European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 212–220

Serosurveillance for selected infectious disease agents in wild boars (Sus scrofa) and outdoor pigs in Switzerland

  • C. Köppel
  • L. Knopf
  • M.-P. Ryser
  • R. Miserez
  • B. Thür
  • K. D. C. Stärk
Original Paper


The large abundance of free-ranging wild boars (Sus scrofa) and a trend towards animal friendly outdoor management of domestic pigs lead to an increasing probability of disease transmission between those animal populations. In 2001, an active monitoring was started for classical swine fever (CSF), Aujeszky’s disease (AD) and porcine brucellosis (PB) in wild boars in Switzerland. The objective of this programme was to document the serological status of wild boars regarding the selected pathogens. To continue this serosurveillance, 1,060 wild boar samples were collected during two regular hunting seasons in 2004–2005. Furthermore, in a pilot study, 61 outdoor pigs from 14 farms located in areas with high wild boar densities were sampled in 2004 and serologically tested for AD and PB. All wild boar samples were negative for CSF. Seroprevalence for AD was 2.83% (95% CI 1.91–4.02%). Seroprevalence for PB was 13.5% (95% CI 10.7–16.7%) for the Rose Bengal test and 11.05% (95% CI 8.82–13.61%) for the indirect ELISA. There was no serological evidence for AD in domestic pigs. All tested animals from 13 piggeries were seronegative for PB, but three pigs from the same farm showed doubtful results. Further investigations on the farm did not indicate the presence of PB in the herd. These findings urge the need for better diagnostic tools to obtain reliable results concerning PB prevalence. Since contact and following transmission of infectious agents between infected wild boars and outdoor pigs might occur in the future, it is advisable to include outdoor pigs in areas at risk in routine surveillance programmes.


Aujeszky’s disease Classical swine fever Outdoor reared pigs Porcine brucellosis Serosurveillance Wild boar (Sus scrofa


