Nourishing nations during pandemics: why prioritize fish diets and aquatic foods in Africa.

The COVID-19 pandemic caught the world unprepared, with containment measures impacting both global supply chains and agri-commodity flows. The public health crisis raised some urgent questions: "how can fish and other aquatic foods and supply chains be prioritized as health-related interventions to avert both a malnutrition crisis and gender inequality?" Furthermore, "what are the integrated responses, investment opportunities, and governance mechanisms to effectively address the pandemic?" As "super foods," diets of fish and aquatic foods provide animal-source protein, omega-3 fatty acids, and micronutrients, including both vitamins and minerals, necessary for both the ill and the healthy. The affordability and accessibility of fish could address food and nutrition security needs under lockdown and border closures, boost immune systems, and increase commodity trade. This analytical piece focuses on the continent of Africa, where malnutrition is pervasive, but also where local aquatic food supplies can be utilised during lockdowns and border closures. The paper provides governance insights on national budget support programs and portfolio restructuring to strengthen local aquatic foods production systems to meet dietary needs. Furthermore, the authors advocate for a coordinated multi-sectoral intervention across several well-being domains in the immediate and medium-term involving various partnerships. These integrated responses will mutually limit the contagion while providing support to functional fish value chains for healthy diets, livelihoods, cross-border trade, and long-term macroeconomic recovery.

Ticks and tick-borne diseases of livestock belonging to resource-poor farmers in the eastern Free State of South Africa.

The paper provides a summary of three studies conducted in the eastern Free State of South Africa between 1998 and 2000. In a questionnaire-based study approximately 21% of interviewed resource-poor farmers (n = 150) indicated that they experienced problems with ticks and tick-borne diseases. About 56% of farmers indicated that tick-related problems were most severe in summer, while 32% indicated that the most problems were encountered in winter. About 12% indicated that the tick problems were experienced throughout the year. Farmers also indicated that the highest tick burdens were experienced between spring and early winter. The principal ticks infesting cattle (n = 30) were found to be Boophilus decoloratus (53.1%). Rhipicephalus evertsi evertsi (44.7%), Rhipicephalus follis (1.0%), Rhipicephalus gertrudae (0.7%) and Rhipicephalus warburtoni (0.4%). On small stock (n = 188), R. evertsi evertsi (68%) and B. decoloratus (32%) were recorded as the main ticks in the study area. A sero-epidemiological survey of cattle (n = 386) showed that 94% of cattle were seropositive for Babesia bigentina by IFAT, while 87% were sero-positive for Anaplasma by indirect ELISA. All the animals were sero-negative for Babesia bovis and this is probably because the tick vector, Boophilus microplus, is not present in the study area. All sheep and goats were sero-positive for Theileria species by IFAT while 85% of sheep and 100% of goats tested positive for Anaplasma species by competition inhibition ELISA. The high incidence of positive serological results for B. bigemina and Anaplasma in cattle, and Theileria and Anaplasma in sheep and goats and the absence of clinical cases would indicate that this area is endemically stable for these diseases.