A registry-based comparative analysis of antibiotic usage reporting for adult cattle on Danish dairy farms.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, necessitating the monitoring of antimicrobial usage (AMU). However, there is a lack of consensus on the standardized collection and reporting of AMU data in the veterinary field. In Denmark, the Danish Cattle Database (DCDB) contains treatment information on animal level, which allows counting of number of treatments carried out, used daily doses (UDD). The Danish VetStat database (VetStat) contains information on veterinary medicinal prescriptions at farm level and uses fixed standard doses of each product to calculate number of daily treatments, animal daily doses (ADD). This study aimed to compare two different numerators, UDD and ADD, used to describe AMU on Danish cattle farms, and estimate their correlation. RESULTS: Routinely collected registry data from conventional dairy farms in Denmark for 2019 were used, including a total of 2,197 conventional dairy farms. The data from VetStat and the DCDB were aggregated and analysed, and treatment frequencies (TF) were calculated for both UDD and ADD, adjusting for farm size. Spearman correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plots were employed to assess the relationship and agreement between TF for ADD and UDD, respectively. The results showed a high correlation between TF for ADD and UDD for most prescription groups, i.e., groups used to categorise antibiotics based on target organs. An exception is found for the Udder prescription group, where a systematic underreporting of UDD compared to ADD was observed. This discrepancy may be due to combination treatments, and potential missing or grouped registrations in the DCDB. CONCLUSIONS: Our UDD and ADD comparison yields valuable insights on farm-level AMU. We observe strong correlations between UDD and ADD, except for udder treatments, where some farms report only 1/3 UDD compared to ADD, indicating potential underreporting. Further investigations are needed to understand the factors contributing to these patterns and to ensure the accuracy and completeness of recorded information. Standardizing AMU data collection and reporting remains crucial to tackle the global challenge of AMR effectively.

The use of high expansion foam for stunning and killing pigs and poultry.

The EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the use of high-expansion foam for stunning and killing pigs and poultry. A dossier was provided by the applicant as the basis for an assessment of the extent to which the method is able to provide a level of animal welfare at least equivalent to that ensured by the currently allowed methods for pigs and poultry. According to legislation, to be approved in the EU, new stunning methods must ensure (1) the absence of pain, distress or suffering until the onset of unconsciousness, and (2) that the animal remains unconscious until death. An ad hoc Working Group set up by EFSA performed the assessment as follows: (1) The data provided were checked against the criteria laid down in the EFSA Guidance (EFSA, 2018), and was found to partially fulfil those criteria; (2) extensive literature search; (3) data extraction for quantitative assessment; (4) qualitative exercise based on non-formal expert elicitation. The assessment led to conclude that it is more likely than not (certainty > 50%-100%) that high-expansion foam for stunning and killing pigs and poultry, named NEFS in container (Nitrogen Expansion Foam Stunning in container), provides a level of welfare at least equivalent to one or more of the currently allowed methods listed in Annex I of Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009. The overall assessment of EFSA is valid only under the technical conditions described in this Opinion for laying hens, broiler chickens of all age and pigs weighing 15-41 kg in situations other than slaughter. The overall assessment of EFSA is that NEFS can be suitable for depopulation using containers for pig and poultry farms respecting the technical conditions and the categories and types of animals defined in this Scientific Opinion.

Guidance on risk-benefit assessment of foods.

The EFSA Scientific Committee has updated its 2010 Guidance on risk-benefit assessment (RBA) of foods. The update addresses methodological developments and regulatory needs. While it retains the stepwise RBA approach, it provides additional methods for complex assessments, such as multiple chemical hazards and all relevant health effects impacting different population subgroups. The updated guidance includes approaches for systematic identification, prioritisation and selection of hazardous and beneficial food components. It also offers updates relevant to characterising adverse and beneficial effects, such as measures of effect size and dose-response modelling. The guidance expands options for characterising risks and benefits, incorporating variability, uncertainty, severity categorisation and ranking of different (beneficial or adverse) effects. The impact of different types of health effects is assessed qualitatively or quantitatively, depending on the problem formulation, scope of the RBA question and data availability. The integration of risks and benefits often involves value-based judgements and should ideally be performed with the risk-benefit manager. Metrics such as Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) can be used. Additional approaches are presented, such as probability of all relevant effects and/or effects of given severities and their integration using severity weight functions. The update includes practical guidance on reporting results, interpreting outcomes and communicating the outcome of an RBA, considering consumer perspectives and responses to advice.

Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments.

EFSA requested its Scientific Committee to prepare a guidance document on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments. The guidance document provides an introduction to epidemiological studies and illustrates the typical biases, which may be present in different epidemiological study designs. It then describes key epidemiological concepts relevant for evidence appraisal. This includes brief explanations for measures of association, exposure assessment, statistical inference, systematic error and effect modification. The guidance then describes the concept of external validity and the principles of appraising epidemiological studies. The customisation of the study appraisal process is explained including tailoring of tools for assessing the risk of bias (RoB). Several examples of appraising experimental and observational studies using a RoB tool are annexed to the document to illustrate the application of the approach. The latter part of this guidance focuses on different steps of evidence integration, first within and then across different streams of evidence. With respect to risk characterisation, the guidance considers how evidence from human epidemiological studies can be used in dose-response modelling with several different options being presented. Finally, the guidance addresses the application of uncertainty factors in risk characterisation when using evidence from human epidemiological studies.

Welfare of sheep and goats during killing for purposes other than slaughter.

Sheep and goats of different ages may have to be killed on-farm for purposes other than slaughter (where slaughter is defined as killing for human consumption) either individually (i.e. on-farm killing of unproductive, injured or terminally ill animals) or on a large scale (i.e. depopulation for disease control purposes and for other situations, such as environmental contamination and disaster management) outside the slaughterhouses. The purpose of this opinion was to assess the hazards and welfare consequences associated with the on-farm killing of sheep and goats. The whole killing procedure was divided into Phase 1 (pre-killing) - that included the processes (i) handling and moving the animals to the killing place and (ii) restraint of the animals before application of the killing methods and Phase 2 - that included stunning and killing of the animals. The killing methods for sheep and goats were grouped into three categories: (1) mechanical, (2) electrical and (3) lethal injection. Welfare consequences that sheep and goats may experience during each process were identified (e.g. handling stress, restriction of movements and tissue lesions during restraint) and animal-based measures (ABMs) to assess them were proposed. During application of the killing method, sheep and goats will experience pain and fear if they are ineffectively stunned or if they recover consciousness. ABMs related to the state of consciousness can be used to indirectly assess pain and fear. Flowcharts including ABMs for consciousness specific to each killing method were included in the opinion. Possible welfare hazards were identified for each process, together with their origin and related preventive and corrective measures. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, ABMs, origins, preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences were proposed.

Prevalence and characterisation of band-shaped tail lesions in Holstein cows.

The aim of the study was to characterise and determine the prevalence of band-shaped tail lesions in Holstein cows. Lesions were present either as wounds or by epithelised granulation/connective tissue formations. Both types were characterised by a median localisation 7 cm from the tip of the tail, and they occurred on the dorsal aspect of the tail. From here they encircled the tail either completely or in varying degrees, and they were often present as isolated lesions (93%). The prevalence of band-shaped tail lesions was found to be 25% among 2099 cows examined in 16 Danish Holstein herds with a variation from 18 to 40% between herds. In the herds, the wound lesions and the connective tissue formations accounted for 22% and 78% of all band-shaped tail lesions, respectively. Among 458 Holstein cows examined at an abattoir the prevalence of band-shaped tail lesions was 23%, i.e. similar to the prevalence within the herds. At the abattoir the share of band-shaped wound lesions was 67% and the band-shaped connective tissue formation 33%. Associations between the occurrence of band-shaped tail lesions and parity and lack of the tail tip were observed.

Vaccination of poultry against highly pathogenic avian influenza - Part 2. Surveillance and mitigation measures.

