Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:08:56.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biosecurity strategies for conservation of farm animal genetic resources

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

A.E. Wrathall
Affiliation:
Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Weybridge, Addlestone, Surrey, KT15 3NB, UK
H.A. Simmons
Affiliation:
Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Weybridge, Addlestone, Surrey, KT15 3NB, UK
Get access

Abstract

The foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) epidemic in the U.K. in 2001 highlighted the threat of infectious diseases to rare and valuable livestock and stimulated a renewed interest in biosecurity. Not all diseases resemble FMD, however; transmission routes and pathological effects vary greatly, so biosecurity strategies must take this into account. Realism is also needed as to which diseases to exclude and which will have to be tolerated. The aim should be to minimise disease generally and to exclude those diseases that threaten existence of the livestock, or preclude their national or international movement. Achieving this requires a team effort, bearing in mind the livestock species involved, the farming system (‘open’ or ‘closed’) and the premises. Effective biosecurity demands that practically every aspect of farm life is controlled, including movements of people, vehicles, equipment, food, manure, animal carcasses and wildlife. Above all, biosecurity strategies must cover the disease risks associated with moving the livestock themselves, and this will require quarantine if adult or juvenile animals are imported into the herd or flock. Reproductive technologies such as artificial insemination and embryo transfer offer much safer ways for getting new genetic materials into herds/flocks for breeding than bringing in live animals. Embryo transfer is especially safe when the sanitary protocols promoted by the International Embryo Transfer Society (IETS) and advocated by the Office International des Epizooties (OIE: the ‘World Organisation for Animal Health’) are used. It can also allow the full genetic complement to be salvaged from infected animals. Cryobanking of genetic materials, especially embryos, is another valuable biosecurity strategy because it enables storage for contingencies such as epidemic disease or other catastrophes.

Type
Section 3: Reproductive techniques to support conservation
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anon. 2001. Editorial. Nature Immunology 2: 565.Google Scholar
Canon, R.M. and Roe, R.T. 1982. Livestock Disease Surveys: A Field Manual for Veterinarians. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Donaldson, A.I., Alexandersen, S., Sorensen, J.H. and Mikkelsen, T. 2001. Relative risks of the uncontrollable (airborne) spread of FMD by different species. Veterinary Record 148: 602604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillespie, R.R., Hill, M.A. and Kanitz, C.L. 1996. Infection of pigs by aerosols of Aujeszky's disease virus and their shedding of the virus. Research in Veterinary Science 60: 228233.Google Scholar
Hennecken, M., Stegeman, J.A., Elbers, A.R.W., Nes, A. van., Smak, J.A. and Verheijden, J.H.M. 2000. Transmission of classical swine fever virus by artificial insemination during the 1997-1998 epidemic in the Netherlands: a descriptive epidemiological study. Veterinary Quarterly 22 (4): 228233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
International Embryo Transfer Society. 1998. Manual of the International Embryo Transfer Society: A procedural guide and general information for the use of embryo transfer technology, emphasising sanitary procedures. 3rd edition. Edited by Stringfellow, D.A. and Seidel, S.M.. IETS, Illinois, USA.Google Scholar
Mellor, P.S. 1994. Bluetongue. State Veterinary Journal 4: 710.Google Scholar
Mawhinney, I. 2002. Markers for the future of IBR control in the UK. Cattle Practice 10 (3): 213217.Google Scholar
Office International des Epizooties (OIE). 2000. Manual of Standards for Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines. 4th edition. Office International des Epizooties, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Office International des Epizooties (OIE). 2002. International Animal Health Code (Mammals, Birds and Bees). 11th edition. Office International des Epizooties, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Otake, S., Dee, S.A., Rossow, K.D., Moon, R.D. and Pijoan, C. 2002. Mechanical transmission of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus by mosquitoes, Aedes vexans (Meigen). Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 66: 191195.Google ScholarPubMed
Parker, B.N.J., Wrathall, A.E. and Cartwright, S.F. 1981. Accidental introduction of porcine parvovirus and Talfan virus into a group of minimal disease gilts and their effects on reproduction. British Veterinary Journal 137: 262267.Google Scholar
Parker, B.N.J., Wrathall, A.E., Saunders, R.W., Dawson, M., Done, S.H., Francis, P.G., Dexter, I. and Bradley, R. 1998. Prevention of transmission of sheep pulmonary adenomatosis by embryo transfer. Veterinary Record 142: 687689.Google Scholar
Philpott, M. 1993. The dangers of disease transmission by artificial insemination and embryo transfer. British Veterinary Journal 149: 339369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pointon, A.M., Morrison, R.B., Hill, G., Dargatz, D. and Dial, G. 1990. Monitoring pathology in slaughtered stock: Guidelines for selecting sample size and interpreting results. National Animal Health Monitoring System, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, USA, pp. 257264.Google Scholar
Sutmoller, P. and Wrathall, A.E. 1997. A quantitative assessment of the risk of transmission of foot-and-mouth disease, bluetongue and vesicular stomatitis by embryo transfer in cattle. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 32: 111132.Google Scholar
Wrathall, A.E. 1997. Risks of transmitting scrapie and bovine spongiform encephalopathy by semen and embryos. Revue Scientifique et Technique des Office International des Epizooties. 16 (1): 240264.Google Scholar
Wrathall, A.E. 2000. Risks of transmission of spongiform encephalopathies by reproductive technologies in domesticated ruminants. Livestock Production Science 62: 287316.Google Scholar
Wrathall, A.E., Brown, K.F.D., Sayers, A.R., Wells, G.A.H., Simmons, M.M., Farrelly, S.S.J., Bellerby, P., Squirrell, J., Spencer, Y.I., Wells, M., Stack, M.J., Bastiman, B., Pullar, D., Scatcherd, J., Heasman, L., Parker, J., Hannam, D.A.R., Helliwell, D.W., Chree, A. and Fraser, H. 2002. Studies on embryo transfer from cattle clinically affected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Veterinary Record 150: 365378.Google Scholar