[top]Disease Information
26 August 2005
Vol. 18 - No. 34Contents
NEWCASTLE DISEASE IN BOTSWANA
Follow-up report No. 2 (end of outbreak in Mochudi)See also: 5 August 2005, 22 July 2005
Information received on 19 August 2005 from Dr Musa Fanikiso, Director of Animal Health and Production, Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone:
End of previous report period: 4 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [31], 236, dated 5 August 2005).
End of this report period: 19 August 2005.
Date of first confirmation of the event: 15 July 2005.
Date of start of the event: 7 July 2005.
The outbreak of Newcastle disease reported in Mochudi, South-Eastern region, is considered closed. According to the surveys conducted, no new cases have been recorded since 2 August 2005.
There was a single isolated outbreak, affecting 11 of 17 homesteads/households. The affected households had not vaccinated their animals against Newcastle disease in the previous year.
Movement restrictions into and out of Mochudi village will remain in force until further notice.
About 306,000 doses of Newcastle disease vaccine have been sold by the Departmental vaccine outlet points (Livestock Advisory Centre) in Mochudi. To date, 3,866 chickens in 122 households have been vaccinated (using lyophilised live vaccine) under official veterinary supervision. Efforts to raise the awareness of farmers and the general public of the disease and current control measures have been very effective judging by the response to the call for vaccination.
*
* *NEWCASTLE DISEASE IN GREECE
Follow-up report No. 2 (final report)See also: 11 November 2005, 8 July 2005
Information received on 19 August 2005 from Dr Vasilios Stylas, Head, Animal Health Directorate, Ministry of Agriculture, Athens:
End of previous report period: 6 July 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [27], 190, dated 8 July 2005).
End of this report period: 19 August 2005.
The outbreak in Pidima Arfaron, Messinia, is considered closed. Repopulation of the farm is planned to take place in September 2005, according to the statements of the poultry farmer.
*
* *HIGHLY PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA IN RUSSIA
Follow-up report No. 2See also: 30 December 2005, 21 October 2005, 14 October 2005, 12 August 2005, 5 August 2005, 29 July 2005
Translation of information received on 20 August 2005 from Dr Evgueny A. Nepoklonov, Head of the Main Veterinary Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Moscow:
End of previous report period: 5 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [31], 239, dated 5 August 2005).
End of this report period: 20 August 2005.
On 20 August 2005, clinical, virological and serological monitoring established that poultry have been infected or suspected of infection in six territorial divisions of Russia.
Mortality is not significant, and as a rule, does not exceed 4-5% of the total flock in the locality. One of the reasons for this is the application of stringent veterinary measures against suspected cases: homes suspected of infection in villages are isolated until the birds are culled, and birds suspected of having been in contact are also culled. The main method used to control the disease is culling of infected birds and suspected cases, and sanitary measures. Vaccination is not being conducted.
There is no evidence of virus movements from one village to another; the spread of infection within villages is slow. Infected localities do not form clusters. There are two main reasons for this: first, stringent quarantine measures; and second, long distances between localities (on average 12 km). Practically all the infected localities are close to reedy lakes or marshes used by wild ducks. In these villages, the first birds to be affected are those kept in homes close to reservoirs.
Not a single poultry plant (large closed commercial farms with more than 20,000 birds) has been found to be infected or to contain birds seropositive for avian influenza of any subtype.
One infected farm has been identified (a free-range goose farm in Altai Territory with approximately 10,000 birds) and was depopulated the day after the infection was discovered.
Human infection has not been established, despite careful monitoring of residents of affected villages, staff of veterinary laboratories and people engaged in the slaughter and disposal of birds.
Infection of pigs in the affected localities has not been established.
Location of Altai Territory and of the chief towns of the affected Regions
Details of outbreaks:
First administrative division Lower administrative divisions (districts) Number of outbreaks* Number of birds destroyed Altai Territory Zavialovo, Mamontovo, Romanovo, Bayevo, Yegorievskoye 8 13,667 Chelyabinsk Region Oktyabrskoye, Uvelskiy 3 954 Kurgan Region Chistoozernoye, Lebiazhye, Almenevo, Kurtamysh, Makushino, Lebiazhye 6 5,090 Novosibirsk Region Dovolnoie, Kupino, Zdvinsk, Chistoozernoye 11 69,658 Omsk Region Sargatskoye, Maryanovka, Okoneshnikovo 9 5,997 Tiumen Region Berdyuzh, Armizonskoye, Kazanskoye 13 22,921 * Areas where circulation of the virus or the presence of H5 antibodies has been identified, independently of whether there have been deaths of birds or clinical signs of influenza.