  1. Al Dahouk S, Nockler K et al (2005) Sero-prevalence of brucellosis, tularemia and yersiniosis in wild boar (Sus scrofa) from north-eastern Germany. J Vet Med Ser B 52(10):444–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albina E, Mesplede A, Chenut G, Le Potier MF, Bourbao G, Le Gal S, Leforban Y (2000) A serological survey on classical swine fever (CSF), Aujeszky’s disease (AD) and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus infections in French wild boars from 1991 to 1998. Vet Microbiol 77:43–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anonymous (2004a) Epidemiological review of wildlife diseases. OIEGoogle Scholar
  4. Anonymous (2004b) Praxishilfe Wildschwein. BUWAL Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft, BerneGoogle Scholar
  5. Anonymous (2004c) Technische Weisungen über Mindestmassnahmen zur Bekämpfung der Schweinepest bei freilebenden Wildschweinen. Bundesamt für Veterinärwesen, Berne, 4. 01.10.2004, Technische WeisungGoogle Scholar
  6. Anonymous (2005a) OIE terrestrial animal health code, 14th edn. Office international des epizooties, Paris
  7. Anonymous (2005b) Terrestrial animal health code, 14th edn. Office International des épizooties, OIE, ParisGoogle Scholar
  8. Cameron A (1999) Survey toolbox for livestock diseases: a practical manual and software package for active surveillance of livestock diseases in developing countries. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) Monograph No. 54, pp 37–47Google Scholar
  9. Capua I, Casaccia C et al (1997) Characterisation of Aujeszky’s disease viruses isolated from domestic animals and from a wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Italy between 1972 and 1995. Vet Microbiol 57(2–3):143–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cvetnic Z, Mitak M, Ocepek M, Lojkic M, Terzic S, Jemersic L, Humski A, Habrun B, Sostaric B, Brstilo M, Krt B, Garin-Bastuji B (2003) Wild boars (Sus scrofa) as reservoirs of Brucella suis biovar 2 in Croatia. Acta Vet Hung 51:465–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Garin-Bastuji B, Hars J (2001) La brucellose du porc et du sanglier en France. Agence française de sécurité sanitaire des aliments (AFSSA Alfort). 1.07.2001Google Scholar
  12. Garin-Bastuji B, Hars J, Calvez D, Thiébaud M, Artois M (2000) Brucellose du porc domestique et du sanglier sauvage due a Brucella suis biovar 2 en France. Epidémiologie et santé animale 38:1–5Google Scholar
  13. Gennero M, Grattarola C, Bergagns S, Zoppi S, Travaglio S, Gobetto M, Dondo A (2005) Brucellosis surveillance in wild boars in Piedmont (Italy). Verh ber Erkrg Zootiere 42:223–227Google Scholar
  14. Godfroid J (2002) Brucellosis in wildlife. Rev Sci Tech 21:277–286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Godfroid J, Saegerman C, Wellemans V, Walravens K, Letesson JJ, Tibor A, Mc Millan A, Spencer S, Sanna M, Bakker D, Pouillot R, Garin-Bastuji B (2002) How to substantiate eradication of bovine brucellosis when aspecific serological reactions occur in the course of brucellosis testing. Vet Microbiol 90:461–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Godfroid J, Cloeckaert A, Liautard JP, Kohler S, Fretin D, Walravens K, Garin-Bastuji B, Letesson JJ (2005) From the discovery of the Malta fever’s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis. Vet Res 36:313–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jungersen G, Sorensen V, Giese SB, Stack J, Riber U (2005) Differentiation between serological responses to Brucella suis and Yersinia enterocolitica serotype O:9 after natural or experimental infection in pigs. Epidemiol Infect 134:347–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kittelberger R, Hilbink F, Hansen MF, Ross GP, Joyce MA, Fenwick S, Heesemann J, Wolf-Watz H, Nielsen K (1995) Serological crossreactivity between Brucella abortus and Yersinia enterocolitica 0:9 II the use of Yersinia outer proteins for the specific detection of Yersinia enterocolitica infections in ruminants. Vet Microbiol 47:271–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leuenberger R (2004) Surveillance of wild boar in Switzerland: prevalence of infections relevant to domestic pigs. Universität Basel, BaselGoogle Scholar
  20. Leuenberger R, Boujon P, Thur B, Miserez R, Garin-Bastuji B, Rüfenacht J, Staerk KDC (2006) Prevalence of classical swine fever, Aujeszky’s disease and brucellosis in a surveyed population of wild boar in Switzerland. Vet Rec (in press)Google Scholar
  21. Lutz W, Junghans D (2003) A long-term survey of pseudorabies virus infection in European wild boar of western Germany. Z Jagdwiss 130–140Google Scholar
  22. Moser C, Ruggli N, Tratschin JD, Hofmann MA (1996) Detection of antibodies against classical swine fever virus in swine sera by indirect ELISA using recombinant envelope glycoprotein E2. Vet Microbiol 51:41–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Muller T, Teuffert J, Ziedler K, Possardt C, Kramer M, Staubach C, Conraths FJ (1998) Pseudorabies in the European wild boar from eastern Germany. J Wildl Dis 34:251–258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Müller T, Conraths FJ, Hahn EC (2000) Pseudorabies virus infection (Aujeszky’s disease) in wild swine. Infect Dis Rev 2:27–34Google Scholar
  25. Munoz PM, Marin CM, Monreal D, Gonzalez D, Garin-Bastuji B, Diaz R, Mainar-Jaime RC, Moriyon I, Blasco JM (2005) Efficacy of several serological tests and antigens for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in the presence of false-positive serological results due to Yersinia enterocolitica O:9. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 12:141–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nielen M, Jalvingh AW, Meuwissen MP, Horst SH, Dijkhuizen AA (1999) Spatial and stochastic simulation to evaluate the impact of events and control measures on the 1997–1998 classical swine fever epidemic in The Netherlands. II. Comparison of control strategies. Prev Vet Med 42:297–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nielsen K, Smith P, Widdison J, Gall D, Kelly L, Kelly W, Nicoletti P (2004) Serological relationship between cattle exposed to Brucella abortus, Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 and Escherichia coli O157:H7. Vet Microbiol 100:25–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nielsen K, Smith P, Yu W, Nicoletti P, Jungersen G, Stack J, Godfroid J (2005) Serological discrimination by indirect enzyme immunoassay between the antibody response to Brucella sp. and Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 in cattle and pigs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 109:69–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Priadi A, Chasanah U, Hirst RG, Emmins JJ, Van der Giessen JW, Soeroso M (1995) Development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detecting antibody to Brucella suis in porcine sera, abstr. 7528. Vet Bull 56:967. (Abstract)Google Scholar
  30. Rossi S (2005) Analyse épidémiologique de la peste porcine classique et de la brucellose du sanglier (Sus scrofa). Ecole nationale Vétérinaire de Lyon, LyonGoogle Scholar
  31. Rossi S, Artois M, Pontier D, Cruciere C, Hars J, Barrat J, Pacholek X, Fromont E (2005) Long-term monitoring of classical swine fever in wild boar (Sus scrofa sp.) using serological data. Vet Res 36:27–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruiz-Fons F, Vicente J, Vidal D, Hofle U, Villanua D, Gauss C, Segales J, Almeria S, Montoro V, Gortazar C (2005) Seroprevalence of six reproductive pathogens in European wild boar (Sus scrofa) from Spain: the effect on wild boar female reproductive performance. Theriogenology 65:731–743PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schnyder M, Stark KD, Vanzetti T, Salman MD, Thor B, Schleiss W, Griot C (2002) Epidemiology and control of an outbreak of classical swine fever in wild boar in Switzerland. Vet Rec 150:102–109PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Köppel
    • 1
  • L. Knopf
    • 1
  • M.-P. Ryser
    • 2
  • R. Miserez
    • 3
  • B. Thür
    • 4
  • K. D. C. Stärk
    • 1
  1. 1.Swiss Federal Veterinary OfficeBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Centre for Fish and Wildlife Health, Vetsuisse FacultyUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Institute of Veterinary Bacteriology, ZOBAUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  4. 4.Institute of Virology and ImmunoprophylaxisMittelhäusernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations