18 benv october 2014 en

BENVNational Veterinary Epidemiological Bulletin

October 2014Number 18

-

CESMENational Reference Centrefor the study and verificationof Foreign Animal Diseases

-

COVEPIOperational VeterinaryCentre for EpidemiologyProgrammingand Information

Pho

to b

y C

rist

ian

Bor

tes

BENV National Veterinary Epidemiological Bulletin

2 Index

INDEX

-EDITORIAL 3

-IN THESE MONTHSEpidemiological situation of Bluetongue in Italy in 2014 4Models applied to the study of epidemics 8

-HAND ON DATANumber of outbreaks reported to SIMAN in the I, II, III trimester 2014 12Number of outbreaks reported by Regions to SIMAN in the I, II, III trimester 2014 13Animals involved in outbreaks reported to SIMAN in the I, II, III trimester 2014 16

-A LOOK AT THE MAPS 17

-AROUND USAfrican Swine Fever in UE: evolution of the epidemiological situationduring 2014 20World Rabies Day 24

-OFFICIALLY FREE TERRITORIES 26 -CONTACTS & EDITORIAL STAFF 30

October 2014 Number 18

EDITORIALThe BENV as a tool for disseminating information

Dear readers,

this new issue of BENV will keep you company in the cold winter months with new interesting articles.

In the section In recent months, an article on bluetongue describes the epidemiological situation of this disease in Italy during 2014. In fact, a new epidemic wave caused by BTV1, occurred in our country during this year. The epidemiological situation is still in rapid evolution and to date, the infection has been confirmed in Abruzzo, Basilicata, Calabria, Campania, Lazio, Marche, Molise, Puglia, Sardegna, Sicilia, Umbria.

For a second time the BENV would like to give you an overview of the application of epidemiological models in animal health. Epidemiological models are useful tools using mathematics and statistics to quantitatively describe the relationships between pathogens and hosts, trying to predict the population-level transmission dynamics of infectious diseases, thus depicting the expected magnitude and behaviour of an epidemic.

The article published in this issue highlights the use of compartmental models, and illustrates how these models could help to lay a theoretical foundation for public health interventions.

In the section Around us, an update on the epidemiological situation of African Swine Fever in the countries of the European Union and of the Russian Federation is provided. Nowadays, the disease is endemic in the south of Russian Federation and involved other neighbouring countries such as Ukraine and Belarus to reach, more recently, the Baltic Republics and Poland.

Another article is focused on the World Rabies Day, an event endorsed by international human and veterinary health organizations which is celebrated each year on September the 28th, the date of the anniversary of the death of Louis Pasteur, who developed the first efficacious rabies vaccine. World Rabies Day is designed to raise awareness about rabies and enhance prevention and control efforts against the disease. The theme of this year is “Together against Rabies”, aiming at teaching everyone about the impact of rabies, how to prevent it and how to eradicate sources of the disease across the world.

The Hand on Data section shows you the data on the outbreaks of animal diseases, the health status of the regions and the animal species involved in the outbreaks reported to SIMAN up to September 2014. As previously reported in Benv News, during September 2014, Calabria reported 10 outbreaks of “small hive beetle” (Aethina Tumida): until now, the infection was considered exotic in the EU and responsible of serious economic losses.

The distribution of the main animal diseases occurred in Italy is shown in the section A look to the maps. More than 500 outbreaks due to BTV1 have been confirmed up to September 2014. As shown in the bluetongue map, the highest number of confirmed outbreaks is in Calabria, followed by Lazio and Abruzzo.

Finally, you can consult the maps and tables of officially free territories for enzootic-bovine-leukosis, tuberculosis and brucellosis and updated to the 14th of February 2014.

We invite you once again to send us articles of interest in the section Submit your article, where you can find the author’s guidelines.

The BENV editorial staff wishes you a pleasant reading and gives you the appointment to the next year for the new issue.

Simona Iannetti COVEPI

3 Editorial


4 In these months

IN THESE MONTHSThe main events of epidemiological interest in the lastmonths in Italy and in the European Union

Epidemiological situation of Bluetongue in Italy in 2014

Bluetongue (BT) is a non-contagious disease of ruminants transmitted by insects belonging to the genus Culicoides. The causative agent is a virus (BTV), family Reoviridae, genus Orbivirus with 26 historically recognized serotypes.

In summer 2000, BT infection due to serotype 2 was reported for the first time in three Regions of Southern Italy (Sardinia, Sicily and Calabria) and resulted in the largest epidemic of BT ever affecting Europe (1). Following the first epidemic several other BT incursions occurred in Italy caused by different serotypes (BTV1, 2, 4, 8, 9 and 16).

From 1/01/2013 to 31/12/2013 a total of 6,049 outbreaks were confirmed in Italy caused mainly by serotype BTV1, previously circulating in North Africa. The region with the highest number of outbreaks was Sardinia followed by Sicily, Lazio, Tuscany, Calabria, Liguria and Campania. In 2013 the animal sentinel system detected also the sporadic circulation of other serotypes (BTV 2, 4, 8, 9 and 16).

Prevention and control measures

In Italy, a National Surveillance Plan for BT is active as early warning system to detect the virus circulation in the territories and to prevent the spread in not affected areas through the restrictions posed to animal movements from the infected areas. The surveillance plan consists in serological and virological tests on susceptible animals, a nationwide network of sentinel animals, and entomological surveillance.

Italy has been divided into a grid of square units of 400 km2 within which a number of sentinel animals, mainly cattle, are selected and tested every month to detect a monthly incidence of 5% with a 95% confidence level.

Entomological surveillance is carried out during the year using blak-light traps to quantify the abundace of total insects, of Culicoides and to determine the presence/absence of C. imicola, the main vector in Italy. Currently the involvement of C. obsoletus in the viral transmission in some areas of the country has been proved.

Epidemiological situation in Italy in 2014

FIn 2014 (from 1/07/2014 to 29/09/2014) a new epidemic wave, caused by BTV1 occurred in Italy. The first outbreak was notified at the beginning of July in the province of Salerno, Campania region, in a herd of sheep in which clinical signs of the disease were observed. The infection has been confirmed both in territories


5 In these months

previously involved by the viral circulation and in new regions. To date the involved regions are: Abruzzo, Basilicata, Calabria, Campania, Lazio, Marche, Molise, Puglia, Sardinia, Sicily, Umbria. The epidemiological situation is still in rapid evolution (Figure 1).