The level of infection of the population of wild ducks and geese is not known precisely, but is assumed to be extremely widespread. In all the places listed above, deaths of wild ducks have been reported.
There is still a risk of new outbreaks of the disease appearing in domestic birds. This is most likely to occur during the last ten days of August (migration of birds from northern to southern Siberia) and in mid-September (migration of wild waterfowl to their wintering grounds).
Culling of birds in the areas at risk and monitoring of the virus are continuing.
During the monitoring and diagnosis process, approximately 32,000 tests have been conducted. The main laboratory screening methods used are the following:
- haemagglutination test;
- haemagglutination inhibition test;
- ELISA(1) (for detection of antibodies to NP protein);
- PCR(2) (for detection of H5 gene in tissue and faeces).
(1) ELISA: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
(2) PCR: polymerase chain reaction
*
* *NEWCASTLE DISEASE IN BULGARIA
See also: 14 December 2006, 30 November 2006, 27 July 2006, 27 April 2006, 26 January 2006
(Date of previous outbreak of Newcastle disease in Bulgaria reported to the OIE: December 2004).
Emergency report
Information received on 23 August 2005 from Dr Nikola T. Belev, Delegate of Bulgaria to the OIE:
Report date: 23 August 2005.
Nature of diagnosis: clinical and laboratory.
Date of initial detection of animal health incident: 18 August 2005.
Estimated date of primary infection: 15 August 2005.
Outbreaks:
Location No. of outbreaks Vratsa region, Mizia district, Krushovitsa village 7 farms Description of affected population: unvaccinated backyard poultry.
Total number of animals in the outbreaks:
species susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaughtered avi 548 ... 126 422 0 Diagnosis:
A. Laboratory where diagnosis was made: national reference laboratory for Newcastle disease, Sofia.
B. Diagnostic tests used: virus isolation by inoculation into 10-day-old chicken embryos.
Epidemiology:
A. Source of agent / origin of infection: wild pigeons.
B. Mode of spread: indirect contact.
Control measures:
- stamping out;
- disinfection;
- ring vaccination (number of vaccinated birds: 30,523).
*
* *AVIAN INFLUENZA IN JAPAN
Follow-up report No. 2See also: 27 July 2006, 19 January 2006, 9 December 2005, 18 November 2005, 11 November 2005, 23 September 2005, 29 July 2005
Information received on 23 August 2005 from Dr Hirofumi Kugita, Chief Veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Tokyo:
End of previous report period: 15 July 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [30], 221, dated 29 July 2005).
End of this report period: 23 August 2005.
Precise identification of agent: low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) virus subtype H5N2.
Date of first confirmation of the event: 26 June 2005.
Date of start of the event: 24 June 2005.
Since the immediate notification of the 1st infected farm on 27 June 2005, 7 infected farms have already been notified in follow-up report No. 1.
An 8th infected farm was confirmed. It is located at the edge of the surveillance zone (a 5-km radius zone set up around the 1st affected farm). A new surveillance zone, containing 5 farms, was established within a radius of 5 km of the 8th infected farm.
In the course of the epidemiological investigation of the 8th infected farm, a 9th farm was found to be infected. It had supplied chicks to the 8th infected farm. Because the 9th infected farm was located outside the pre-existing surveillance zone, another surveillance zone, containing 19 farms, was established within a 5-km radius of the 9th infected farm.
In addition, within the framework of the avian influenza national surveillance scheme, which was been stepped up after confirmation of the 1st infected farm, a farm was found to be infected at Kounosu city in Saitama prefecture. Subsequently, another surveillance zone, containing four farms, was established within a 5-km radius of the 10th infected farm. The epidemiological relationship between the 10th infected farm and the outbreaks in Ibaraki prefecture is under investigation.
Details of new outbreaks:
First administrative division (prefecture) Lower administrative division Type of epide-miolo-gical unit Date of start of the outbreak Spe-cies Number of animals in the outbreaks susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaugh-tered Ibaraki Ibaraki town farm* 29 July 2005 avi 115,700 ... ... 115,700 0 Ibaraki Mitsukaido city farm* 25 July 2005 avi 35,082 ... ... 35,082 0 Saitama Kounosu city farm* 16 Aug. 2005 avi approx. 98,300 ... ... ... ... * 1 farm
Diagnosis: laboratory diagnosis. The affected populations showed little or no clinical signs of the disease.
Laboratory where diagnosis was made Diagnostic tests used Date Results National Institute of Animal Health
(national reference laboratory)Outbreaks in Ibaraki prefecture:
- agar gel precipitation test;
- haemagglutination inhibition test;
- PCR(1);
- virus isolation.
... positive Outbreak in Saitama prefecture:
- agar gel precipitation test;
- haemagglutination inhibition test.
17 Aug. 2005 positive Source of outbreak or origin of infection: unknown or inconclusive.
Control measures:
A. Undertaken:
- quarantine;
- movement control;
- zoning.
B. To be undertaken:
- stamping out: all chickens within the same premises are going to be destroyed;
- disinfection of infected premises.
Vaccination prohibited: yes.
(1) PCR: polymerase chain reaction
*
* *NEWCASTLE DISEASE IN FRANCE
Follow-up report No. 2 (final report)See also: 9 November 2006, 12 October 2006, 23 December 2005, 9 December 2005, 25 November 2005, 18 November 2005, 11 November 2005, 4 November 2005, 28 October 2005, 5 August 2005, 29 July 2005, 22 July 2005
Information received on 23 August 2005 from Dr Monique Eloit, Deputy Director General, General Directorate for Food (DGAL), Ministry of Agriculture, Food, Fisheries and Rural Affairs, Paris:
End of previous report period: 3 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [31], 241, dated 5 August 2005).
End of this report period: 22 August 2005.
Background:
On 19 July 2005, the French authorities notified the European Commission and the OIE of a suspicion of Newcastle disease on a pheasant and partridge farm in the Loire-Atlantique département. The suspicion was confirmed and notification of the outbreak was given on 27 July.
All measures imposed by the European Union regulations had been largely put in place before the outbreak was confirmed:
- 15 July: beginning of the epidemiological investigation; blocking of suspected farms and establishment of a protection zone (with a 3-km radius) and a surveillance zone (with a 10-km radius) and implementation of related measures, i.e., inventory of farms, limits on movement, health visits, etc.;
- 20 and 21 July: stamping-out policy applied on both affected units;
- 21 July: preliminary disinfection completed;
- 25 July: disinfection of the infected farms completed.
Epidemiological investigation:
The precise source of the disease is still under investigation. However, a link with avifauna remains the most likely hypothesis due to the suspect farm’s close proximity to a lake known for its migratory bird population.
The epidemiological investigation determined that the risk period occurred between 15 June and 15 July.
The intracerebral pathogenicity index could not be established since the virological analyses were unable to isolate the virus.
Conclusion:
The situation is satisfactory, with no new outbreaks or clinical suspicions.
All of the investigations (health visits and laboratory analyses) had favourable results. The French authorities now believe that further danger in terms of Newcastle disease is unlikely. Hence, and in compliance with European Union regulations, the protection and surveillance zones were lifted on 22 August 2005.
*
* *VESICULAR STOMATITIS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Follow-up report No. 14See also: 28 December 2006, 7 December 2006, 23 November 2006, 16 November 2006, 2 November 2006, 26 October 2006, 19 October 2006, 12 October 2006, 5 October 2006, 28 September 2006, 21 September 2006, 14 September 2006, 7 September 2006, 31 August 2006, 24 August 2006, 13 April 2006, 16 February 2006, 26 January 2006, 12 January 2006, 23 December 2005, 9 December 2005, 18 November 2005, 4 November 2005, 28 October 2005, 21 October 2005, 14 October 2005, 7 October 2005, 30 September 2005, 23 September 2005, 16 September 2005, 2 September 2005, 19 August 2005, 5 August 2005, 29 July 2005, 15 July 2005, 8 July 2005
Information received on 24 August 2005 from Dr Peter Fernandez, Associate Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, DC:
End of previous report period: 14 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [33], 266, dated 19 August 2005).
End of this report period: 21 August 2005.
Precise identification of agent: vesicular stomatitis virus type New Jersey.
Date of first confirmation of the event: 27 April 2005.
Date of start of the event: 16 April 2005.