Selecting appropriate diagnostic methods that take account of the type of vaccine used is important when implementing a vaccination programme against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). If vaccination is effective, a decreased viral load is expected in the samples used for diagnosis, making molecular methods with high sensitivity the best choice. Although serological methods can be reasonably sensitive, they may produce results that are difficult to interpret. In addition to routine molecular monitoring, it is recommended to conduct viral isolation, genetic sequencing and phenotypic characterisation of any HPAI virus detected in vaccinated flocks to detect escape mutants early. Following emergency vaccination, various surveillance options based on virological testing of dead birds ('bucket sampling') at defined intervals were assessed to be effective for early detection of HPAIV and prove disease freedom in vaccinated populations. For ducks, virological or serological testing of live birds was assessed as an effective strategy. This surveillance could be also applied in the peri-vaccination zone on vaccinated establishments, while maintaining passive surveillance in unvaccinated chicken layers and turkeys, and weekly bucket sampling in unvaccinated ducks. To demonstrate disease freedom with > 99% confidence and to detect HPAI virus sufficiently early following preventive vaccination, monthly virological testing of all dead birds up to 15 per flock, coupled with passive surveillance in both vaccinated and unvaccinated flocks, is recommended. Reducing the sampling intervals increases the sensitivity of early detection up to 100%. To enable the safe movement of vaccinated poultry during emergency vaccination, laboratory examinations in the 72 h prior to the movement can be considered as a risk mitigation measure, in addition to clinical inspection; sampling results from existing surveillance activities carried out in these 72 h could be used. In this Opinion, several schemes are recommended to enable the safe movement of vaccinated poultry following preventive vaccination.

Using registry data to identify individual dairy cows with abnormal patterns in routinely recorded somatic cell counts.

Data from the Danish milk recording system routinely enter the Danish Cattle Database, including somatic cell counts (SCC) for individual animals. Elevated SCC can signal intramammary inflammation, suggesting subclinical mastitis. Detecting mastitis is pivotal to limit severity, prevent pathogen spread, and target treatment or culling. This study aimed to differentiate normal and abnormal SCC patterns using recorded registry data. We used registry data from 2010 to 2020 for dairy cows in herds with 11 annual milk recordings. To create consistency across herds, we used data from 13,996 unique animals and eight different herds, selected based on the amount of data available, only selecting Holstein animals and conventional herds. We fitted log10-transformed SCC to days in milk (DIM) using the Wilmink and Wood's curve functions, originally developed for milk yield over the lactation. We used Nonlinear Least Square and Nonlinear Mixed Effect models to fit the log10-transformed SCC observations to DIM at animal level. Using mean squared residuals (MSR), we found a consistently better fit using a Wood's style function. Detection of MSR outliers in the model fitting process was used to identify animals with log10(SCC) curves deviating from the expected "normal" curve for that same animal. With this study, we propose a method to identify single animals with SCC patterns that indicate abnormalities, such as mastitis, based on registry data. This method could potentially lead to a registry data-based detection of mastitis cases in larger dairy herds.

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) 2016/429): infection with Gyrodactylus salaris (GS).

Infection with Gyrodactylus salaris was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular, the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as laid down in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to infection with G. salaris. The assessment was performed following the ad hoc method for data collection and assessment previously developed by AHAW panel and already published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to the assessment here performed, it is uncertain whether infection with G. salaris can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (33-70% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that Infection with G. salaris does not meet the criteria in Section 1 and 3 (Category A and C; 1-5% and 10-33% probability of fulfilling the criteria, respectively) and it is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 2, 4 and 5 (Categories B, D and E; 33-80%, 33-66% and 33-80% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively). The animal species to be listed for infection with G. salaris according to Article 8 criteria are provided.

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) 2016/429): Bacterial kidney disease (BKD).

Bacterial kidney disease (BKD) was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as laid out in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to BKD. The assessment was performed following the ad hoc method on data collection and assessment developed by AHAW Panel and already published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to this assessment, BKD can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (66-90% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that BKD does not meet the criteria in Sections 1, 2 and 3 (Categories A, B and C; 1-5%, 33-66% and 33-66% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively) but meets the criteria in Sections 4 and 5 (Categories D and E; 66-90% and 66-90% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively). The animal species to be listed for BKD according to Article 8 criteria are provided.

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU)2016/429): Infection with salmonid alphavirus (SAV).

Infection with salmonid alphavirus (SAV) was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as laid out in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to infection with SAV. The assessment was performed following the ad hoc method on data collection and assessment developed by AHAW Panel and already published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to the assessment, it was uncertain whether infection with salmonid alphavirus can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (50-80% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that infection with salmonid alphavirus does not meet the criteria in Section 1 (Category A; 5-10% probability of meeting the criteria) and it is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Categories B, C, D and E; 50-90%, probability of meeting the criteria). The animal species to be listed for infection with SAV according to Article 8 criteria are provided.

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) 2016/429): Spring Viraemia of Carp (SVC).

