Equine infectious anaemia in equids of Southern Pantanal, Brazil: seroprevalence and evaluation of the adoption of a control programme

Nogueira, Márcia F.; Oliveira, Jacqueline M.; Santos, Carlos J.S.; Petzold, Hildeberto V.; Aguiar, Daniel M.; Juliano, Raquel S.; Reis, Jenner K.P.; Abreu, Urbano G.P.

doi:10.1590/S0100-736X2017000300005

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

LIVESTOCK DISEASES • Pesq. Vet. Bras. 37 (03) • Mar 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-736X2017000300005 copy

Equine infectious anaemia in equids of Southern Pantanal, Brazil: seroprevalence and evaluation of the adoption of a control programme

Anemia infecciosa equina em equídeos do Pantanal Sul, Brasil: soroprevalência e avaliação da adoção de um programa de controle

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT:

The working equid population in Corumbá, Southern Pantanal, is very large and has a crucial role in the main economic activity of the State of Mato Grosso do Sul, the beef cattle industry. The aim of the present study was to estimate the prevalence of equine infectious anaemia (EIA) in working equids of ranches in the municipality of Corumbá, by the official agar gel immunodiffusion (AGID) test, and evaluate the adoption of the Programme for the Prevention and Control of Equine Infectious Anaemia proposed by Embrapa Pantanal and official entities in the 1990s. From September to November 2009, forty ranches distributed through the area of the municipality were visited, and serum samples were obtained from 721 equines and 232 mules. According to previous publications and the present data, it was concluded that the prevalence of EIA in this population has increased from 18.17% to 38.60%, which represents at this time approximately 13,000 infected animals. There was no significant difference between the apparent prevalence of equines and mules. It was also verified that the control programme was not known by the greater part of the interviewed ranch owners, managers and foremen and, in their perception, EIA is not a primary threat to address. Among the studied variables, the serologic testing practice significantly reduced the risk for the presence of EIA seropositivity, as well as the separation of riding equipment and segregation of seropositives.

INDEX TERMS:
Equine infectious anaemia; equids; Southern Pantanal; seroprevalence; control programme; EIAV; Equidae; AGID; Mato Grosso do Sul; prevalence; risk factor.

Colégio Brasileiro de Patologia Animal - CBPA Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira, Caixa Postal 74.591, 23890-000 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 21) 2682-1081 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: pvb@pvb.com.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] ^*Corresponding author:
marcia.furlan@embrapa.br

Ranches		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20
Equines	Total	30	60	66	15	55	11	29	70	80	50	50	25	53	150	80	21	100	60	80	13
	Sampled	14	16	34	8	18	5	17	4	23	29	22	17	18	6	21	20	10	23	24	12
	Positives	9	16	23	3	16	3	14	1	10	12	17	8	9	3	6	0	8	9	0	0
Mules	Total	22	1	38	0	13	25	0	20	23	0	0	0	2	41	2	0	13	2	0	13
	Sampled	16	1	20	0	13	14	0	20	23	0	0	0	2	14	0	0	10	1	0	13
	Positives	9	0	8	0	10	7	0	14	12	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0
Prevalence* (%)		60.0	94.1	57.4	37.5	83.9	52.6	82.4	62.5	41.7	41.4	77.3	47.1	45.0	15.0	28.6	0.0	45.0	37.5	0.0	0.0
Ranches		21	22	23	24	25	26	27	28	29	30	31	32	33	34	35	36	37	38	39	40
Equines	Total	166	150	100	60	70	120	20	15	50	60	34	34	30	80	70	250	79	250	110	12
	Sampled	21	25	25	20	14	20	15	13	21	20	17	16	22	20	20	19	20	20	20	12
	Positives	7	2	23	11	8	17	11	10	13	17	17	9	16	2	0	0	0	0	11	0
Mules	Total	18	31	21	2	0	26	0	25	15	0	4	0	6	0	24	0	1	0	13	0
	Sampled	18	24	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	3	0	2	0	20	0	1	0	13	0
	Positives	4	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	6	0
Prevalence* (%)		28.2	12.2	92.0	55.0	55.6	85.0	73.3	76.9	64.0	85.0	100.0	56.3	66.7	10.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	51.5	0.0

