Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39554755›Full record

ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024

One Health Farming: Noninvasive monitoring reveals links between farm vertebrate richness and pathogen markers in outdoor hoofstock.

Gloria Herrero-García, Marta Pérez-Sancho, Patricia Barroso, Carmen Herranz-Benito, David Relimpio, Teresa García-Seco, Alberto Perelló, Alberto Díez-Guerrier, Pilar Pozo, Ana Balseiro and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Gloria Herrero-GarcíaDepartment of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad de León, León 24071, Spain.
Marta Pérez-SanchoVISAVET Health Surveillance Center, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain.
Patricia BarrosoDepartment of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad de León, León 24071, Spain.
Carmen Herranz-BenitoVISAVET Health Surveillance Center, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain.
David RelimpioSaBio Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC-UCLM-JCCM, Ciudad Real 13071, Spain.
Teresa García-SecoVISAVET Health Surveillance Center, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain.
Alberto PerellóSaBio Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC-UCLM-JCCM, Ciudad Real 13071, Spain.
Alberto Díez-GuerrierVISAVET Health Surveillance Center, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain.
Pilar PozoSaBio Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC-UCLM-JCCM, Ciudad Real 13071, Spain.
Ana BalseiroDepartment of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad de León, León 24071, Spain.
Lucas DomínguezVISAVET Health Surveillance Center, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain.
Christian GortázarSaBio Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC-UCLM-JCCM, Ciudad Real 13071, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Outdoor farming contributes to biodiversity conservation and enhances animal welfare, but also raises biosafety concerns due to livestock contact with potentially infected wildlife. Thus, there is a need to assess the balance between vertebrate species richness on farms, visits by wildlife species posing a biosafety risk, and pathogen circulation in open-air farming systems. We explored these links in a pilot study involving 15 open-air hoofstock farms (6 cattle, 5 small ruminant, and 4 pig farms), where we conducted interviews and risk point inspections and used two noninvasive tools: short-term camera trap (CT) deployment and environmental nucleic acid detection (ENAD). CTs were deployed to assess the richness of birds and mammals, as well as to determine the percentage of CTs detecting defined risk species. We also collected livestock feces and used sponges to sample surfaces for environmental DNA (eDNA), testing for nine pathogen markers. Total vertebrate richness ranged from 18 to 42 species, with waterholes significantly contributing to farm vertebrate richness, since 48.2 % of all wild vertebrates were detected at waterbodies, and 28.6 % were exclusively detected at waterholes. Pathogen markers detected at risk points correlated with those detected in livestock samples. Notably, the frequency of uidA marker detection correlated with the total number of pathogen markers detected per farm. Overall marker richness, an indicator of pathogen diversity, varied between farms, being higher in small ruminant farms compared to cattle or pig farms. At the farm level, wild vertebrate richness was negatively correlated with the richness of pathogen markers detected at risk points. Additionally, risk points with a higher probability of detecting more pathogen markers had lower vertebrate richness. Although CT-based assessments of vertebrate richness and ENAD-based pathogen marker detection are only indicators of actual biodiversity and farm health, respectively, our findings suggest that farmland vertebrate communities provide important ecosystem services and may help limit the circulation of multi-host pathogens.

Indexed as

FarmlandNoninvasive samplingVertebrate communityWildlife-livestock interface

Identifiers

PMID39554755
PMCPMC11565532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.