Figure 1.BT confirmed outbreaks

(serotype 1 and unknown) in Italy (Source SIMAN, Sep. 29,

2014)

A total of 521 outbreaks due to BTV1 have been confirmed. In 162 outbreaks the serotyping is on-going. The highest number of confirmed outbreaks is in Calabria (195) region followed by Lazio (99) and Abruzzo (95) regions (Table 1).


6 In these months

Tabella 1. Dettaglio focolai confermati in Italia da BTV 1 e sconosciuto per Provincia (Source SIMAN , Sep. 29, 2014)

Region Province SerotypeN.

confirmed outbreaks

Susceptible CasesCases with

clinical symptoms

Deaths Slaughtered Destroyed

ABRUZZO CHIETI BTV 1 1 181 2 0 0 0 0

L’AQUILA BTV 1 45 2979 175 25 7 0 3

PESCARA BTV 1 10 1824 65 39 20 0 2

TERAMO BTV 1 39 10029 174 168 59 0 3

BASILICATA MATERA BTV 1 8 1481 34 34 9 0 0

POTENZA BTV 1 5 517 16 9 0 0 0

CALABRIA CATANZAROND 53 9447 1450 1372 407 0 407

BTV 1 17 2148 509 452 82 0 82

COSENZA BTV 1 8 336 31 5 1 0 1

CROTONEND 2 125 65 65 8 0 0

BTV 1 154 45981 6278 6273 1388 0 1011

VIBO VALENTIA

ND 13 1976 49 38 0 0 0

BTV 1 16 1180 94 21 9 0 1

CAMPANIA AVELLINO BTV 1 4 123 5 2 1 0 0

CASERTA ND 2 24 6 4 0 0 0

SALERNOND 8 665 19 19 1 0 0

BTV 1 22 993 49 43 3 0 1

LAZIO FROSINONEND 46 5644 437 342 265 0 0

BTV 1 18 3235 103 102 78 0 0

LATINA BTV 1 2 1224 27 27 9 0 9

RIETIND 3 842 30 30 21 0 21

BTV 1 17 2856 104 103 55 0 57

ROMA BTV 1 55 12873 556 454 331 3 302VITERBO

ND 7 3455 210 210 44 0 42

BTV 1 7 4277 127 116 51 0 44

MARCHE ANCONA BTV 1 4 146 15 0 0 0 0ASCOLI PICENO BTV 1 11 3437 161 158 17 0 10

FERMO ND 6 4115 157 157 68 0 68

MACERATAND 6 1484 82 23 60 0 58

BTV 1 1 81 1 0 0 0 0PESARO E URBINO ND 4 105 10 0 0 0 0

MOLISE ISERNIA BTV 1 4 442 30 10 20 0 0

PUGLIA TARANTO BTV 1 1 309 12 12 1 0 0

SARDEGNA CAGLIARIND 1 448 6 5 1 0 1

BTV 1 1 1215 102 5 11 0 11

NUORO BTV 1 2 169 11 0 0 0 0

SICILIA CATANIAND 1 102 1 0 0 0 0

BTV 1 1 43 1 0 0 0 0

UMBRIA PERUGIAND 10 3650 47 45 6 0 5

BTV 1 11 943 31 22 11 0 0

TERNI BTV 1 57 8948 357 357 255 0 0

Total 683 140052 11639 10747 3299 3 2139

• The classic BT symptoms related to the acute form of the disease have been observed in sheep: serous and purulent nasal discharge; hemorrhages and ulcerations of the oral and nasal tissue; swelling of lips, tongue, and jaw; inflammation of the coronary band.

• The control measures put in place by the Ministry of Health include the surveillance strengthening and the animal movement restriction in infected territories (2) to limit the viral circulation and the spread of the infection. Since the epidemiological situation is rapidly evolving, vaccination plans area under elaboration in the regions involved by the epidemic, in collaboration with the National Reference Centre for the study and verification of Foreign Animal Diseases (CESME) and the Ministry of Health.


7 In these months

References

1. A. Giovannini, P. Calistri, D. Nannini, C. Paladini, U. Santucci, C. Patta & V. Caporale (2004). Bluetongue in Italy: Part I Veterinaria Italiana Volume 40 (3): 252-259

2. Nota 5662 del Ministero della salute del 14.03.2014 - Febbre catarrale degli ovini (Bluetongue) - Ulteriori misure di controllo ed eradicazione per contenere l’eventuale diffusione del virus della Bluetongue sul territorio nazionale.

--Edited by:Rossana Bruno and Francesca Sauro COVEPIIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Abruzzo e del Molise “G. Caporale”

Table 2. Serotypes confirmed in Italy (BTV2, 4, 8, 9,16)

Region Province BTV 2 BTV 16 Total

ABRUZZO L’AQUILA 1 1

CALABRIA

COSENZA 1 1

VIBO VALENTIA 1 1

REGGIO CALABRIA 4 4

CAMPANIA SALERNO 2 2

LAZIO VITERBO 1 1

SARDEGNA OLBIA TEMPIO 1 1

SICILIAENNA 1 1

MESSINA 1 1

Total 3 10 13


8 In these months

Models applied to the study of epidemics

Mathematical modelling of infectious diseases was initiated by Bernoulli in 1760. The work of Kermack and McKendrick, published in 1927, had a major influence on the modelling framework. Their SIR model is still used to model epidemics of infectious diseases. In fact the SIR model is the point of reference for mathematical models used to describe epidemic spread. Most current epidemiological models are extensions of it.

Epidemiological modelling can be a powerful tool to assist animal health policy development and disease prevention and control. In the previous BENV chapter, an introduction to different types of mostly used models in epidemiology was done by focusing on basic Compartmental Models: SIR - SEIR model.

Sum up…

As already mentioned SIR models are compartmental models described by ordinary differential equations systems in which the population is divided into different compartments/groups.

Summarizing, there are two stages of the dynamics of the SIR model. In the first stage, susceptible individuals become infected after an effective contact with those infectious. β is the transmission rate between individuals; in the second stage, infected individuals recover at the average rate γ. Given the assumption that epidemiological rates are constant, the differential equations of a simple SIR model (with no births, deaths, or migrations) are:

Otherwise, when demography is considered we add other two parameters, the born rate at which new susceptible hosts enter into the system (λ) and the host death rate (μ).

A graphical example of a SIR model, considering a closed population that is no births and no deaths occur is showed in the figure 1.

