European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 57, Issue 5, pp 1065–1075 | Cite as

Wildtool, a flexible, first-line risk assessment system for wildlife-borne pathogens

  • Paul Tavernier
  • Jeroen Dewulf
  • Sophie Roelandt
  • Stefan Roels
Original Paper


We describe the prototype of an electronic tool for risk assessment with dynamic ranking of wildlife-borne pathogens in function of their need for surveillance. Data about pathogens, their hosts and occurrences are obtained from literature and are classified as qualitative scores under six main criteria with their sub-criteria, corresponding to the elements of a standard risk assessment. Pathogen-specific data are reviewed by experts. The information is processed per pathogen through an algorithm and through summing up of the values obtained by converting four-tiered qualitative sub-criteria scores to weighted five-tiered numerical values. For a consistent comparison between pathogens, the “unknown” sub-criteria scores are assigned a median value of 3, allowing preservation of the sub-criteria concerned and their weights for the risk assessment, but minimizing the effect of this score on the outcome. Irregular data availability is further accommodated by a different data processing for comprehensiveness and refinement requirements, which is realised by a respective first- and second-level ranking of pathogens, the latter using additional quantitative and qualitative data for the release assessment. Continuous data updates are necessary to reflect the current situation in the field. Output flexibility is implemented by the possibility to run queries based on the choice of a region, a specific target group susceptible to the pathogens and a set of weights for the sub-criteria.


Wildlife pathogens Risk assessment Prioritization Surveillance Wildtool 



This work was funded by the Belgian Federal Public Service of Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment (contract RT 07/5 WILDSURV). We acknowledge the contributions of the members of the WILDSURV steering committee and the many experts who kindly responded to our call for advice concerning pathogens and vectors. A special word of thanks is given to Marc Artois, Joke van der Giessen and Andrew Frost for their highly appreciated comments and support.

Supplementary material

10344_2011_520_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (28 kb)
Appendix 1 Guidelines for scoring (PDF 27 kb)
10344_2011_520_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (35 kb)
Appendix 2 Scoring form (PDF 35 kb)
10344_2011_520_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (32 kb)
Appendix 3 Examples of weights assigned to the sub-criteria (PDF 32 kb)


