USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70252846

Identifying an understudied interface: Preliminary evaluation of the use of retention ponds on commercial poultry farms by wild waterfowl

Abstract

While the recent incursion of highly pathogenic avian influenza into North America has resulted in notable losses to the commercial poultry industry, the mechanism by which virus enters commercial poultry houses is still not understood. One theorized mechanism is that waterfowl shed virus into the environment surrounding poultry farms, such as into retention ponds, and is then transmitted into poultry houses via bridge species. Little is known about if and when wild waterfowl use these retention ponds, leading to uncertainty regarding the potential significance of this interface. To quantify the use of retention ponds on commercial poultry farms by wild waterfowl, we surveyed 12 such ponds across Somerset and Dorchester counties, Maryland, USA. This region was chosen due to the high level of poultry production and its importance for migratory waterfowl. Surveys consisted of recording waterfowl visible on the retention ponds from public roadways at least once per week from 20 September 2022–31 March 2023. Throughout the course of this study, we observed a total of nine species of waterfowl using retention ponds on commercial poultry farms at nine of 12 sites. The number of waterfowl observed at retention ponds varied notably throughout the course of our survey period, with values generally following trends of fall migration within each species indicating that resident birds were not the only individuals to utilize these habitats. Additionally, waterfowl use was highest at sites with little vegetation immediately surrounding the pond, and lowest when ponds were surrounded by trees. Our data suggest that retention ponds on commercial poultry farms present a notable interface for waterfowl to introduce avian influenza viruses to farm sites. However, additional testing and surveys could provide further insight into whether it may be possible to reduce the use of these habitats by wild waterfowl through vegetative management as preliminarily reported here.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jeffery D. Sullivan, Ayla McDonough, Lauren Lescure, Diann J. Prosser. 2024-04-03. Identifying an understudied interface: Preliminary evaluation of the use of retention ponds on commercial poultry farms by wild waterfowl. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024%2F3022927

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Rapid risk assessment framework to estimate potential for spillback at human-wildlife interfaces

More than 60% of emerging infectious diseases of humans have a wildlife origin, and when these diseases spread through human populations to new geographical areas, there is a considerable risk of spillback from humans to wildlife species. Spillback events can have severe consequences for wildlife populations, where the disease may cause morbidity and mortality, and human populations, where the establishment in wildlife may lead to prolonged transmission or new exposures in humans. Mitigating these consequences requires identifying the key risk factors that lead to human–wildlife transmission events and implementing risk-reducing actions, a challenge given that cross-species transmission events are rare and often data deficient. To identify potential species and locations that are most likely to lead to these rare events, we developed a spatially explicit, rapid risk assessment framework that incorporates three components of the spillback process: wildlife susceptibility, wildlife exposure, and pathogen introduction pressure. To demonstrate the broad applicability of our framework, we conducted a rapid risk assessment on two recent emerging zoonotic pathogens in humans, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and mpox, to determine the relative spillback risk to wild mammalian species in the continental United States. The rapid risk assessment identified both species and locations with higher than expected spillback risk, providing managers and researchers with valuable information to prioritize surveillance and risk-mitigation actions. Our framework represents a rapid and flexible approach to assess the risks of spillback to wildlife populations during rapidly evolving zoonotic disease outbreaks.

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases

Fomites could determine severity of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in low-density white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations

The establishment of a reservoir species for zoonotic diseases is concerning for both animal and human health. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2, the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, has been detected in white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) in the United States. Since its initial detection, various studies have documented circulation and evolution of SARS-CoV-2 in deer, with human cases suspected of spill-back from infectious deer. A priority for mitigating SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in deer populations is determining the contribution of direct (via aerosols and physical contact) and indirect (via contaminated objects and media) transmission pathways. We expanded existing epidemiological models founded on direct transmission pathways to include three indirect transmission pathways of infection for simulated deer populations, including contaminated water, food waste, and feed piles. Despite lower infection probabilities and transmission hazards (measured by force-of-infection (FOI)) posed solely by these indirect pathways compared to direct transmission pathways, the addition of indirect transmission pathways increased FOI, which had ramifications for the severity of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in simulated deer populations, particularly in populations with low degrees of spread between deer (measured by basic reproductive number; R 0 ). We used contact rate models to estimate SARS-CoV-2 spread across deer range in the United States and identified widespread potential for indirect transmission to increase the severity of outbreaks in low-density deer populations. These results indicate that indirect transmission pathways need to be considered in the management of white-tailed deer as a reservoir species for SARS-CoV-2.

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases

Detection of tick-borne pathogen coinfections and coexposures to foot-and-mouth disease, brucellosis, and Q fever in selected wildlife from Kruger National Park, South Africa, and Etosha National Park, Namibia

Background: Although the rate of emerging infectious diseases that originate in wildlife has been increasing globally in recent decades, there is currently a lack of epidemiological data from wild animals. Methodology: We used serology to determine prior exposure to foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), Brucella spp., and Coxiella burnetii and used genetic testing to detect blood-borne parasitic infections in the genera Ehrlichia , Anaplasma , Theileria , and Babesia from wildlife in two national parks, Kruger National Park (KNP), South Africa, and Etosha National Park (ENP), Namibia. Serum and whole blood samples were obtained from free-roaming plains zebra ( Equus quagga ), greater kudu ( Tragelaphus strepsiceros ), impala ( Aepyceros melampus ), and blue wildebeest ( Connochaetes taurinus ). Risk factors (host species, sex, and sampling park) for infection with each pathogen were assessed, as well as the prevalence and distribution of co-occurring infections. Results: In KNP 13/29 (45%; confidence interval [CI]: 26%–64%) kudus tested positive for FMD, but none of these reacted to SAT serotypes. For brucellosis, seropositive results were obtained for 3/29 (10%; CI: 2%–27%) kudu samples. Antibodies against C. burnetii were detected in 6/29 (21%; CI: 8%–40%) kudus, 14/21 (67%; CI: 43%–85%) impalas, and 18/39 (46%; CI: 30%–63%) zebras. A total of 28/28 kudus tested positive for Theileria spp. (100%; CI: 88%–100%) and 27/28 for Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. (96%; CI: 82%–100%), whereas 12/19 impalas (63%) and 2/39 zebra (5%) tested positive for Anaplasma centrale . In ENP, only 1/29 (3%; CI: 0%–18%) wildebeest samples tested positive for FMD. None of the samples tested positive for brucellosis, while C. burnetii antibodies were detected in 26/30 wildebeests (87%; CI: 69%–96%), 16/40 kudus (40%; CI: 25%–57%), and 26/26 plains zebras (100%; CI: 87%–100%). A total of 60% Anaplasma/Ehrlichia spp. and 35% Theileria/Babesia spp. in kudu and 37% wildebeest tested positive to Theileria sp. (sable), 30% to Babesia occultans , and 3%–7% to Anaplasma spp. The seroprevalence of Q fever was significantly higher in ENP, while Brucella spp., Anaplasma , Ehrlichia , Theileria , and Babesia species were significantly higher in KNP. Significant coinfections were also identified. Conclusion: This work provided baseline serological and molecular data on 40+ pathogens in four wildlife species from two national parks in southern Africa.

Etosha National Park, Kruger National Park