Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26156024›Full record

ArticleVeterinary research2015

Serological profile of foot-and-mouth disease in wildlife populations of West and Central Africa with special reference to Syncerus caffer subspecies.

Antonello Di Nardo, Geneviève Libeau, Bertrand Chardonnet, Philippe Chardonnet, Richard A Kock, Krupali Parekh, Pip Hamblin, Yanmin Li, Satya Parida, Keith J Sumption

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Antonello Di NardoInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom. a.di-nardo.1@research.gla.ac.uk.
Geneviève LibeauCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), UMR Contrôle des Maladies, Campus International de Baillarguet, Montpellier, France. genevieve.libeau@cirad.fr.
Bertrand ChardonnetAfrican Protected Areas & Wildlife Expert, Saint Cloud, France. bertrand.chardonnet@gmail.com.
Philippe ChardonnetInternational Foundation for the Conservation of Wildlife (IGF), Paris, France. p.chardonnet@fondation-igf.fr.
Richard A KockRoyal Veterinary College (RVC), Hatfield, United Kingdom. rkock@rvc.ac.uk.
Krupali ParekhThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, Woking, United Kingdom. krupali.parekh@pirbright.ac.uk.
Pip HamblinThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, Woking, United Kingdom. pip.hamblin@pirbright.ac.uk.
Yanmin LiThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, Woking, United Kingdom. drily@yahoo.com.
Satya ParidaThe Pirbright Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, Woking, United Kingdom. satya.parida@pirbright.ac.uk.
Keith J SumptionEuropean Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (EuFMD), Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy. keith.sumption@fao.org.
The Pirbright Institute · GBBoehringer Ingelheim (China) · CNCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement · FRFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · ITRoyal Veterinary College · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/I/00001192
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role which West and Central African wildlife populations might play in the transmission dynamics of FMD is not known nor have studies been performed in order to assess the distribution and prevalence of FMD in wild animal species inhabiting those specific regions of Africa. This study reports the FMD serological profile extracted from samples (n = 696) collected from wildlife of West and Central Africa between 1999 and 2003. An overall prevalence of FMDV NSP reactive sera of 31.0% (216/696) was estimated, where a significant difference in seropositivity (p = 0.000) was reported for buffalo (64.8%) as opposed to other wild animal species tested (17.8%). Different levels of exposure to the FMDV resulted for each of the buffalo subspecies sampled (p = 0.031): 68.4%, 50.0% and 0% for Nile Buffalo, West African Buffalo and African Forest Buffalo, respectively. The characterisation of the FMDV serotypes tested for buffalo found presence of antibodies against all the six FMDV serotypes tested, although high estimates for type O and SAT 3 were reported for Central Africa. Different patterns of reaction to the six FMDV serotypes tested were recorded, from sera only positive for a single serotype to multiple reactivities. The results confirmed that FMDV circulates in wild ruminants populating both West and Central Africa rangelands and in particular in buffalo, also suggesting that multiple FMDV serotypes might be involved with type O, SAT 2 and SAT 1 being dominant. Differences in serotype and spill-over risk between wildlife and livestock likely reflect regional geography, historical circulation and differing trade and livestock systems.

Indexed as

BuffaloesAfrica, CentralAfrica, WesternAnimalsAntibodies, ViralEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFoot-and-Mouth DiseaseFoot-and-Mouth Disease VirusParks, RecreationalPrevalenceSeroepidemiologic StudiesSerogroupViral ProteinsAntibodies, ViralViral Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26156024
PMCPMC4495843
OpenAlexW1864529479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.