	Ap (FC95%)	Tp	D	roh	HAp / HTp (FC95%)	HSe / HSp
All	38.60%	39.39%	16.50	0.68	80.00%	100%
All	(26.04 - 51.15)				(67.60-92.40)
Equines	40.10%^a	40.92%	14.53	0.79
Equines	(26.46 - 53.74)
Mules	33.30%^a	33.98%	5.43	0.42	65.00%
Mules	(19.17 - 47.43)				(44.10-85.90)

Variables	Description	Total	Positives	Frequency of positives (%)	OR	Inf. FC	Sup. FC	P
Area	highlands	3	3	100.0	2.017	0.094	43.042	1.000
Area	lowlands	37	29	78.4
Pantanal subregion	Nhecolândia	11	7	63.6	0.308	0.054	1.754	0.209
	Paiaguás	20	17	85.0
	Nhecolândia	11	7	63.6	0.218	0.019	2.448	0.318
	other regions	9	8	88.9
	Paiaguás	20	17	85.0	0.708	0.063	7.924	1.000
	other regions	9	8	88.9
Property size	above mean	13	11	84.6	1.571	0.270	9.126	1.000
	below mean	27	21	77.8
	above median	20	16	80.0	1.000	0.212	4.711	1.000
	below median	20	16	80.0
Herd size	above mean	14	11	78.6	0.873	0.175	4.354	1.000
	below mean	26	21	80.8
	above median	20	15	75.0	0.529	0.107	2.599	0.694
	below median	20	17	85.0
Interviewed	owner	6	4	66.7	0.333	0.045	2.465	0.281
Interviewed	other	28	24	85.7
Knowledge of the Program	yes	13	11	84.6	1.294	0.201	8.309	1.000
Knowledge of the Program	no	21	17	81.0
Separation of riding equipment	yes	5	2	40.0	0.076	0.008	0.661	0.028
Separation of riding equipment	no	29	26	89.7
Segregation of seropositives	yes	6	2	33.3	0.038	0.004	0.356	0.004
Segregation of seropositives	no	28	26	92.9
Testing practice	yes	8	3	37.5	0.024	0.002	0.280	0.001
Testing practice	no	26	25	96.2
Weaning	yes	14	11	78.6	0.647	0.110	3.804	0.672
Weaning	no	20	17	85.0

Questions	# Observations (%)	Answers
Which was the employment of the equids in the ranch?	34 (100)	Equids were used to work in cattle raising (daily practices and transportation from ranches to livestock markets).
Was weaning performed on the ranch?	20 (59)	No, it was not.
	7 (21)	Yes, and it occurred from seven months to less than one year of age.
	7 (21)	Yes, and it occurred from one year onward.
Were the practices the same for equines and mules?	17 (50)	(There was no answer or there were no mules in the ranch).
Were the practices the same for equines and mules?	17 (50)	Yes, all the practices were the same for equines and mules.
Was there perception of the effects of the disease in the equid?	10 (29)	(There was no answer).
	10 (29)	Yes, it was perceived when the equid was infected.
	14 (41)	No, it was not possible to know when the equid was infected.
Did the infected equids have a decreased work capacity when compared to the non-infected ones?	17 (50)	(There was no answer).
	10 (29)	No, they did not.
	5 (15)	Yes, they had a decreased working capacity.
	2 (6)	It was not known.
Were there diseases that could be confounded with EIA?	8 (24)	(There was no answer).
	13 (38)	No, there were not.
	13 (38)	Yes, there were some.
Mention examples of diseases that could be confounded with EIA.	4 (44)	Strangles.
	3 (33)	Trypanosomiasis.
	1 (11)	Encephalitis.
	1 (11)	Rabies.
What kills equids in the Pantanal?	27 (66)	Ophidian accidents.
	4 (10)	EIA.
	3 (7)	Strangles.
	3 (7)	Pythiosis.
	3 (7)	Trypanosomiasis.
	1 (2)	Puma predation.