New outbreaks:
First administrative division (State) Lower administrative division (County) Type of epide-miolo-gical unit Name of the location Date of start of the outbreak Spe-cies Number of animals in the outbreaks susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaugh-tered Colorado Delta f Austin 31 July 2005 bov 2 1 0 0 0 Colorado Delta f Delta 30 July 2005 equ 1 1 0 0 0 ovi 30 0 0 0 0 Colorado La Plata f Bayfield 8 Aug. 2005 equ 21 1 0 0 0 Colorado Mesa f Mack 1 Aug. 2005 equ 6 1 0 0 0 Colorado Montrose f Olathe 2 Aug. 2005 equ 3 1 0 0 0 Colorado Rio Blanco f Meeker 31 July 2005 equ 3 1 0 0 0 Colorado Rio Blanco f Meeker 2 Aug. 2005 equ 1 1 0 0 0 Montana Yellowstone f Billings 8 Aug. 2005 equ 25 1 0 0 0 Montana Yellowstone f Billings 10 Aug. 2005 equ 6 6 0 0 0 Montana Yellowstone f Laurel 2 Aug. 2005 bov 2 3 0 0 0 Montana Yellowstone f Laurel 6 Aug. 2005 equ 2 2 0 0 0 Montana Yellowstone f Laurel 9 Aug. 2005 equ 33 2 0 0 0 New Mexico Rio Arriba f Conjilan 22 July 2005 equ 2 1 0 0 0 Utah Emery f Huntington 2 Aug. 2005 equ 11 1 0 0 0 bov 2 0 0 0 0 Wyoming Big Horn f Grayball 12 Aug. 2005 equ 6 4 0 0 0 Wyoming Big Horn f Grayball 15 Aug. 2005 equ 6 1 0 0 0 Wyoming Goshen f Torrington 14 Aug. 2005 equ 1 1 0 0 0 Wyoming Sublette f Boulder 29 July 2005 equ 5 4 0 0 0 Wyoming Sublette f Boulder 11 Aug. 2005 bov 87 4 0 0 0 Wyoming Sublette f Boulder 16 Aug. 2005 equ 6 31 0 0 0 f = farm
Diagnosis:
Laboratories where diagnosis was made Species examined Diagnostic tests used Dates Results National Veterinary Services Laboratories, Ames, Iowa equ virus isolation 16 August 2005 positive complement fixation test 19 August 2005 positive Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, Plum Island, New York bov complement fixation test 19 August 2005 positive Source of outbreaks or origin of infection: unknown or inconclusive (vectors?).
Control measures undertaken:
- control of arthropods;
- quarantine;
- on-going surveillance activities are being performed by APHIS Veterinary Services and Arizona(1), Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Texas(1), Utah and Wyoming State Departments of Agriculture personnel.
Treatment of affected animals: no.
Vaccination prohibited: yes.
Other details/comments: on 17 August 2005, Arizona released the quarantine on the final vesicular stomatitis-positive premises within its borders.
(1) Note: no new vesicular stomatitis-positive premises have been reported in Texas since May 2005 and in Arizona since June 2005.
*
* *FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE IN MYANMAR
Virus type Asia1Immediate notification report and final report
Information received on 25 August 2005 from Dr U Maung Maung Nyunt, Director General, Livestock Breeding and Veterinary Department, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, Yangon:
Report date: 25 August 2005.
Precise identification of agent: foot and mouth disease (FMD) virus type Asia1.
Date of first confirmation of the event: 4 August 2005.
Date of start of the event: 27 July 2005.
Nature of diagnosis: clinical and laboratory.
Details of outbreaks:
First administrative division (State) Lower administrative division (district) Type of epide-miolo-gical unit Name of the location Date of start of the outbreak Spe-cies Number of animals in the outbreaks susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaugh-tered Kayah Loikaw village Daw paw ka law 27 July 2005 bov 493 10 ... ... ... Kayah Loikaw village Pan kan 28 July 2005 bov 352 10 ... ... ... Kayah Demawhsoe village Kalthawdaw 29 July 2005 bov 153 2 ... ... ... Diagnosis:
Laboratory where diagnosis was made Diagnostic tests used Date Results FMD Laboratory, Insein, Yangon indirect sandwich ELISA(1) 4 August 2005 Asia1 positive Source of outbreaks or origin of infection: unknown or inconclusive.
Control measures
A. Undertaken:
- quarantine;
- movement control inside the country;
- disinfection of infected premises/establishments;
- dipping/spraying.
B. To be undertaken: vaccination.
Treatment of affected animals: yes (palliative treatment for secondary infections, feeding concentrate and tonic mixtures).
Final report: yes (now the outbreaks ceased and the disease was well controlled, there has been no spread to other areas).
(1) ELISA: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Note by the OIE Animal Health Information Department: the previous outbreak of FMD due to virus type Asia 1 in Myanmar was in 2001.
