Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW)
  • ,
  • Soren Saxmose Nielsen
  • ,
  • Julio Alvarez
  • ,
  • Dominique Joseph Bicout
  • ,
  • Paolo Calistri
  • ,
  • Elisabetta Canali
  • ,
  • Julian Ashley Drewe
  • ,
  • Bruno Garin-Bastuji
  • ,
  • Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas
  • ,
  • Christian Schmidt
  • ,
  • Mette Herskin
  • Virginie Michel
  • ,
  • Barbara Padalino
  • ,
  • Paolo Pasquali
  • ,
  • Helen Claire Roberts
  • ,
  • Hans Spoolder
  • ,
  • Karl Stahl
  • ,
  • Antonio Velarde Calvo
  • ,
  • Christoph Winckler
  • ,
  • Sandra Blome
  • ,
  • Anette Boklund
  • ,
  • Anette Botner
  • ,
  • Sofie Dhollander
  • ,
  • Cristina Rapagna
  • ,
  • Yves Van der Stede
  • ,
  • Miguel Angel Miranda Chueca

The European Commission asked EFSA to provide study designs for the investigation of four research domains (RDs) according to major gaps in knowledge identified by EFSA in a report published in 2019: (RD 1) African swine fever (ASF) epidemiology in wild boar; (RD 2) ASF transmission by vectors; (RD 3) African swine fever virus (ASFV) survival in the environment, and (RD 4) the patterns of seasonality of ASF in wild boar and domestic pigs in the EU. In this Scientific Opinion, the second RD on ASF epidemiology in wild boar is addressed. Twenty-nine research objectives were proposed by the working group and broader ASF expert networks and 23 of these research objectives met a prespecified inclusion criterion. Fourteen of these 23 research objectives met the predefined threshold for selection and so were prioritised based on the following set of criteria: (1) the impact on ASF management; (2) the feasibility or practicality to carry out the study; (3) the potential implementation of study results in practice; (4) a possible short time-frame study (< 1 year); (5) the novelty of the study; and (6) if it was a priority for risk managers. Finally, after further elimination of three of the proposed research objectives due to overlapping scope of studies published during the development of this opinion, 11 research priorities were elaborated into short research proposals, considering the potential impact on ASF management and the period of one year for the research activities. (C) 2021 European Food Safety Authority.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummere06716
TidsskriftEFSA Journal
Vol/bind19
Nummer7
Antal sider87
ISSN1831-4732
DOI
StatusUdgivet - jul. 2021

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 228971189