4.6 Review

Swine enteric coronavirus disease: A review of 4years with porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus and porcine deltacoronavirus in the United States and Canada

期刊

TRANSBOUNDARY AND EMERGING DISEASES
卷 65, 期 3, 页码 660-675

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tbed.12823

关键词

coronavirus; porcine deltacoronavirus; porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus; review; swine; transmission

资金

  1. National Pork Board [16-266]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Swine enteric coronaviruses, including porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus (PEDV) and porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV), have emerged and spread throughout the North American swine industry over the last four years. These diseases cause significant losses within the pork industry and within the first year after PEDV introduction, approximately 10% of the US herd died due to the disease. Similar to other enteric coronaviruses, such as transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), these emerging swine enteric coronavirus diseases (SECD) are age-dependent, with high morbidity and mortality in neonatal pigs. Since the introduction of SECD, research has focused on investigating viral pathogenesis through experimental inoculation, increasing maternal antibody for neonatal protection, understanding transmission risks through feed and transportation, and outlining the importance of biosecurity in preventing SECD introduction and spread. A survey of swine professionals conducted for this review revealed that the majority of respondents (75%) believe SECD can be eradicated and that most herds have been successful at long-term elimination of SECD after exposure (80%). However, unique properties of SECD, such as ineffective immunity through parenteral vaccination and a low oral infectious dose, play a major role in management of SECD. This review serves to describe the current knowledge of SECD and the characteristics of these viruses which provide both opportunities and challenges for long-term disease control and potential eradication from the US swine population.

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

4.6
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