range of bacterial and viral pathogens of outstanding importance for the economy and public health in backyard poultry in Morocco.
Materials and Methods
UNASSIGNED
A total of 712 sera samples and 258 cloacal swabs were collected from 712 backyard chickens from 15 rural markets in the Khemisset and Skhirat-Temara provinces. None of the sampled chickens received any vaccination. Sera samples were screened for antibodies against Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and low pathogenic avian influenza H9N2 subtype (LPAI H9N2) using a hemagglutination-inhibition test, against bursal infectious disease virus (IBDV) and infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and against
Results
UNASSIGNED
The seroprevalences in backyard chickens for NDV, LPAI H9N2, IBDV, IBV, MG, and MS were 52.1% (371/712), 63.5% (452/712), 84.7% (603/712), 82.2% (585/712), 58% (413/712), and 74.8% (533/712), respectively. Based on the RT-PCR results, 2.3% (2/86), 62.8% (54/86), 2.3% (2/86), 63.9% (55/86), 40.7% (35/86), and 29.1% (25/86) of the pools were positive for NDV, H9N2 LPAI, IBDV, IBV, MG, and MS, respectively. Multiple coinfections (H9N2-IBV-MG), (H9N2-IBV-MS), or (IBV-MG-MS) were observed in 15.1%, 8.5%, and 8.5% of the tested samples, respectively.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The results show that backyard chicken flocks and rural markets have the potential to serve as reservoirs or amplifiers for poultry pathogens and could pose a risk to the commercial poultry sector. This highlights the need for a comprehensive and adapted vaccination plan for backyard chickens, and extension of efforts to increase flock owners' awareness of avian diseases and incite the implementation of biosecurity measures at the farm level.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37859951
doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2023.1897-1906
pii: Vetworld-16-1897
pmc: PMC10583883
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1897-1906Informations de copyright
Copyright: © Fagrach, et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
Prev Vet Med. 2014 Sep 1;116(1-2):197-202
pubmed: 24958456
Zoonoses Public Health. 2012 Feb;59(1):52-60
pubmed: 21824372
Avian Dis. 2008 Dec;52(4):558-66
pubmed: 19166045
Trop Anim Health Prod. 2022 Jun 15;54(4):214
pubmed: 35705876
J Clin Microbiol. 2004 Jan;42(1):329-38
pubmed: 14715773
Avian Dis. 2014 Dec;58(4):623-7
pubmed: 25619008
Vet World. 2018 Aug;11(8):1183-1187
pubmed: 30250382
Viruses. 2022 Mar 04;14(3):
pubmed: 35336936
J Virol Methods. 2006 Dec;138(1-2):60-5
pubmed: 16934878
Acta Trop. 2013 Mar;125(3):294-302
pubmed: 23262213
Poult Sci. 2020 Nov;99(11):5415-5421
pubmed: 33142458
Trop Anim Health Prod. 2019 Jun;51(5):1033-1048
pubmed: 30877525
Clin Infect Dis. 2014 May;58(10):1432-8
pubmed: 24501387
N Z Vet J. 2013 Nov;61(6):316-22
pubmed: 23611028
J Clin Microbiol. 2008 May;46(5):1769-73
pubmed: 18367569
Vet Rec. 1985 Apr 20;116(16):445
pubmed: 2988180
Res Vet Sci. 2015 Oct;102:83-8
pubmed: 26412525
Arch Virol. 2019 Feb;164(2):381-390
pubmed: 30367293
Avian Pathol. 2015;44(4):287-95
pubmed: 25925561
Avian Pathol. 2005 Aug;34(4):303-12
pubmed: 16147566
J Virol Methods. 1994 Jul;48(2-3):281-91
pubmed: 7989444
Open Vet J. 2020 Apr;10(1):80-85
pubmed: 32426261
Poult Sci. 2012 Apr;91(4):862-9
pubmed: 22399725
Poult Sci. 2020 Feb;99(2):719-724
pubmed: 32029157
Avian Dis. 2022 Mar;66(1):29-38
pubmed: 35092236
Avian Dis. 2020 Sep 1;64(3):310-314
pubmed: 33205168
Virol J. 2016 Aug 15;13(1):140
pubmed: 27527708
Infect Immun. 1980 Feb;27(2):364-7
pubmed: 6247275
Avian Dis. 1993 Apr-Jun;37(2):315-23
pubmed: 8395796
Prev Vet Med. 2015 Nov 1;122(1-2):145-53
pubmed: 26431926
Avian Dis. 1986 Jan-Mar;30(1):231-3
pubmed: 3729867
J S Afr Vet Assoc. 2003 Mar;74(1):14-6
pubmed: 12836740
Animals (Basel). 2023 Jan 05;13(2):
pubmed: 36670742
Prev Vet Med. 2015 Jul 1;120(3-4):321-7
pubmed: 26002998
Avian Dis. 2018 Mar;62(1):1-5
pubmed: 29620463
Vet Med (Auckl). 2022 Jan 25;13:39-46
pubmed: 35117983
Poult Sci. 2009 Apr;88(4):856-9
pubmed: 19276435