Spring Viraemia of Carp (SVC) was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to SVC. The assessment was performed following the ad hoc method for data collection and assessment previously developed by the AHAW panel and already published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to the assessment performed here, it is uncertain whether SVC can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (45-90% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that SVC does not meet the criteria in Section 1 (Category A; 5-33% probability of meeting the criteria) and it is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Categories B, C, D and E; 33-66%, 10-66%, 45-90% and 45-90% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively). The animal species to be listed for SVC according to Article 8 criteria are provided.

Guidance on protocol development for EFSA generic scientific assessments.

EFSA Strategy 2027 outlines the need for fit-for-purpose protocols for EFSA generic scientific assessments to aid in delivering trustworthy scientific advice. This EFSA Scientific Committee guidance document helps address this need by providing a harmonised and flexible framework for developing protocols for EFSA generic assessments. The guidance replaces the 'Draft framework for protocol development for EFSA's scientific assessments' published in 2020. The two main steps in protocol development are described. The first is problem formulation, which illustrates the objectives of the assessment. Here a new approach to translating the mandated Terms of Reference into scientifically answerable assessment questions and sub-questions is proposed: the 'APRIO' paradigm (Agent, Pathway, Receptor, Intervention and Output). Owing to its cross-cutting nature, this paradigm is considered adaptable and broadly applicable within and across the various EFSA domains and, if applied using the definitions given in this guidance, is expected to help harmonise the problem formulation process and outputs and foster consistency in protocol development. APRIO may also overcome the difficulty of implementing some existing frameworks across the multiple EFSA disciplines, e.g. the PICO/PECO approach (Population, Intervention/Exposure, Comparator, Outcome). Therefore, although not mandatory, APRIO is recommended. The second step in protocol development is the specification of the evidence needs and the methods that will be applied for answering the assessment questions and sub-questions, including uncertainty analysis. Five possible approaches to answering individual (sub-)questions are outlined: using evidence from scientific literature and study reports; using data from databases other than bibliographic; using expert judgement informally collected or elicited via semi-formal or formal expert knowledge elicitation processes; using mathematical/statistical models; and - not covered in this guidance - generating empirical evidence ex novo. The guidance is complemented by a standalone 'template' for EFSA protocols that guides the users step by step through the process of planning an EFSA scientific assessment.

Vaccination of poultry against highly pathogenic avian influenza - part 1. Available vaccines and vaccination strategies.

Several vaccines have been developed against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), mostly inactivated whole-virus vaccines for chickens. In the EU, one vaccine is authorised in chickens but is not fully efficacious to stop transmission, highlighting the need for vaccines tailored to diverse poultry species and production types. Off-label use of vaccines is possible, but effectiveness varies. Vaccines are usually injectable, a time-consuming process. Mass-application vaccines outside hatcheries remain rare. First vaccination varies from in-ovo to 6 weeks of age. Data about immunity onset and duration in the target species are often unavailable, despite being key for effective planning. Minimising antigenic distance between vaccines and field strains is essential, requiring rapid updates of vaccines to match circulating strains. Generating harmonised vaccine efficacy data showing vaccine ability to reduce transmission is crucial and this ability should be also assessed in field trials. Planning vaccination requires selecting the most adequate vaccine type and vaccination scheme. Emergency protective vaccination is limited to vaccines that are not restricted by species, age or pre-existing vector-immunity, while preventive vaccination should prioritise achieving the highest protection, especially for the most susceptible species in high-risk transmission areas. Model simulations in France, Italy and The Netherlands revealed that (i) duck and turkey farms are more infectious than chickens, (ii) depopulating infected farms only showed limitations in controlling disease spread, while 1-km ring-culling performed better than or similar to emergency preventive ring-vaccination scenarios, although with the highest number of depopulated farms, (iii) preventive vaccination of the most susceptible species in high-risk transmission areas was the best option to minimise the outbreaks' number and duration, (iv) during outbreaks in such areas, emergency protective vaccination in a 3-km radius was more effective than 1- and 10-km radius. Vaccine efficacy should be monitored and complement other surveillance and preventive efforts.

Effect of feeding dairy calves with milk fermented with selected probiotic strains on occurrence of diarrhoea, carriage of pathogenic and zoonotic microorganisms and growth performance.

