17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Seroprevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Bovine Brucellosis at the Wildlife-Livestock-Human Interface in Rwanda

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Bovine brucellosis is endemic in Rwanda; however, little information is available on seroprevalence and risk factors. Therefore, a cross-sectional study was conducted among cattle farmed at the wildlife-livestock-human interface ( n = 1691) in five districts and one peri-urban district ( n = 216). Cattle were screened using the Rose Bengal test, then the results were confirmed by indirect enzyme-linked immunesorbent assay. Potential risk factors were determined with a questionnaire and analyzed for their association with seropositivity. In all districts, the animal and herd-level seroprevalence was 7.4% (141/1907) and 28.9% (61/212), respectively, 8.3% (141/1691) and 30.9% (61/198) at the interface, and 0.0% (0/216) in peri-urban areas. Among the potential risk factors, old age (≥5 years), cattle farmed close to wildlife, herds of cattle and small ruminants, history of abortions, and replacement animals were significantly associated with brucellosis ( p < 0.05). Low awareness of zoonotic brucellosis, assisting calving without biosafety protection, drinking raw milk, and manual milking were each observed in more than 21.7% of cattle keepers whose herds were seropositive. This study confirmed brucellosis endemicity in cattle farmed close to wildlife in Rwanda, suggesting the need to focus control efforts in these areas. Educated farmers with a high awareness of zoonotic brucellosis had low bovine brucellosis seropositivity, which emphasizes the importance of education.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Economics of brucellosis impact and control in low-income countries.

          Most data and evidence on the economic burden of brucellosis and the benefits of its control are from high-income and middle-income countries. However, the burden of brucellosis is greatest in low-income countries. This paper focuses on estimating the economic burdens of brucellosis in low-income countries in tropical Asia and Africa. The prospects for national, technically feasible, and economically viable, national brucellosis control programmes in most low-income countries are limited. However, some targeted control programmes will be beneficial and can probably be feasibly managed and provide good economic returns. More ambitious control will require a more general strengthening of Veterinary Services and livestock-sector capacity, using risk-management-based approaches.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Brucellosis in humans--etiology, diagnostics, clinical forms.

            Brucellosis in humans is a zoonosis of greatly varied clinical image. It occurs on all inhabited continents. The course of the disease may be acute, sub-acute or chronic. The etiologic factors of brucellosis are small, aerobic Gram-negative rods of the genus Brucella, which currently contains ten species: B. abortus, B. suis, B. ovis, B. melitensis, B. canis, B. neotomae, B. pinnipedialis, B. ceti, B. microti and B. inopinata. In humans, the disease is caused mainly by: B. melitensis as the most pathogenic species, followed by B. suis, whereas B. abortus is considered as the mildest type of brucellosis. The natural reservoir of the germ and the source of infection in humans are infected domestic animals, primarily cattle, sheep, goats, as well as wild animals. Infection in humans occurs by penetration through damaged skin, conjunctiva, and more rarely via the alimentary route by the consumption of infected products. Especially exposed are: veterinarians, veterinary technicians, insemination service employees, zoo technicians, farmers working on multi-herd farms (production cooperatives), e.g. cattlemen, also private farmers, employees of slaughter houses and meat processing enterprises. A basis for diagnosing brucellosis are serologic tests which allow the detection of antibodies occurring in response to infection, performed with the use of the following methods: agglutination test, complement fixation test, Coombs test, 2-mercaptoethanol agglutination test, and Burnet's intradermal allergy test which detects the state of hypersensitivity of the infected organism to Brucella abortus rods.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Brucellosis in Sub-Saharan Africa: Current challenges for management, diagnosis and control.

              Brucellosis is a highly contagious zoonosis caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella and affecting domestic and wild mammals. In this paper, the bacteriological and serological evidence of brucellosis in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and its epidemiological characteristics are discussed. The tools available for the diagnosis and treatment of human brucellosis and for the diagnosis and control of animal brucellosis and their applicability in the context of SSA are presented and gaps identified. These gaps concern mostly the need for simpler and more affordable antimicrobial treatments against human brucellosis, the development of a B. melitensis vaccine that could circumvent the drawbacks of the currently available Rev 1 vaccine, and the investigation of serological diagnostic tests for camel brucellosis and wildlife. Strategies for the implementation of animal vaccination are also discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Microorganisms
                Microorganisms
                microorganisms
                Microorganisms
                MDPI
                2076-2607
                09 October 2020
                October 2020
                : 8
                : 10
                : 1553
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0110, South Africa; kolofrancis@ 123456hotmail.com (F.B.K.); cbyaruhanga27@ 123456yahoo.com (C.B.); henriette.vanheerden@ 123456up.ac.za (H.v.H.)
                [2 ]Department of Veterinary Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Rwanda, P.O.Box 57 Nyagatare, Rwanda; gasirich@ 123456yahoo.fr
                [3 ]Department of Animal Resources and Veterinary Services, Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Board, P.O.Box 5016 Kigali, Rwanda; lydiamurerwa88@ 123456gmail.com
                [4 ]National Agricultural Research Organisation, P.O. Box 259 Entebbe, Uganda
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: boscus2@ 123456gmail.com ; Tel.: +27-647-254-082 or +250-788-648-909
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9404-2214
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2872-8864
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3577-1273
                Article
                microorganisms-08-01553
                10.3390/microorganisms8101553
                7600169
                33050125
                dacca9da-2f9a-43bf-a74b-529a8a97c309
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 30 July 2020
                : 24 September 2020
                Categories
                Article

                brucellosis,seroprevalence,potential risk factors,wildlife-livestock-human interface,rwanda

                Comments

                Comment on this article