| Literature DB >> 31337392 |
Jeong-Min Hwang1, Jae Geun Kim2, Jung-Yong Yeh3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bluetongue is a vector-borne viral disease, and bluetongue virus (BTV) outbreaks can cause substantial economic losses. Even subclinical infection may carry significant associated costs, including a loss of condition, reduced milk yield, and infertility and abortion, and indirect costs, largely due to the export restrictions and surveillance requirements imposed to limit the spread of the virus. However, the BTV epidemiology in the Far East remains incompletely understood, especially in the cattle population in South Korea. In this study, the seroprevalence of BTV antibodies and distribution of BTV serotypes in dairy cattle in South Korea were evaluated to improve the understanding of the BTV epidemiological situation in the Asia-Pacific region.Entities:
Keywords: Bluetongue; Dairy cattle; Seroprevalence; Serotype; South Korea
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31337392 PMCID: PMC6651986 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-019-2000-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Seroprevalence of BTV infection in dairy cattle in the Republic of Korea (2012–2013)
| Dairy cattle (herds) | Dairy cattle (individuals) | Serotype | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Province | Latitude (N) | Longitude (E) | Positivea | Tested | APb | Positive | Tested | AP | TP ± 95% CI | SNTd | RNA (number)e |
| Incheon | 36°55'-37°58' | 124°36'-126°47' | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 - 29.9 | - | - |
| Ulsan | 35°19'-35°43' | 128°58'-129°27' | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 - 24.3 | - | - |
| Gyeonggi | 36°53'-38°17' | 126°22'-127°51' | 7 | 37 | 18.9 | 18 | 109 | 16.5 | 10.7 - 24.6 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 15 | 2 (2), 15 (1) |
| Gangwon | 38°09'-39°25' | 126°46'-128°22' | 0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 0 - 11.0 | - | - |
| Chungbuk | 37°15'-36°00' | 127°16'-128°38' | 2 | 14 | 14.3 | 3 | 33 | 9.1 | 3.1 - 23.6 | 1, 4 | 1 (1), 3 (1) |
| Chungnam | 35°58'-37°03' | 125°32'-127°38' | 8 | 32 | 25.0 | 19 | 111 | 17.1 | 11.2 - 25.2 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 15 | 2 (1), 3 (2), 15 (1) |
| Jeonbuk | 35°18'-36°09' | 125°58'-127°54' | 6 | 13 | 46.2 | 14 | 37 | 37.8 | 24.1 - 53.9 | 1, 3, 4 | NDf |
| Jeonnam | 33°54'-35°30' | 125°04'-127°54' | 7 | 17 | 41.2 | 17 | 41 | 41.5 | 27.8 - 56.6 | 3, 16 | 16 (1) |
| Gyeongbuk | 35°34'-37°33' | 127°48'-131°52' | 2 | 16 | 12.5 | 4 | 34 | 11.8 | 4.7 - 26.6 | 2, 15 | 2 (1) |
| Gyeongnam | 34°39'-35°54' | 127°35'-129°28' | 3 | 16 | 18.8 | 5 | 36 | 13.9 | 6.9 - 28.7 | 4 | NDf |
| Jeju | 33°06'-34°00' | 126°08'-126°58' | 2 | 5 | 40.0 | 5 | 13 | 38.5 | 17.7 - 64.5 | 1, 3 | 1 (1), 3 (1) |
| Total | 33°06'-39°25' | 124°36'-131°52' | 37 | 171 | 21.6 | 85 | 466 | 18.2 | 15.0 - 22.0 | ||
aNumber of seropositive herds or animals (individuals); bAP, apparent (estimated) prevalence; cTP ± 95% CI, 95% confidence interval for the true proportion; dSerotypes identified by serum neutralization tests; eBTV serotype identified by RT-PCR for blood sample; fND, not detected