The figure shows a simulation of the model with β = 0.2 and γ = 0.1. With N = 1 (normalized), the initial given conditions are S(0) = 0.99, I(0) = 0.01, and R(0) = 0, meaning that at the start of the simulation, 1% of the population is infected with the rest being susceptible. The simulation shows that the epidemic builds to where almost 15% of the population is infected shortly after 40 days, then the epidemic declines. In the end almost 80% of the population will have become infected and immune to any subsequent outbreak. About 20% of the population never gets the disease and remains susceptible to the infectious disease.

Two mathematical models belonging to the SIR category are mainly applied to the study of epidemics; they are the Kermack-McKendrick model and the Reed-Frost model. These models enjoy different properties and assumptions as summarized in the table below.


9 In these months

Figure 1.SIR model

in a closed population

Table 1. Kermack-McKendrick and Reed-Frost models properties and assumptions

MODELLO Kermack-McKendrick Reed-Frost

Input variables and parameters Deterministic1 Stochastic2

TIME Discrete3 Discrete

CATEGORY Belongs to the SIR category Belongs to the SIR category

ASSUMPTIONS 1An infected animal

immediately become infectious

Infection is transmitted through direct contact

ASSUMPTIONS 2 Removed animals are no more infectious

At the beginning of the epidemic animals removed

can exist

ASSUMPTIONS 3 The population is constant during the epidemic Infection lasts a unit of time

ASSUMPTIONS 4Animals within the

population have the same probability to be infected

Animals within the population have the same probability to be infected

ASSUMPTIONS 5 Time is divided into equal discrete intervals Time is discrete

ASUMPTION 6

The contact between a recovered and an infected animal does not cause the

infection

1. In deterministic models the input variables assume fixed values 2. Stochastic models take into account variations (causal or not) of the input variables used and then provide results in

terms of “probability” 3. Variables are measured at intervals

This chapter would highlight the use of compartmental models illustrating how these models would help to lay a theoretical foundation for public health interventions, for example by means of R0 use.


10 In these months

Practical use of R0

As stated in the previous chapter which introduced models, the SIR model enable to extrapolate an important epidemiological parameter: the basic reproductive ratio (R0), which is defined as the average number of secondary cases arising from an average primary case in an entirely susceptible population and it is determined by β/γ. If R0>1 an epidemic occurs in the absence of intervention, moreover an epidemic is prevented when the initial susceptible fraction has been reduced to less than 1/R0 (number of susceptibles at equilibrium is given from: Se=1/R0 ) while if R0<1 the disease dies out. In an endemic infection, we can determine which control measures, and at what magnitude,

Examples of applied models to diseases

1. Direct contact transmission disease: Foot and Mouth disease (FMD)

Determining the magnitude of R0 for FMD has also proved important, guiding policies for culling and vaccination, the two major control measures implemented for FMD.

Ferguson et al. (2001) determined R0 for FMD by considering contact tracing data and the number of susceptibles at equilibrium. They found that R0 ≈ 4.5 and that is reduced to approximately 1.6 when control measures were implemented. Also, by developing a model of differential equations to describe FMD dynamics and fitting this model to R0 values over time, they were able to conclude that slaughtering on all farms within 24h of case reporting (without necessarily waiting for laboratory confirmation) can significantly slow the epidemic. However, they found that even these improvements in slaughter times did not reduce R0 below one. They concluded that it is necessary to consider other interventions, especially those capable of rapidly controlling infections established in multiple regions. Ring culling and vaccination were also explored using the model. Ferguson et al. concluded that both are highly effective strategies if implemented rigorously, but that this may be very costly. The high initial value of R0 estimated in this study confirmed that FMD is highly transmissible, and estimates of R0were essential in determining which control measures might be effective against this pathogen.

Matthews et al.(2003) extended previous models of FMD by defining an optimal control policy. This policy included removing newly discovered infected holdings and the pre-emptive removal of holdings deemed to be at enhanced risk of infection. Matthews et al. employed a simple SIR model to determine the magnitude of the effect of different control policies on a chosen value of R0. They found, not surprisingly, that the level of control required to minimize the number of animals removed increases with R0. They also found that non-zero levels of control can optimize the outcome of the epidemic even when R0< 1. In this case, the impact of the control measure was assessed using the fraction of animals removed.

Extending their model to a metapopulation, Matthews et al. concluded that a greater level of control is needed in this case, but most importantly, they found that to minimize losses to livestock populations, R0 should be only sufficiently reduced; there is a tradeoff between the amount by which R0 can be reduced and the fraction of animals removed. The key points which emerge are that total losses are not highly sensitive to small variations in the control effort around the optimal values, and that losses increase only gradually as control effort increases beyond the optimal value. They concluded that some leeway is acceptable in practice, but that over-control is generally safer than under-control when trying to avoid large losses to the population. Similar arguments were also applied for variation in R0; that is, over-control should be implemented if there is any uncertainty or variability in the value of R0.

2. Vector-borne disease: West Nile

Wonham et al. (2004) derived a system of ODEs to describe the behavior of West Nile virus. Their model consisted of susceptible, infectious, recovered and dead birds, and larval, susceptible, exposed and infectious mosquitoes. The next generation method was used to calculate R0 from this model in order to evaluate the ability of the virus to invade the system. The calculated value of R0 was then interpreted biologically


11 In these months

as the square root of the product of (i) the disease R0from mosquitoes to birds and (ii) the R0 from birds to mosquitoes. Each of these R0 values was further analyzed as a product of disease transmission and infectious lifespan in case (i) and the product of the transmission probability, the number of initially susceptible mosquitoes per bird that survive the exposed period and the bird’s infectious lifespan incase (ii). R0 was then used to establish a threshold mosquito level, above which the virus will invade a constant population of susceptible mosquitoes. The R0 value derived was then used to evaluate public health policy makers. Two such policies were evaluated: mosquito control and bird control. It was demonstrated that a small increase in mosquito mortality can lead to a disproportionately large increase in the outbreak threshold. More surprisingly, however, R0 was used to show that reducing crow densities would have the opposite effect and actually enhance disease transmission (unless extremely low densities limited mosquito biting rates). Thus, R0 was used to show that reducing the initial mosquito population below the calculated threshold would have prevented the West Nile outbreak for New York in 2000. Conversely, bird control would have had the opposite effect.