Calf-diarrhoea is a major health problem in dairy calves and a primary reason for use of antimicrobials. We aimed to investigate the effect of feeding milk fermented with a combination of four probiotic bacterial strains to young-calves on; occurrence of diarrhoea and associated-pathogens (bacteria, virus and parasites), shedding of Salmonella Dublin and Campylobacter, occurrence of virulence genes linked to Clostridium perfringens, Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli and shiga-toxin producing E. coli (STEC), as well as growth performance. For this, 143 new-born calves from three Danish dairy-farms were allocated into Treatment- (fed the fermented milk for the first 8-weeks-of-life) and Control-groups (fed regular farm-milk). Diarrhoea was observed in 18.6 % (Farm 1), 22.4 % (Farm 2) and 15.7 % (Farm 3) of the total registrations mainly within the first 3-weeks-of-life. C. perfringens was the most frequently detected pathogen. The treatment did not affect the occurrence of virulence genes linked to STEC and C. perfringens and, overall, their detection levels were very low/undetected. The statistical model applied found no significant effect of the treatment on prevalence of early-diarrhoea (≤ 3 weeks), late-diarrhoea (>3 weeks), occurrence of C. perfringens and Cryptosporidium parvum or levels of Campylobacter spp. Limited detection of the other pathogens and associated virulence-genes under study, did not allow for assessment of the impact of the treatment on their occurrence. Notably, the feeding-approach showed a significant detrimental effect on daily-weight-gain. The inefficacy of the treatment may be associated with the complexity of influencing factors under field conditions including management practices.

Use of Danish National Somatic Cell Count Data to Assess the Need for Dry-Off Treatment in Holstein Dairy Cattle.

In Denmark, PCR testing of dairy cattle is commonly used to select animals for the antibacterial treatment of intramammary infection (IMI) during the dry-off period. IMI is associated with a high somatic cell count (SCC), routinely recorded for milk quality control for most commercial dairy herds. This study aimed to compare SCC curves over the lactation among dairy cows with positive vs. negative PCR test results for four major IMI pathogens. Data from 133,877 PCR-tested Holstein cows from 1364 Danish conventional dairy herds were used to fit a nonlinear mixed-effects model using a modified four-parameter Wilmink function. We stratified the data into first, second, third or fourth and later parity and fitted Wilmink curves to all SCC observations between 6 and 305 days in milk. The PCR tests were taken before dry-off at the end of the lactation to investigate which animals qualified for selective dry cow therapy. A PCR Ct-value of 37 and below was used to determine if an animal was PCR positive for any of the following IMI pathogens: Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus agalactiae, Str. dysgalactiae and Str. uberis. Our findings showed that mean SCC curve fits were higher for PCR-positive animals in all four parity groups and across lactations. The use of SCC data fitted to the entire lactation for multiple lactations enabled quantification of overall differences in SCC curves between cattle with and without detected IMI, adjusted for parity group and stage of lactation. These findings are relevant to the use of SCC to support treatment decisions.

Species which may act as vectors or reservoirs of diseases covered by the Animal Health Law: Listed pathogens of molluscs.

Vector or reservoir species of five mollusc diseases listed in the Animal Health Law were identified, based on evidence generated through an extensive literature review, to support a possible updating of Regulation (EU) 2018/1882. Mollusc species on or in which Mikrocytos mackini, Perkinsus marinus, Bonamia exitiosa, Bonamia ostreae and Marteilia refringens were detected, in the field or during experiments, were classified as reservoir species with different levels of certainty depending on the diagnostic tests used. Where experimental evidence indicated transmission of the pathogen from a studied species to another known susceptible species, this studied species was classified as a vector species. Although the quantification of the risk of spread of the pathogens by the vectors or reservoir species was not part of the terms of reference, such risks do exist for the vector species, since transmission from infected vector species to susceptible species was proven. Where evidence for transmission from infected molluscs was not found, these were defined as reservoir. Nonetheless, the risk of the spread of the pathogens from infected reservoir species cannot be excluded. Evidence identifying conditions that may prevent transmission by vectors or reservoir mollusc species during transport was collected from scientific literature. It was concluded that it is very likely to almost certain (90-100%) that M. mackini, P. marinus, B. exitiosa B. ostreae and M. refringens will remain infective at any possible transport condition. Therefore, vector or reservoir species that may have been exposed to these pathogens in an affected area in the wild or at aquaculture establishments or through contaminated water supply can possibly transmit these pathogens. For transmission of M. refringens, the presence of an intermediate host, a copepod, is necessary.

Species which may act as vectors or reservoirs of diseases covered by the Animal Health Law: Listed pathogens of crustaceans.