*
* *NEWCASTLE DISEASE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM/GREAT BRITAIN
Follow-up report No. 4 (final report)See also: 30 November 2006, 23 November 2006, 16 November 2006, 9 November 2006, 2 November 2006, 26 October 2006, 19 October 2006, 26 January 2006, 19 August 2005, 12 August 2005, 29 July 2005, 22 July 2005
Information received on 25 August 2005 from Dr Debby Reynolds, Director General for Animal Health and Welfare, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), London:
End of previous report period: 18 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [33], 263, dated 19 August 2005).
End of this report period: 25 August 2005.
Surveillance for Newcastle disease has been completed with negative results and area restrictions were removed from 25 August 2005.
This was a single introduction of disease from a source outside the United Kingdom. Control measures put in place were fully effective, limiting the incident to a single outbreak. There were no secondary cases.
*
* *FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE IN MONGOLIA
Follow-up report No. 1 (identification of virus type Asia1)See also: 21 October 2005, 19 August 2005
Information received on 26 August 2005 from Dr Doloonjin Orgil, Director, Department of Veterinary Services, Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ulaanbaatar:
End of previous report period: 18 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [33], 271, dated 19 August 2005).
End of this report period: 26 August 2005.
No new outbreaks have been reported.
Total number of animals in the outbreak (updated data):
species susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaughtered bov 118 118 ... 118 0 o/c 47 47 ... 47 0 Diagnosis:
A. Laboratory where diagnosis was confirmed: samples were sent to the laboratory of the Federal Centre for Animal Health in Vladimir, Russia (OIE Reference Laboratory for foot and mouth disease).
B. Causal agent: the test results were received on 22 August 2005: virus type Asia 1 was identified.
Control measures:
- quarantine;
- stamping out;
- movement control;
- zoning;
- disinfection.
*
* *HIGHLY PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA IN THAILAND
Follow-up report No. 65See also: 16 November 2006, 3 August 2006, 27 July 2006, 6 April 2006, 16 February 2006, 2 February 2006, 26 January 2006, 19 January 2006, 12 January 2006, 23 December 2005, 16 December 2005, 9 December 2005, 2 December 2005, 25 November 2005, 18 November 2005, 4 November 2005, 28 October 2005, 21 October 2005, 14 October 2005, 7 October 2005, 30 September 2005, 23 September 2005, 16 September 2005, 9 September 2005, 2 September 2005, 19 August 2005, 12 August 2005, 29 July 2005, 22 July 2005, 15 July 2005
Information received on 26 August 2005 from Dr Yukol Limlamthong, Director General, Department of Livestock Development (DLD), Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok:
End of previous report period: 18 August 2005 (see Disease Information, 18 [33], 269, dated 19 August 2005).
End of this report period: 26 August 2005.
Date of first confirmation of the event: 23 January 2004.
Nature of diagnosis: clinical, post-mortem and laboratory.
Details of new outbreaks:
First administrative division (province) Lower administrative division Type of epide-miolo-gical unit Name of the location Date of start of the outbreak Spe-cies Number of animals in the outbreaks susceptible cases deaths destroyed slaugh-tered Suphanburi NongKharm, NongYaSai village village No. 5 10 Aug. 2005 avi 88 28 28 60 0 Kampaengphet TahPutSa, KlongKlung village village No. 5 18 Aug. 2005 avi 105 75 75 30 0 Kampaengphet TahPutSa, KlongKlung village village No. 6 19 Aug. 2005 avi 39 ... 10 22 0 Description of affected population in the new outbreaks: native chickens raised in backyards or free ranging with minimal biosecurity.
Diagnosis:
Laboratories where diagnosis was made Diagnostic tests used Results National Institute of Animal Health and Regional Veterinary Research and Development Centres, DLD - agar-gel precipitation test;
- haemagglutination test;
- pathogen isolation by egg inoculation;
- intracerebral pathogenicity index test.
positive Source of new outbreaks: unknown or inconclusive.
Control measures undertaken:
- stamping out;
- quarantine;
- movement control inside the country;
- screening;
- zoning;
- disinfection of infected premises/establishments.
Vaccination prohibited: yes.
Other details/comments: the case findings resulted from the second nationwide active surveillance campaign. The purpose of this surveillance is to evaluate the present status of highly pathogenic avian influenza after the second wave of outbreaks (between 3 July 2004 and 12 April 2005). The surveillance campaign is being extended.
*
* *
http://www.oie.int/
Copyright
© 2004 OIE
World Animal Health Organisation