3.9 Article

Lumpy skin disease in cattle in central Ethiopia: outbreak investigation and isolation and molecular detection of the virus

出版社

OFFICE INT EPIZOOTIES
DOI: 10.20506/rst.33.3.2325

关键词

Cattle; Ethiopia; Feedlot; Lumpy skin disease virus; Outbreak

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study was a combination of two investigations into active outbreaks of lumpy skin disease (LSD) in cattle in central Ethiopia and a retrospective analysis of outbreak reports between January 2007 and December 2011 covering the entire country. Active outbreaks were investigated in four districts of central Ethiopia: Adama, Wenji, Mojo and Welenchiti. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to acquire data at individual and herd levels, and tissue samples were collected for viral isolation and characterisation. The retrospective analyses showed that, during the five-year period, a total of 1,675 outbreaks were reported, with 62,176 cases and 4,372 deaths. The highest number of outbreaks was reported in Oromia (1,066), followed by Amhara (365) and the Southern Nations, Nationalities and People's Region (123). Outbreaks were more frequently observed between September and December and the highest number of outbreaks was reported in 2010. During the period studied, a total of 2,174 local zebu cattle were clinically examined and morbidity and mortality rates of 13.61% (296) and 4.97% (108) were recorded, respectively. Analysis of the active outbreaks revealed a relatively consistent morbidity rate, with the highest observed in Adama (15.38%), followed by Wenji (10.26%). The highest mortality rates were also observed in Adama (5.89%) and Wenji (3.42%). The LSD virus was isolated from 22 samples and all tested positive in polymerase chain reaction analysis. The disease was observed in the cattle regardless of previous vaccination with Kenyan sheep- and goat-pox vaccine; thus, vaccine efficacy was assessed under field conditions and the authors' findings, together with a possible remedy, are presented in this paper.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据