medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Veterinaria México

  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2001, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Vet Mex 2001; 32 (1)

Evaluation of some factors influencing the increment of classical swine fever in the State of Mexico during 1997

Estrada SE, Diosdado VF, Arriaga RE, Ávila SE, Hernández CA, Morilla GA
Full text How to cite this article

Language: English/Spanish
References: 19
Page: 47-53
PDF size: 131.71 Kb.


Key words:

PIGS, CLASSICAL SWINE FEVER, IMMUNITY.

ABSTRACT

The control area of classical swine fever (CSF) is located in the central and southern parts of Mexico where vaccination of swine has been continued, and CSF cases are still reported. The number of outbreaks increased in 1997, and 87% of those occurred in backyard pig premises. To determine some of the factors responsible for the increase of outbreaks in 1997, a survey was done in 424 backyard premises, of four municipalities, four animal markets, four slaughterhouses and sixteen farrow-to finish farms in the western part of the State of Mexico within the control area. In backyard premises an average of 25% of the pigs had been vaccinated, and the serological survey showed that 43% had antibodies. An average of 37% of the pigs were sold and replaced every three months. At the farrow-to finish farms, 12% the animals were not vaccinated. At the animal markets, an average of 40% of swine came from the eradication area, and the rest, 60% of the control area. The veterinarians in charge at the four slaughterhouses reported that there had been animals condemned with lesions suggestive of CSF. It was concluded that some of the factors that increased the number of outbreaks in 1997 in the backyard pig population, were the large amount of susceptible pigs that came into the CSF endemic control area, and were mixed with other pigs in animals markets, the high mobility of the animals and low herd immunity, and sick and viremic animals were send to the slaughterhouses and trucks and drivers became contaminated and carried out the virus back to the swine premises.


REFERENCES

  1. 1. Solís, SS. Evolución de la campaña de control y erradicación de la FPC en México. En: Morilla GA, editor. La fiebre porcina clásica en las Américas. México (DF): Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias de la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo Rural, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura, Fundación Produce Puebla, 2000:185-191.

  2. 2. Rosales OC, Cabrera TA, Castillo MM, Salas M, Ugalde E. Análisis epidemiológico de los brotes de fiebre porcina clásica en México. En: Morilla GA, editor. La fiebre porcina clásica en las Américas. México (DF): Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias de la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo Rural, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura, Fundación Produce Puebla, 2000:193-206.

  3. 3. Rosales OC, Cabrera TA, Castillo MM, Salas M. Vigilancia epizootiológica de la FPC en zonas de control. Memorias de la Sexta Reunión Anual del Consejo Técnico Consultivo Nacional de Sanidad Animal; 1997 30 de septiembre al 3 de octubre; México (DF). México (DF): Comisión Nacional de Sanidad Agropecuaria, 1997:65-69.

  4. 4. Terpstra C. Epizootiology of swine fever. Vet Q 1987;9:50S-60S.

  5. 5. Dahle J, Liess B. A review on classical swine fever infections in pigs: epizootiology, clinical disease and pathology. Comp Immun Microbiol Infect Dis 1992;15:203-211.

  6. 6. Elbers ARW, Stegeman A, Moser H, Ekker HM, Smak JA, Pluimers FH. The classical swine fever epidemic 1997-1998 in the Netherlands: descriptive epidemiology. Prev Vet Med 1999;42:157-184.

  7. 7. Suárez B, Barkin D. Porcicultura. Producción de traspatio, otra alternativa. México (DF): Centro de Ecodesarrollo, 1990.

  8. 8. Cannon RM, Roe RT. Livestock disease surveys: a field manual for veterinarians. Canberra, Australia. Australian Gvt. Publishing Service, 1982.

  9. 9. Morilla GA. Manual para el control de las enfermedades infecciosas de los cerdos. México (DF): Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias de la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo Rural, Patronato de Apoyo para la Investigación Pecuaria en México, 1997.

  10. Colijn EO, Bloemraad M, Wensvoort G. An improved ELISA for the detection of serum antibodies directed against classical swine fever virus. Vet Microbiol 1997;59:15-25.

  11. Aguirre BF, Aguilar OP, Martínez SA, Morilla GA. Aspectos epidemiológicos de la campaña de vacunación intensiva contra la fiebre porcina clásica en el estado de Guanajuato. Téc Pecu Méx 1994;32:98-104.

  12. Carbrey EA, Stewart WC, Kresse JL, Shidjer ML. Innaparent hog cholera infection following the inoculation of field isolates. CEC Seminar on Hog Cholera/Classical Swine Fever and African Swine Fever; 1997 November 15-18; Hannover, Germany. Hannover, Germany: EUR 5904, 1997:214.

  13. Luenen J, Strobbe R. Capacity of attenuated swine fever vaccines to prevent virus carriers in the vaccinated pigs after contact with field virus. Arch Exp Vet Med 1977;31:533-536.

  14. Morilla GA. Control y erradicación de la fiebre porcina clásica. En: Moreno CR, editor. Ciencia Veterinaria. México (DF): Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1994;6:173-206.

  15. Beal ST, Downey W, Cowart W, Young SH. A report of the involvement of markets in the spread of hog cholera. Proceedings of the 74th Annual Meeting; 1970 October 18-23; Philadelphia (PA). Philadelphia (PA): Livestock Sanit Assoc., 1970:284a-284r.

  16. Zepeda SC. Epidemiología de la fiebre porcina clásica en Centroamérica. En: Morilla GA, editor. La fiebre porcina clásica en las Américas. México (DF): Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias de la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo Rural, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura, Fundación Produce Puebla, 2000:245-256.

  17. Mengeling MS, Packer RA. Pathogenesis of chronic hog cholera: host response. Am J Vet Res 1969;30:409-417.

  18. Helwing DM, Keast JC. Viability of virulent swine fever virus in cooked and uncooked ham and sausage casings. Austr Vet J 1966;42:131-135.

  19. McCauley EH. Economic evaluation of hog cholera impact and vaccination programs in Honduras based on small holder surveys. USAHA 1993;97:54-63.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Vet Mex. 2001;32