“As a matter of fact, all epidemiology, concerned as it is with the variationof disease from time to time or from place to place, must beconsidered mathematically, however many variables as implicated, if it is to be considered scientifically at all.” Sir Ronald Ross, MD

“All models are wrong… but some are useful” . George Box

Bibliografia

1. Ferguson, N. M., Donnelly, C. A. & Anderson, R. M. 2001. The foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain: pattern of spread and impact of interventions. Science 292, 1155–1160.

1. H. Weiss, 2013.The SIR model and the Foundations of Public Health.1. Materials Matemàtics Volum 2013, n. 3, 17 pp. ISSN: 1887-1097 Publicació

electrònica de divulgació del Departament de Matemàtiques de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.

1. J. M. Heffernan, R. J. Smith and L. M. Wahl, 2005. Perspectives on the basic reproductive ratio. J. R. Soc. Interface (2005) 2, 281–293 doi:10.1098/rsif.2005.0042.

1. Marjorie J. Wonham, Toma s de-Camino-Beck and Mark A. Lewis. 2004. An epidemiological model for West Nile virus: invasion analysis and control applications. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B (2004) 271, 501–507 501. 2004 The Royal Society. DOI 10.1098/rspb.2003.2608.

1. Matthews, L., Haydon, D. T., Shaw, D. J., Chase-Topping, M. E., Keeling, M. J. & Woolhouse, M. E. J. 2003 Neighborhood control policies and the spread of infectious diseases. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, 1659–1666. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2429)

1. M.G. Garner & S.A. Hamilton, 2011. Principles of epidemiological modeling. Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2011, 30 (2), 407-416. http://www.mat.uab.cat/matmat/

1. N. Masuda and P. Holme, 2013. Predicting and controlling infectious disease epidemics using temporal networks. F1000Prime Reports 2013, 5:6 (doi:10.12703/P5-6). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590785/

1. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~jmahaffy/courses/f09/math636/lectures/bifurcation_ode/bifurcation_ode.pdf

1. Keeling M.J. and Rohani P. (2008). Modeling infectious diseases in humans and animals. Princeton University Press. Princeton (US) and Oxford (UK). 366 pp.

--Edited by:Maria Luisa Danzetta e Lara Savini COVEPIIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Abruzzo e del Molise “G. Caporale”


12 Hand on data

HAND ON DATA Processing date: 9th October 2014Number of outbreaks reported to SIMAN in the 1, II, III trimester 2014

Disease Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Total outbreaks

Aethina tumida 10 10

African swine fever 21 9 2 5 13 12 3 2 67

American foulbrood of honey bees 2 11 6 18 12 10 8 67

Antrax 1 1

Avian typhosis 1 1

Bluetongue 16 7 3 1 3 9 160 266 334 799

Bovine leucosis 5 1 4 2 4 6 2 1 25

Bovine tuberculosis 31 28 26 28 49 50 21 12 12 257

Brucellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs 32 24 53 64 74 62 44 19 20 392

Caprine arthritis/encephalitis 1 2 1 1 1 6

Contagious agalactia 6 5 7 10 2 4 3 1 1 39

Contagious bovine mastitis 1 1

Crayfish plague (Aphanomyces astaci) 1 1

Echinococcosis/Idatidosis 1 1 2

Equine infectious anaemia 2 1 2 1 3 3 3 15

Equine rhinopneumonitis 2 2

Erysipelas 1 1 2

European foulbrood of honey bees 1 3 4

Fowl pox 1 1

Infectious hematopoietic necrosis 1 1 2

Koi herpesvirus disease 1 1

Leishmaniosis 1 1 2

Leptospirosis 3 5 2 4 4 3 2 2 25

Low patogenicity Avian influenza in poultry 1 1 1 1 1 5

Maedi-visna 1 1

Mixomatosis 1 1 2

Non-typhoidal avian salmonellosis 6 2 4 4 1 17

Paratuberculosis 1 4 2 2 1 1 1 12

Pasteurellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs 1 1

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease 1 1 1 1 2 6

Salmonellae equine abortion 1 1

Salmonellosis (S. abortusovis) 5 10 4 1 2 22

Salmonellosis of animals 1 2 3

Scrapie 1 3 3 2 4 1 1 15

Swine vescicular disease 2 2

Trichinellosis 3 1 4

Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) 1 1

West Nile Disease 1 20 42 14 77


13 Hand on data

Number of outbreaks reported by Regions to SIMAN in the 1, II, III, trimester 2014