  1. Burfield I, Van Bommel F (2004) Birds in Europe. Population estimates, trends and conservation status. BirdLife Conservation series no12. BirdLife Int, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Cardoen S, Van Huffel X, Berkvens D, Quoilin S, Ducoffre G, Saegerman C, Speybroeck N, Imberechts H, Herman L, Ducatelle R, Dierick K (2009) Evidence-based semiquantitative methodology for prioritization of foodborne zoonoses. Foodborne Pathog Dis 6(9):1083–1096PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ciotti M (2003) Establishing a list of priority diseases for the countries of the Dubrovik pledge. The Dubrovnik pledge on surveillance and prioritization of infectious diseases. Doc EUR/03/5042861. Report on a WHO meeting, Bucharest, Romania, 21–23 Nov 2002. pp 2–5Google Scholar
  4. DEFRA (2009) Veterinary surveillance: prioritisation project. Available at:
  5. Devos K, Kuijken E, Verscheure C, Meire P, Benoy L, De Smet W, Gabriëls J (2005) Overwinterende wilde ganzen in Vlaanderen, 1990/91-2003/04. Natuur. Oriolus 71(Bijl):4–20Google Scholar
  6. Doherty J-A (2000) Establishing priorities for national communicable disease surveillance. Can J Infect Dis 11(1):21–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ducoffre G (2010) Surveillance van infectieuze aandoeningen door een netwerk van laboratoria voor microbiologie 2008 + epidemiologische trends 1983–2007. IPH/EPIREPORTS, nr 2010–16 Mei 2010Google Scholar
  8. Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain (2010). Zoosanitaire toestand in België. Available at:
  9. Handistatus II (2010). Available at:
  10. Hartley M (2009) Qualitative risk assessment of the role of the feral wild boar (Sus scrofa) in the likelihood of incursion and the impacts on effective disease control of selected exotic diseases in England. Eur J Wildl Res. Available at:
  11. Hartley M, Gill E (2010) Assessment and mitigation processes for disease risks associated with wildlife management and conservation interventions. Vet Rec 166:487–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones KE, Patel NG, Levy MA, Storeygard A, Balk D, Gittleman JL, Daszak P (2008) Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451:990–993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krause G (2008) Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health—call for comments. Eurosurveillance 13(40). Available at:
  14. Kuiken T, Leighton FA, Fouchier RAM, LeDuc JW, Peiris JSM, Schudel A, Stöhr K, Osterhaus ADME (2005) Pathogen surveillance in animals. Science 309:1680–1681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lamotte S (2006) l’Erosion de la biodiversité: les mammifères. Partim: Chauves-souris. Dossier scientifique. Direction de la Nature, Division Nature et Forêts, Direction générale des ressources naturelles et de l’environnement, JambesGoogle Scholar
  16. Libois R (2006) L’Erosion de la biodiversité: les mammifères. Partim: Les mammifères non volants. Dossier scientifique. Unité de recherches zoogéographiques, Faculté des Sciences, Université de LiègeGoogle Scholar
  17. McKenzie J, Simpson H, Langstaff I (2007) Development of methodology to prioritise wildlife pathogens for surveillance. Prev Vet Med 81:194–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. OIE (2008a) Import Risk Analysis. Chapter 2.1. In: Terrestrial Animal Health Code, 17th edn. Available at:
  19. OIE (2008b) Questionnaire on wildlife diseases. Available at:
  20. Patel K, Lopez M, Roberts H, Sabirovoc M (2009) West Nile Virus: Potential risk factors and the likelihood for the introduction of the disease into the United Kingdom. Working Document. Food and Farming Group, International Animal Health., DEFRA, London. pp 1–34. Available at:
  21. Peeters L (2007) Trekkalender roofvogels over Nederland en België. Bijlage: Themanummer roofvogels. Natuur Oriolus 73(3):98–99Google Scholar
  22. Ryser-Degiorgis M-P, Gavier-Widen D, Gortazar-Schmidt C, Kuiken T (2009) EWDA network for wildlife health surveillance in Europe. Summary of data presented at the inaugural meeting. Brussels 15 Oct 2009. Available at:,%20Brussels%20Oct%202009.pdf
  23. Sainsbury AW, Vaughan RJ, Curtiss P (2010) Disease risk analysis for the reintroduction of the white tailed sea eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) to England. Report to Natural England. Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Thrusfield M (2007a) Veterinary information systems. In: Veterinary Epidemiology, 3rd edn. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 205–207Google Scholar
  25. Thrusfield M (2007b) The transmission and maintenance of infection. In: Veterinary Epidemiology, 3rd edn. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 205–207Google Scholar
  26. Valenciano M (2001) Définition des priorités dans le domaine des zoonoses non alimentaires, 2000–2001. Rapport de l’Institut de Veille Sanitaire. Available at:
  27. Van der Giessen JWB., Van de Giessen AW., Braks MAH. (2010) Emerging zoonoses information and priority-setting system. In: Emerging zoonoses: early warning and surveillance in the Netherlands. RIVM-rapport 330214002, Bilthoven. pp 29–31.Google Scholar
  28. Verkem S, De Maeseneer J, Vandendriessche B, Verbeylen G, Yskout S (2003) Zoogdieren in Vlaanderen. Ecologie en verspreiding van 1987 tot 2002. Natuurpunt.Studie en JNM Zoogdierenwerkgroep, Mechelen/GentGoogle Scholar
  29. Vermeersch G, Anselin A, Devos K, Herremans M, Stevens J, Gabriëls J, Van Der Krieken B (2004) Atlas van de Vlaamse broedvogels 2000–2002. Mededelingen van het Instituut voor Natuurbehoud 23, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  30. Vlaamse Avifauna Comissie (1989) Vogels in Vlaanderen, voorkomen en verspreiding. Vlavico, IMP, BornemGoogle Scholar
  31. Weiserbs A, Jacob J-P (2007) Oiseaux nicheurs de Bruxelles, 2000–2004. Répartition, effectifs, évolution. Aves, Liège.Google Scholar
  32. Williams ES, Yuill T, Artois M, Fisher J, Haigh SA (2002) Emerging infectious diseases in wildlife. Rev Sci Tech 21(1):139–157PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Tavernier
    • 1
  • Jeroen Dewulf
    • 2
  • Sophie Roelandt
    • 1
  • Stefan Roels
    • 1
  1. 1.Wildsurv Project, Operational Direction Interactions and SurveillanceVeterinary and Agrochemical Research CenterBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Veterinary Epidemiology Unit, Department of Obstetrics, Reproduction and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary MedicineGhent UniversityMerelbekeBelgium

Personalised recommendations