Univariable analysis of the exposure variables relative to the animal seropositivity outcome
| Negative ( | Positive ( | OR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land use | ||||
| Agricultural | 117 | 30 | 1.262 (0.705 - 2.259) | 0.432 |
| Woodland and semi-natural | 136 | 29 | 1.050 (0.587 - 1.878) | 0.870 |
| Urban | 128 | 26 | - | - |
| Herd size | ||||
| ≤5 | 122 | 30 | 2.762 (1.380 - 5.527) | 0.003 |
| 6-30 | 113 | 42 | 4.174 (2.139 - 8.148) | <0.001 |
| ≥31 | 146 | 13 | - | - |
| Cattle density | ||||
| ≤10 | 120 | 30 | 1.625 (0.876 - 3.014) | 0.121 |
| 11-20 | 131 | 35 | 1.737 (0.953 - 3.166) | 0.070 |
| ≥21 | 130 | 20 | - | - |
| Adult/calf ratios | ||||
| ≤1.0 | 135 | 20 | 0.653 (0.348 - 1.224) | 0.182 |
| 1.1-2.0 | 127 | 38 | 1.319 (0.759 - 2.293) | 0.326 |
| ≥2.1 | 119 | 27 | - | - |
| Age class | ||||
| Juvenile | 145 | 18 | 0.294 (0.159 - 0.541) | <0.001 |
| Subadult | 139 | 26 | 0.443 (0.254 - 0.771) | 0.004 |
| Adult | 97 | 41 | - | - |
| Reproductive problems | ||||
| Yes | 173 | 41 | 1.120 (0.700 - 1.794) | 0.636 |
| No | 208 | 44 | - | - |
| Southern vs northern | ||||
| Southern | 253 | 45 | 1.757 (1.092 - 2.828) | 0.019 |
| Northern | 128 | 40 | - | - |
| Eastern vs western | ||||
| Eastern | 128 | 18 | 0.531 (0.303 - 0.932) | 0.026 |
| Western | 253 | 67 | - | - |
Multivariable analysis of the exposure variables relative to the animal seropositivity outcome
| Variable | OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land use | |||
| Agricultural | 1.446 | 0.751 - 2.784 | 0.270 |
| Woodland and semi-natural | 1.034 | 0.542 - 1.973 | 0.920 |
| Urban | - | - | - |
| Herd size | |||
| ≤5 | 2.951 | 1.411 - 6.171 | 0.004 |
| 6-30 | 4.512 | 2.218 - 9.180 | <0.001 |
| ≥31 | - | - | - |
| Cattle density | |||
| ≤10 | 1.478 | 0.745 - 2.935 | 0.264 |
| 11-20 | 1.711 | 0.883 - 3.314 | 0.111 |
| ≥21 | - | - | - |
| Adult/calf ratios | |||
| ≤1.0 | 0.578 | 0.291 - 1.150 | 0.118 |
| 1.1-2.0 | 1.550 | 0.841 - 2.857 | 0.160 |
| ≥2.1 | - | - | - |
| Age class | |||
| Juvenile | 0.249 | 0.128 - 0.484 | <0.001 |
| Subadult | 0.449 | 0.244 - 0.828 | 0.010 |
| Adult | - | - | - |
| Reproductive problems | |||
| Yes | 1.081 | 0.641 - 1.822 | 0.771 |
| No | - | - | - |
| Southern vs northern | |||
| Southern | 3.525 | 2.000 - 6.214 | <0.001 |
| Northern | - | - | - |
| Eastern vs western | |||
| Eastern | 0.332 | 0.171 - 0.647 | 0.001 |
| Western | - | - | - |
Fig. 2Frequency distribution of the seroprevalence proportions of bluetongue virus infection in dairy cattle in South Korea (2012–2013). Note the bimodal distribution; one cluster is < 30% and the other cluster > 81% among individual cattle herds
Fig. 1a Geographical location of the provinces in South Korea. b Density of dairy cattle in South Korea per km2. The herds sampled in this study are mapped by a dot. c Geographical distribution patterns of the seroprevalence to BTV. Percentages of tested animals seropositive for bluetongue virus in 11 provinces in South Korea. The serotypes identified by serum neutralization tests or the BTV serotype identified by RT-PCR of blood sample are shown. Differences in the intensity of the darkness on the map represent different percentages of seroprevalence. The map depicted in figure 1 is our own