Region Disease Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Total

ABRUZZO

Avian typhosis 1 1

Bluetongue 1 37 78 116

Bovine leucosis 1 1

Bovine tuberculosis 1 1

Brucellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs

5 1 1 2 9

Salmonellae equine abortion 1 1

APULIA

American foulbrood of honey bees 1 1

Bluetongue 1 1

Bovine leucosis 3 1 3 1 1 6 15

Bovine tuberculosis 1 3 3 1 2 10


4 3 14 6 2 8 6 1 3 47

Echinococcosis/Idatidosis 1 1

Equine infectious anaemia 1 1

Fowl pox 1 1

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease 1 1

BASILICATA

Antrax 1 1

Bluetongue 8 7 15

Bovine tuberculosis 1 1 2


4 3 2 2 5 3 1 3 1 24

Equine infectious anaemia 1 1 2

Swine vescicular disease 2 2

BOLZANO American foulbrood of honey bees 1 1 1 3

CALABRIA

Aethina tumida 10 10

Bluetongue 1 3 1 1 3 111 119 40 279

Bovine tuberculosis 1 2 6 1 3 2 1 16


7 3 13 13 19 15 5 1 6 82

Echinococcosis/Idatidosis 1 1

Salmonellosis of animals 1 1

Scrapie 1 1

CAMPANIA

Bluetongue 1 2 1 12 11 20 47

Bovine leucosis 1 1 2

Bovine tuberculosis 6 7 7 7 7 1 35


5 3 11 13 24 18 9 2 3 88

Equine infectious anaemia 2 1 3

Non-typhoidal avian salmonellosis 1 1

EMILIA ROMAGNA

American foulbrood of honey bees 3 1 1 2 7

Erysipelas 1 1

European foulbrood of honey bees 1 1

Leptospirosis 1 1

Low patogenicity Avian influenza in poultry

1 1 2

Non-typhoidal avian salmonellosis 1 1 2

Salmonellosis (S. abortusovis) 1 1

Scrapie 1 1

West Nile Disease 13 29 8 50


14 Hand on data


FRIULI VENEZIA GIULIA

Crayfish plague (Aphanomyces astaci) 1 1

Leishmaniosis 1 1 2

Leptospirosis 1 5 1 3 2 3 2 1 18


1 1


West Nile Disease 1 1 2

LAZIO

American foulbrood of honey bees 1 1

Bluetongue 4 1 2 33 67 76 183

Bovine leucosis 2 1 1 4

Bovine tuberculosis 2 1 2 3 1 2 11


1 1 1 3

Equine infectious anaemia 1 1 1 2 1 6

Equine rhinopneumonitis 2 2

Mixomatosis 1 1


Salmonellosis (S. abortusovis) 1 1 1 3

Scrapie 1 1 1 3

LIGURIABovine tuberculosis 1 1

Leptospirosis 1 1

LOMBARDY



1 1

Non-typhoidal avian salmonellosis 2 1 1 1 5


MARCHE

Bluetongue 1 44 45


Scrapie 2 2

MOLISE

Bluetongue 5 5

Bovine tuberculosis 1 1 2


1 2 1 4


Trichinellosis 2 2

PIEDMONT


Infectious hematopoietic necrosis 1 1


1 1

Paratuberculosis 1 2 3

West Nile Disease 1 1 2


15 Hand on data


SARDINIA African swine fever 21 9 2 5 13 12 3 2 67

Bluetongue 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 15


1 1

Caprine arthritis/encephalitis 1 2 1 1 1 6

Contagious agalactia 4 3 6 8 2 4 3 1 1 32

Contagious bovine mastitis 1 1

Leptospirosis 2 1 1 4

Maedi-visna 1 1

Mixomatosis 1 1


Paratuberculosis 1 1 2

Salmonellosis (S. abortusovis) 4 8 4 1 1 18

Salmonellosis of animals 2 2

Scrapie 2 1 2 1 1 7

Trichinellosis 1 1 2

West Nile Disease 1 1

SICILY Bluetongue 8 1 2 3 14

Bovine leucosis 2 1 3

Bovine tuberculosis 27 22 16 14 30 37 14 8 9 177


11 12 12 22 23 16 22 9 7 134

Contagious agalactia 1 1

Leptospirosis 1 1

Pasteurellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs

1 1

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease 1 1

Scrapie 1 1

West Nile Disease 1 1

TRENTO American foulbrood of honey bees 1 3 2 13 9 10 8 46

Contagious agalactia 1 2 1 2 6

European foulbrood of honey bees 3 3

Paratuberculosis 1 4 1 6

TUSCANY American foulbrood of honey bees 4 1 1 1 7


Koi herpesvirus disease 1 1


Paratuberculosis 1 1

UMBRIA Bluetongue 22 58 80


VENETO American foulbrood of honey bees 1 1 2

Erysipelas 1 1

Infectious hematopoietic necrosis 1 1


Rabbit haemorrhagic disease 1 1 1 1 4

Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) 1 1



16 Hand on data

Animals involved in outbreaks reported to SIMAN in the 1, II, III trimester 2014

Disease Animals involved No. Of animal in the holding

No. Of diseased animals

No. Of died

animals

No. Of culled

animals

No. Of destroyed

animas

Aethina tumida Bees 346 27 0 0 0

African swine fever Suidae 1204 209 118 1078 711

American foulbrood of honey bees Bees 250817 250190 150005 250020 250128

Antrax Ruminants 11 2 2 0 2

Avian typhosis Poultry 25120 25120 12500 12620 25120

BluetongueRuminants 154836 12659 3673 5 2460

Wild animals 18 18 0 0 0

Bovine leucosis Ruminants 2555 109 1 67 1

Bovine tuberculosisRuminants 18242 1686 7 1440 14


Brucellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigsRuminants 46061 6167 12 5466 9

Suidae 5 2 0 0 0

Caprine arthritis/encephalitis Ruminants 702 363 1 0 1

Contagious agalactia Ruminants 11862 1637 7 6 7

Contagious bovine mastitis Ruminants 7 1 0 0 0

Crayfish plague (Aphanomyces astaci) Acquatic animals 1 1 0 0

Echinococcosis/Idatidosis Ruminants 61 4 0 0 0

Equine infectious anaemia Equidae 136 18 1 9 1

Equine rhinopneumonitis Equidae 204 4 0 0 0

Erysipelas Suidae 6258 25 24 1 0

European foulbrood of honey bees Bees 214 75 0 0 3

Fowl pox Poultry 10 10 10 0 0

Infectious hematopoietic necrosis Acquatic animals 43001 0 0 0

Koi herpesvirus disease Acquatic animals 7 7 0 0

Leishmaniosis Domestic carnviores 9 5 1 0 0

Leptospirosis

Domestic carnviores 614 25 18 0 3

Equidae 1 1 0 0 0

Ruminants 141 4 1 0 0

Suidae 730 31 0 30 0

Low patogenicity Avian influenza in poultryBirds 6455 103 0 3816 3801

Poultry 2141 67 1 1765 1765

Maedi-visna Ruminants 129 15 0 0 0

Mixomatosis Lagomorphs 445 98 98 347 445

Non-typhoidal avian salmonellosisBirds 108814 96737 0 0 0

Poultry 1055845 784354 36 58344 25586

Paratuberculosis Ruminants 2814 29 3 5 0

Pasteurellosis of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs Ruminants 152 1 1 0 1

Rabbit haemorrhagic disease Lagomorphs 41415 10431 10231 21836 22436

Salmonellae equine abortion Equidae 14 3 0 0 0

Salmonellosis (S. abortusovis) Ruminants 9390 533 14 0 12

Salmonellosis of animalsRuminants 1284 17 2 0 0

Suidae 16 1 16 16 1

Scrapie Ruminants 6532 36 11 189 51

Swine vescicular disease Suidae 690 687 0 678 678

TrichinellosisSuidae 9 2 0 0 1


Viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) Acquatic animals 200 200 200 200

West Nile Disease

Birds 32 32 5 0 0

Equidae 93 11 0 0 0

Insects 357 91 4 0 0

Poultry 14 1 0 1 1


17 A look at the maps

A LOOK AT THE MAPSThe geographical distribution of the main animal diseasesreported to SIMAN in the I, II, III trimester 2014

Equine Infectious Anaemia

Bluetongue

--Geographical distribution of the outbreaks




African Swine Fever


Avian Influenza, low patogenicity




West Nile Disease


Swine vesicular disease



20 Around us

Introduction

African Swine Fever (ASF) is a highly contagious disease of domestic and wild pigs, not transmissible to humans; the infection is caused by a DNA virus, belonging to the genus Asfavirus, family Asfaviridae.

The infection can spread both by direct contact from infected to healthy animal (by excreta, secreta, infected carcasses...), and through mechanical vectors (insects, animals, workers, tools and contaminated clothing.) In nature, the virus is high resistant even in adverse environmental conditions; some species of soft ticks (Ornithodoros spp.) may act as biological vectors of the virus, while an important role is ascribed to the presence of asymptomatic carriers survived to the infection.

The disease was discovered in Africa, where it is endemic particularly in Sub-Saharian countries. In the second half of the nine-hundred century, ASF was reported in several European (Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, France, Italy and Malta) and American countries (Brazil, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Haiti); thanks to expensive and challenging control programs at the end of the nineties, the disease was confined only to the African continent, with the exception of Sardinia where the infection is still endemic after more than 35 years of its first occurrence.

In this framework, the occurrence of ASF from 2007 in the former Soviet Republic of Caucaso raised particular interest. Later, the infection spread to the Russian Federation and involved other neighbouring countries such as Ukraine and Belarus to reach, more recently, the Baltic Republics and Poland (Figure 1).

AROUND USThe main events of epidemiological interest in the last months in the European Union and in the neighbour countries

African Swine Fever in UE: evolution of the epidemiological situation during 2014


21 Around us

Evolution of the disease in Europe

Georgia officially reported the first outbreak on 5 June 2007, but episodes of high mortality were recorded from at least two months; ASF virus was likely introduced through waste contaminated, coming from a ship docked in the port of Poti and used for feeding local pigs. Genotyping and molecular analysis showed that the virus belonged to genotype II and that it was very similar to the virus detected in the outbreaks of south-eastern Africa (Mozambique, Madagascar and Zambia).

The disease rapidly spread throughout the Georgian territory and across the national borders. Armenia, in fact, reported its first outbreak on 6 August 2007, Azerbaijan in January 2008. In the following years the epidemic involved the neighbouring sub-Caucasian countries and thus the Russian Federation as well.

Nowadays, the disease is considered endemic in the south of Russian Federation and in a western territory 300 Km far from Moscow where the virus is present both in domestic and in wild pigs. From 2007 to date, the federal government reported more than 400 outbreaks of ASF in domestic pigs and more than 600 outbreaks in wild boar. In 2012, the virus was also reported in Ukraine, where in July was notified an outbreak in domestic pigs and three cases in wild boars.

In June and July 2013 Belarus reported two outbreaks in domestic pigs, one of them close to the border of Lithuania and Poland. Afterwards, 27 cases were recorded in wild boars population.

In January 2014, two outbreaks in pigs and 6 in wild boars were reported in Ukraine in Lugansk region, near the border of the Russian federation.

It is important to stress that pigs’ farming in the former Soviet Republics, is characterized by ha high prevalence of farms rearing pigs for own consumption, with a low biosecurity level that does not preclude contacts with wild animals and promotes, in fact, the spread of the infection and its persistence in the region, thus providing a clear and permanent hazard for the European countries.

Figure 1.ASF outbreaks reported in 2014

(source: OIE)


22 Around us

ASF in the EU

ASF was reported officially in UE on 24 January 2014 in Lithuania, when the virus was detected in two carcasses of wild boars found dead near the border of Belarus (few hundred meters). In the same way, between February and May 2014, Poland reported 4 cases in wild boars found dead near the border of Belarus. On 26 of June, Leetonia reported one outbreak in domestic pigs and, from 26 June to 3 July, in wild boars.

The ASF EU reference laboratory (INIA – Madrid), confirmed the presence of the virus and the phylogenetic analysis detected the 100% of homology between the isolates of Lithuania and of Poland with the virus circulating in Belarus and Russia, giving evidence of strict epidemiological links. Nowadays, experts believe that data on ASF prevalence and incidence on the outbreaks reported in Caucasus and in Belarus are strongly underestimated.

More recently (September 2014), another Baltic republic, Estonia, reported one outbreak in the Ida-Virumaa area. On 18 September, the OIE was notified with a follow up specifying that the virus was detected from a carcass of a wild boar. The INIA confirmed the positivity by real-time PCR.

After the confirmation tests in the European countries, the control measures foreseen by art. 15 of Dir. 2002/ 60/ EC were immediately put in place.

ASF in Italy

ASF was introduced in Sardinia in 1978, probably with contaminated food like waste of ships or aircrafts. Despite the strict measures taken during the years, eradication of the infection is currently still a distant goal.

The epidemiological trend over the years has been not uniform; however, a seasonal (summer) “peaks” and a well-defined geo-localization (mainly in the east-central area of the island) were almost constantly observed. In these areas, the presence of wild pigs is still significant despite it is considered a key risk factor; the holding of wild pigs is illegal and forbidden by regional laws.

From the second half of 2011, there was an increase in the incidence of recorded outbreaks characterized by 34 notifications in few months; despite the adoption of more severe measures, this trend was confirmed in 2012 (106 outbreaks) and in 2013 (114 outbreaks) involving both domestic and wild animals, outside of the historically endemic area as well. In 2014, the same trend has been confirmed because of the 72 outbreaks (44 outbreaks in domestic pigs and 28 in wild boars) reported on September 25 (figure 2).

EU Action Plan

After the ASF outbreak occurred in Belarus in June 2013, the EU implemented an Action Plan to prevent the introduction of the virus inside its borders.