Vector or reservoir species of three diseases of crustaceans listed in the Animal Health Law were identified based on evidence generated through an extensive literature review, to support a possible updating of Regulation (EU) 2018/1882. Crustacean species on or in which Taura syndrome virus (TSV), Yellow head virus (YHV) or White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) were identified, in the field or during experiments, were classified as reservoir species with different levels of certainty depending on the diagnostic tests used. Where experimental evidence indicated transmission of the pathogen from a studied species to another known susceptible species, the studied species was classified as vector species. Although the quantification of the risk of spread of the pathogens by the vectors or reservoir species was not part of the terms of reference, such risks do exist for the vector species, since transmission from infected vector species to susceptible species was proven. Where evidence for transmission from infected crustaceans was not found, these were defined as reservoirs. Nonetheless, the risk of the spread of the pathogens from infected reservoir species cannot be excluded. Evidence identifying conditions that may prevent transmission by vectors during transport was collected from scientific literature. It was concluded that it is very likely to almost certain (90-100%) that WSSV, TSV and YHV will remain infective at any possible transport condition. Therefore, vector or reservoir species that may have been exposed to these pathogens in an affected area in the wild or aquaculture establishments or by water supply can possibly transmit WSSV, TSV and YHV.

Species which may act as vectors or reservoirs of diseases covered by the Animal Health Law: Listed pathogens of fish.

Vector or reservoir species of five fish diseases listed in the Animal Health Law were identified, based on evidence generated through an extensive literature review (ELR), to support a possible updating of Regulation (EU) 2018/1882. Fish species on or in which highly polymorphic region-deleted infectious salmon anaemia virus (HPR∆ ISAV), Koi herpes virus (KHV), epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus (EHNV), infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) or viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV) were detected, in the field or during experiments, were classified as reservoir species with different levels of certainty depending on the diagnostic tests used. Where experimental evidence indicated transmission of the pathogen from a studied species to another known susceptible species, the studied species was classified as a vector species. Although the quantification of the risk of spread of the pathogens by the vectors or reservoir species was not part of the terms or reference, such risks do exist for the vector species, since transmission from infected vector species to susceptible species was proven. Where evidence for transmission from infected fish was not found, these were defined as reservoirs. Nonetheless, the risk of the spread of the pathogens from infected reservoir species cannot be excluded. Evidence identifying conditions that may prevent transmission by vectors or reservoir fish species during transport was collected from scientific literature. For VHSV, IHNV or HPR∆ ISAV, it was concluded that under transport conditions at temperatures below 25°C, it is likely (66-90%) they will remain infective. Therefore, vector or reservoir species that may have been exposed to these pathogens in an affected area in the wild, aquaculture establishments or through water supply can possibly transmit VHSV, IHNV or HPR∆ ISAV into a non-affected area when transported at a temperature below 25°C. The conclusion was the same for EHN and KHV; however, they are likely to remain infective under all transport temperatures.

Gastro-intestinal lesions are not relatable to diarrhoea or specific pathogens in post-weaning diarrhoea (PWD) in pigs.

BACKGROUND: Post-weaning diarrhoea (PWD) is a multifactorial condition and the most well documented infectious cause is enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. The objective of the study was to investigate possible associations between pathological manifestations and pathogens in pigs with and without PWD. The study was conducted as a case-control study and included a total of 173 pigs from 9 different commercial intensive indoor production herds in eastern Denmark. RESULTS: Based on clinical examination, a total of 89 piglets with PWD (cases) and 84 piglets without PWD (controls) were included. Most of the pigs (n = 105/173) presented gastric lesions, which were more frequently observed in the control group. The odds of gastric ulcers were lower among pigs with PWD compared to pigs without PWD with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.2 (0.0; 0.7). Abnormal content in the colon was associated with PWD, with an OR of 6.5 (3.2; 14.3). No apparent association was found between lesions and the various pathogens or a combination of these. The odds of neutrophilic granulocyte infiltration were lower in the jejunum among pigs with PWD (OR 0.3 [0.1; 0.6]) compared to pigs without PWD. The association between neutrophilic granulocyte infiltration in jejunum and PWD differed between the herds (P = 0.03). Furthermore, the associations between PWD and hyperleukocytosis (P = 0.04) or infiltration of eosinophilic granulocytes (P = 0.04) in ileum were also herd dependent. Histopathology revealed several lesions not relatable to PWD. CONCLUSION: The association between lesions and specific pathogens or PWD is more complex than anticipated.