Sign up now!
Don't show this again

Thank you for confirming your subscription!

(And remember, if ever you want to change your email preferences or unsubscribe, just click on the links at the bottom of any email.)
Tap to download the app
X
Share
X

REPORTS

Collect articles and features into your own report to read later, print or share with others

Create a New Report

Favorites

Read Later

Create a new report

Report title (required) Brief description (optional)
CREATE
X
NEXT
PORK POULTRY
follow us


You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Favorites Read Later My Reports PHT Special Reports
Pig Health Today is equipped with some amazing (and free) tools for organizing and sharing content, as well as creating your own magazines and special reports. To access them, please register today.
Sponsored by Zoetis

Pig Health Today | Sponsored by Zoetis

.
Routes of Senecavirus A transmission identified

Routes of Senecavirus A transmission identified in breeding herds

A study of the way swine breeding herds were likely infected with Senecavirus A (SVA) underscores the importance of encouraging adherence to biosecurity procedures.[1]

Researchers from Iowa State University conducted an epidemiological investigation of six US swine breeding herds infected with SVA, which has been associated with vesicular signs that can resemble foot-and-mouth disease.

Their study included large and small herds with varying degrees of biosecurity in both swine-dense and swine-sparse areas.

The investigators used a standard form to collect relevant data and had detailed discussions with herd veterinarians and farm personnel about SVA’s clinical presentation and risk events that occurred in the 4 weeks prior to the first observation of clinical signs. Next, they subjectively assigned each event with a risk level of low, medium or high for SVA introduction.

While they identified multiple potential routes of infection, the researchers concluded the highest risks for introducing SVA were by indirect transmission by contaminated people — particularly on-farm employee entry — by livestock trailers or by carcass-removal equipment, K.L. Baker and colleagues reported in the February 2017 issue of Transboundary and Emerging Diseases.

They recommend the veterinary industry improve communication with producers about the importance of biosecurity measures and provide encouragement to improve compliance to protect herds from SVA and other diseases.

One of the farms in their study, for example, had biosecurity procedures better than typical for US breeding herds, but compliance wasn’t 100%. Five of the six farms didn’t have any written biosecurity protocols or formal biosecurity training for employees, they said.

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Baker KL, et al. Systematic Epidemiological Investigations of Cases of Senecavirus A in US Swine Breeding Herds. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017 Feb;64(1):11-18.

 

 

 


tags: , ,
RELATED NEWS
  • Commonly used disinfectants can vary widely in efficacy

    Commonly used disinfectants can have substantially different efficacy and should be tested against the pathogen of concern — and under the conditions of use — before they’re used on swine farms, caution investigators.




You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Google Translate is provided on this website as a reference tool. However, Poultry Health Today and its sponsor and affiliates do not guarantee in any way the accuracy of the translated content and are not responsible for any event resulting from the use of the translation provided by Google. By choosing a language other than English from the Google Translate menu, the user agrees to withhold all liability and/or damage that may occur to the user by depending on or using the translation by Google.