• The Plan foresee the adoption of the following strict protective measures especially near the borders of Russian Federation:

Figure 2.ASF outbreaks reported in Sardinia (1978-2014)


23 Around us

• disinfection of all vehicles carrying livestock;• Shipment Inspections (inspection on meat);• Stop of all livestock markets;• Strengthening the Biosecurity measures inside of the pig farms;• Establishment of training programs for operators;• Surveillance and serological monitoring of the population of domestic pigs and

wild boars;• Establishment of “buffer zones”;• Adoption of appropriate strategies to prevent or minimize the crossing of borders

by wild boars;• Improving the quality of laboratory testing;• Use of insect repellents for wild boars;• Adoption of the early slaughter of pigs in backyard farms at risk, as a measure of

prevention;• Review / update of specific “contingency plans” for each Member State;• Strengthening the diagnostic capacity of EU laboratories;• EU co-financed funds by more than € 2.5 million to be allocated to Estonia, Latvia,

Lithuania and Poland;• Further EU co-financed funds for a total of over € 2 million to be allocated in 2014

to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland;• Insurance of technical assistance by the EU Reference Laboratories (Valdeolmos

INIA, Madrid) and by the EFSA for what concerns the “risk-assessment” and the overall EU coordination of the actions taken by each Member State;

• The FVO is checking the validity of the “contingency plans” of each Member Sate in dealing with an emergency such as “African Swine Fever”;

• In order to help each Member State to deal with such state, the EU Commission has recently published the manual “Guidelines on surveillance and control of ASF in feral pigs and Preventive Measures for pig holdings.”

• The European Union has also provided technical support to the Russian and Belarusian Government through the group of experts of the ASF EU Reference Laboratory of.

Conclusions

ASF is considered as one of the more important threat to be fight in the field of pigs health. The experience gained in the recent epidemic that has characterized the Eastern Europe, highlighted the ability of the virus to move from endemic to new areas: in this framework, there are many risk factors related to human activities. Moreover, a low level of biosecurity of domestic swine herds and the possibility of contact with the wild population can be crucial for the endemisation of ASF.

To effectively tackle the risk of introduction of infection, European legislation requires that each State is prepared to deal with new outbreaks of ASF adopting specific “contingency plans”; experts also insist on the need for proper training and information of veterinarians and of all stakeholders.

It should be remembered that, in the past, ASF has been successfully eradicated from different areas of the world and, in particular, the Spanish model could be effectively adapted to the territories currently infected.

--Edited by:Marco Sensi, Gian Mario De Mia & Francesco Feliziani Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Umbria e delle Marche


24 Around us

World Rabies Day

Rabies is a deadly zoonosis with devastating social and sanitary consequences, with a great adaptation capability given its large range of host species and its ability of interspecies transmission. The majority of rabies-related deaths is in Africa and Asia, and in particular, the 84% of deaths is from poor communities in rural areas. Up to 60% of estimated 55,000 deaths are children under 15 years old: children are particularly vulnerable because they are more exposed to dog bites. The cornerstones for preventing such devastating occurrences are: pet vaccination, education of children and ensuring proper access to medical resources.

On September the 28th the World Rabies Day has been celebrated to raise awareness about rabies and enhance prevention and control efforts. It is an international campaign coordinated by the Global Alliance for rabies control (GARC), a non-profit organization with headquarters in the United States and the United Kingdom, which firstly launched this initiative in 2007. World Rabies Day is endorsed by international human and veterinary health organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the Pan American Health Organization, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Veterinary Association. World Rabies Day takes place each year on September the 28th, the anniversary of the death of Louis Pasteur, who developed the first efficacious rabies vaccine, in collaboration with his colleagues.

The organizers and participants are people living in rabies endemic areas or just caring about the devastating impact of the disease and intending to react to such threat. World Rabies Day is designed to raise awareness about both human and animal rabies, to take steps helping rabies prevention and control, such as the vaccination of pets, including dogs and cats, and educating people on how to avoid dangerous contacts with wild animals potentially transmitting rabies: raccoons, bats, skunks and foxes. Currently it is estimates that 55,000 persons are dying due to rabies every year, but given the lack of compulsory notification to health authorities in many countries, the actual number of deaths could be much higher. Until all rabies deaths were recorded, it is not possible to have a clear picture of the magnitude of the problem or to appreciate the real value of preventing actions. So, one of the objective of the World Rabies Day is to push countries to make rabies a notifiable disease.

Since it started, the World Rabies Day has reached over 100 million people and vaccinated over 3 million of animals against the disease. In 2007 it exceeded expectations with 400,000 people taking part in the event across 74 countries. Nowadays 125 countries are involved. The theme of this year is “Together against Rabies”, aiming at teaching everyone about the impact of rabies, how to prevent it and how to eradicate sources of the disease across the world.

Challenges to controlling rabies in dogs

Rabies is present in all inhabited continents (figure 1 and 2). Worldwide, dog bites are the cause of almost all human deaths, with a smaller number of cases caused by the contact with other domestic and wild animals, including bats. Where rabies is endemic, any dog bite may potentially transmit the infection and, therefore, millions of people every year need for the post-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the onset of the disease. This treatment is expensive and overwhelmingly, and often the price is paid directly by people who cannot afford it. Canine rabies is not under control in many regions of the world, and frequently the presence of large numbers of stray dogs hampers the implementation of control efforts. This often causes an increased number of rabid animals that have the potential to transmit the virus to humans. During the World Rabies Day, rabies experts at WHO and around the world are highlighting dog vaccination programs as the most effective measure to reduce the risk of this disease that kills around 50,000 people every year.


25 Around us

Targets to eliminate rabies

In Italy the last case of rabies in animals was detected in 2011 and in 2013 the country has been declared free from the disease. Latin American countries have set targets to eliminate human and dog rabies within 2015. Countries in South-East Asia aim to do the same in 2020. Significant progress has already been made in particular in Sri Lanka, where mass dog vaccination has reduced rabies deaths from more than 350 in 1973 to 50 in 2010, and in Thailand where mortality from rabies has fallen from 170 deaths in 1991 to 7 in 2011.

Figure 1.Distribuzione della rabbia negli

animali domestici (2013). Fonte: OIE

Figure 2.Distribuzione della rabbia negli animali selvatici (2013). Fonte: OIE

References

1. World Rabies Day Website http://rabiesalliance.org/2. Wikipedia the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Rabies_Day

--A cura di:Simona IannettiCOVEPIIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Abruzzo e del Molise “G. Caporale”


26 Officially free territories

OFFICIALLY FREE TERRITORIES

Bovine tuberculosis: provinces and regions officially free according to the community legislation up to 14/02/2014

