The 12th European PRRS Research Awards
COMBAT - Updated biosecurity tool with 4 features
The Guilty Gilt Guide
PRRS Ctrl 2.0
All in all, a long term whole herd PRRS MLV vaccination approach is vital to reduce the losses in the farm due to PRRS infection.
The aim of this study was to compare the detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) in due-to-wean litters in commercial swine breeding herds using family oral fluids (FOF) vs. individual piglet serum samples. FOF and piglet serum samples were collected in 199 due-to-wean litters on six farms containing 2177 piglets. All samples were individually tested for PRRSV RNA by RT-rtPCR. A litter was considered PRRSV-positive when PRRSV RNA was detected in ≥ 1 piglet serum sample or the FOF sample. Mixed effect logistic regression with farm as a random effect was used 1) to evaluate the probability of obtaining a PRRSV RNA positive FOF as a function of the proportion of viremic piglets in a litter and 2) the effect of litter size and parity on the probability that a litter would test PRRSV RNA positive in FOF. A Bayesian prevalence estimation under misclassification (BayesPEM) analysis was used to calculate the PRRSV prevalence and 95 % credible interval given the condition that all samples (FOF and serum) tested negative. In total, 34 of 199 litters (17.1 %) contained ≥ 1 viremic piglet(s), and 28 of 199 litters (14.1 %) were FOF positive. When all piglet serum samples within a litter tested negative, 1 of 165 FOF (0.6 %) tested PRRSV RNA positive. The probability of a PCR-positive FOF sample from litters with 10 %, 20 %, 30 %, 40 %, and 50 % within-litter PRRSV prevalence was 3.5 %, 35.1 %, 88.8 %, 99.2 %, and >99.9 %, respectively. The odds of a PCR-positive FOF in a first parity litter were 3.36 times (95 % CI: 2.10–5.38) that of a parity ≥ 2 litter. The odds of a positive FOF result in a litter with ≤ 11 piglets were 9.90 times (95 % CI: 4.62–21.22) that of a litter with > 11 piglets. FOF was shown to be an efficacious sample type for PRRSV detection in farrowing rooms. A risk-based approach for litter selection combined with FOF collection can be used to improve on-farm PRRSV detection with a limited sample size, compared to sampling multiple individual pigs. Finally, the BayesPEM analysis showed that PRRSV may still be present in breeding herds when all samples (serum and FOF) test PRRSV RNA negative, i.e., negative surveillance results should be interpreted with caution.
Dear colleagues with passion for PRRS. To update you regularly on the latest scientific and practical aspects in Disease Control and Management with focus on PRRS, we have created a very comprehensive guide book called Content Compass.
Despite the intensive vaccination programs applied in the field, erysipelas continues to be a costly global concern for the swine industry and public health 1,2,3. Post-farrowing vaccination is routinely applied to protect the breeding stock. However, there is a need to vaccinate growing pigs due to a lack of protection in the finishing period, and it is not uncommon to detect outbreaks in the field due to antibody waning 4,5. There is a need for further studies that aim at investigating other vaccination protocols that may increase protection against erysipelas under commercial conditions. Therefore, the specific objectives of this study were two-fold: 1) to study the seroconversion in sows and piglets between pre- and post-farrowing protocols against erysipelas over time; and 2) to describe the time-to-negative erysipelas protection between protocols.
Boehringer Ingelheim, a global leader in animal health, honours three research proposals with a total funding of 75,000 Euro (25,000 Euro each) to encourage further development of practical methods for controlling PRRS (Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome), and to recognize scientific accomplishments in this field.