Bovine tuberculosis

Decision Province Region

2003/467/CE

Bergamo

LombardiaLecco

Sondrio

Ascoli Piceno Marche

BolzanoTrentino Alto Adige

Trento

2004/230/CE Grosseto Toscana

2005/28/CEComo Lombardia

Prato Toscana

2006/169/CEPescara Abruzzo

All the region Friuli Venezia Giulia

2007/174/CE

All the region Emilia Romagna

NovaraPiemonte

Verbania

Livorno

ToscanaLucca

Siena

BellunoVeneto

Padova

2008/97/CE

Vercelli Piemonte

PisaToscana

Pistoia

2008/404/CE All the region Veneto

2009/342/CE Oristano Sardegna

2010/391/CE

All the region Lombardia

All the region Toscana

Cagliari

SardegnaMedio-Campidano

Ogliastra

Olbia-Tempio

2011/277/CERieti

LazioViterbo

2012/204/UE

AstiPiemonte

Biella

Fermo Marche



Bovine tuberculosis

Officially free territories 27

Bovine leukosis: Provinces and Regions Officially Free according to the EU legislation up to 14/02/2014


2003/467/CE

Bergamo

Lombardia

Brescia

Como

Lecco

Mantova

Sondrio

Varese


Bolzano Trentino Alto Adige

Bologna

Emilia Romagna

Ferrara

Forlì

Cesena

Modena

Parma

Piacenza

Ravenna

Reggio Emilia

Rimini

Aosta Valle D'Aosta

2004/63/CE

Cremona

LombardiaLodi

Milano

Arezzo

Toscana

Firenze

Grosseto

Livorno

Lucca

Pisa

Pistoia

Prato

Siena

2005/28/CE

Pavia Lombardia

Massa-Carrara Toscana

PerugiaUmbria

Terni

2005/604/CE

Alessandria

Piemonte

Asti

Biella

Cuneo

Novara

Torino

Verbania

Vercelli


2006/169/CE

Pescara Abruzzo

Tutta la regione Friuli Venezia Giulia

FrosinoneLazio

Rieti

Imperia Liguria

Ancona

MarcheMacerata

Pesaro

2006/290/CE Tutta la regione Molise

2007/174/CE

Savona Liguria

Oristano in Sardegna; Sardegna

Tutta la regione Veneto

2009/342/CE Tutta la regione Sardegna

2010/391/CE

Napoli Campania

Brindisi Puglia

Agrigento Sicilia

Caltanissetta

Siracusa

Trapani

2011/277/CE Viterbo Lazio

2012/204/UE

Catania

SiciliaEnna

Palermo

Ragusa

2013/177/UE Benevento Campania

2014/91/UE

Latina Lazio

Tutta la regione Liguria

Avellino Campania

Leucosi bovina


28 Officially free territories


2003/467/CE

Bergamo

Lombardia

Como

Lecco

Mantova

Sondrio

Varese


BolzanoTrentino Alto Adige

Trento

Bologna

Emilia Romagna

Ferrara

Forlì

Cesena

Modena

Parma

Piacenza

Ravenna

Reggio Emilia

Rimini

Cagliari

SardegnaNuoro

Oristano

Sassari

2004/63/CE

Cremona

LombardiaLodi

Pavia

2005/28/CE

Pavia Lombardia

Massa-Carrara Toscana

PerugiaUmbria

Terni

2005/604/CE

Alessandria

Piemonte

Asti

Biella

Novara

Verbania

Vercelli

2006/169/CE

Pescara Abruzzo


Rieti Lazio

ImperiaLiguria

Savona

Milano Lombardia

PistoiaToscana

Siena

Bovine brucellosis: Provinces and Regions Officially Free according to the EU legislation up to 14/02/2014


2007/174/CE

Torino Piemonte

Firenze Toscana


2008/97/CEBrindisi Puglia

Tutta la regione Toscana

2009/342/CE

Ancona

MarcheMacerata

Pesaro

Cuneo Piemonte

2010/391/CE Campobasso Molise

2011/277/CE

Frosinone

LazioLatina

Viterbo

2012/204/UE Tutta la regione Valle d’Aosta

2014/91/UE Tutta la regione Liguria

Bovine brucellosis



Bovine brucellosis

Officially free territories 29


2002/482/CE Bolzano Trentino Alto Adige

2003/237/CE

Arezzo Toscana

Cagliari

SardegnaNuoro

Sassari

Oristano

2003/732/CE

Bergamo

Lombardia

Brescia

Como

Cremona

Lecco

Lodi

Mantova

Milano

Pavia

Sondrio

Varese

Trento Trentino Alto Adige

2004/199/CERieti

LazioViterbo

2005/28/CE

Firenze

Toscana

Livorno

Lucca

Massa-Carrara

Pisa

Pistoia

Prato

Siena

Perugia

Terni Umbria

2005/764/CE Grosseto Toscana

2005/604/CE

Ancona

Marche

Ascoli Piceno

Macerata

Pesaro

Urbino

Alessandria

Piemonte

Asti

Biella

Cuneo

Novara

Torino

Verbania

Vercelli

2006/169/CE

Pescara Abruzzo


Savona Liguria

Isernia Molise


2008/97/CE

RomaLazio

Latina


2010/391/CE Tutta la regione Molise

2011/277/CETutta la regione Emilia Romagna

Tutta la regione Valle d’Aosta

2014/91/UETutta la regione Lazio

Tutta la regione Liguria

Ovine and caprine brucellosis: Officially Free according to the EU legislation up to 14/02/2014

Ovine and caprine brucellosis

July 2014 Number 17


30 Contacts & Editorial staff

-National Reference Centre for Veterinary Epidemiology, Planning, Information and Risk Analysis (COVEPI)

EpidemiologyDr. Paolo Calistriph +39 0861 332241

Statistics and GISDr. Annamaria Conteph +39 0861 332246

-CoordinatorSimona Iannetti (COVEPI)

Editorial boardBarbara Alessandrini, Paolo Calistri, Fabrizio De Massis, Gianfranco Diletti, Nicola Ferri, Armando Giovannini, Federica Monaco, Daniela Morelli, Giovanni Savini, Vincenza Prencipe

Istructional designerAlessandro De Luca

Web masterand desktop publishingSandro SantarelliCover photo: cvrcak1

mail [email protected] +39 0861 332251www.izs.it

-National Reference Centre for the study and verification of Foreign Animal Diseases (CESME)

Diagnostics and Monitoring of Exotic Viral DiseasesDr. Federica Monacoph +39 0861 332446

Diagnostic and surveillance of exotic diseases, Virology laboratory. Windhoek, Namibia Dr. Massimo Scacchiaph +39 0861 332405

CONTACTS& EDITORIAL STAFF

18 benv october 2014 en

Documents

world rabies day

impact of rabies

animal health

outbreaks of animal

efficacious rabies vaccine

new issue of benv

health stat

data section