Use of farm buildings by wild badgers: implications for the transmission of bovine tuberculosis
- 523 Downloads
Diseases transmitted from wildlife to livestock or people may be managed more effectively if it is known where transmission occurs. In Britain, farm buildings have been proposed as important sites of Mycobacterium bovis transmission between wild badgers (Meles meles) and cattle, contributing to the maintenance of bovine tuberculosis (TB). Farmers are therefore advised to exclude badgers from buildings. We used Global Positioning System (GPS) collars and remote cameras to characterise badgers’ use of farm buildings at four TB-affected sites in southwestern Britain. Across 54 GPS-collared badgers, 99.8% of locations fell ≥3 m from farm buildings. Remote cameras deployed in feed stores recorded just 12 nights with badger visits among 3134 store nights of monitoring. GPS-collared badgers used space near farm buildings less than expected based on availability, significantly preferring land ≥100 m from buildings. There was no positive association between badgers’ use of farm buildings and the infection status of either badgers or cattle. Six GPS-collared badgers which regularly visited farm buildings all tested negative for M. bovis. Overall, test-positive badgers spent less time close to farm buildings than did test-negative animals. Badger visits to farm buildings were more frequent where badger population densities were high. Our findings suggest that, while buildings may offer important opportunities for M. bovis transmission between badgers and cattle, building use by badgers is not a prerequisite for such transmission. Identifying ways to minimise infectious contact between badgers and cattle away from buildings is therefore a management priority.
KeywordsCattle Disease ecology Farm ecology Meles meles Mycobacterium bovis Wildlife disease
We thank all landholders for allowing fieldwork access to their land, livestock and buildings, the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for financial support, and APHA Starcross for diagnostic testing. CAD thanks the Medical Research Council for Centre funding.
Compliance with ethical standards
This study was funded by the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (grant number SE3046).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted.
- Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (2015) Biosecurity for Farm Buildings. http://www.tbhub.co.uk/biosecurity/wildlife/biosecurity-guidance-farm-buildings/
- Bourne J, Donnelly CA, Cox DR, Gettinby G, McInerney JP, Morrison WI & Woodroffe R (2007) Bovine TB: the scientific evidence. Defra, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20081107201922/http://defra.gov.uk/animalh/tb/isg/pdf/final_report.pdf, London
- Chambers MA, Crawshaw T, Waterhouse S, Delahay R, Hewinson RG, Lyaschenko KP (2008) Validation of the BrockTB Stat-Pak assay for detection of tuberculosis in Eurasian badgers (Meles meles) and influence of disease severity on diagnostic accuracy. J Clin Microbiol 46:1498–1500CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- de Leeuw ANS, Forrester GJ, Spyvee PD, Brash MGI, Delahay RJ (2004) Experimental comparison of ketamine with a combination of ketamine, butorphanol and medetomidine for general anaesthesia of the Eurasian badger (Meles meles L.). Vet J 167:186–193. doi: 10.1016/s1090-0233(03)00113-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Department of Agriculture Environment and Rural Affairs (2015) TB bioexclusion webinar. http://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/tb-bioexclusion-webinar
- Donnelly CA, Nouvellet P (2013) The contribution of badgers to confirmed tuberculosis in cattle in high incidence areas in England. PLoS Curr Outbr. doi: 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.097a904d3f3619db2fe78d24bc776098 Google Scholar
- Godfray HCJ, Donnelly CA, Kao RR, Macdonald DW, McDonald RA, Petrokofsky G, Wood JLN, Woodroffe R, Young DB, McLean AR (2013) A restatement of the natural science evidence base relevant to the control of bovine tuberculosis in Great Britain. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 280:20131634. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.1634 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kruuk H, Parish T (1983) Seasonal and local differences in the weight of European badgers (Meles meles) in relation to food supply. Z Saugetier 48:45–50Google Scholar
- Langley RB (1999) Dilution of precision. GPS World May 1999:52–59Google Scholar
- Lyons A, Getz WM & R Development Core Team (2015) T-LoCoH: Time local convex hull homerange and time use analysis. R package version 1.34. http://tlocoh.r-forge.r-project.org
- Neal E, Cheeseman C (1996) Badgers. Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
- O’Mahony DT (2014) Badger-cattle interactions in the rural environment: implications for bovine tuberculosis transmission. http://www.dardni.gov.uk/badger-cattle-proximity-report.pdf, Belfast: Agri-food and Biosciences Institute
- Smith PG (2005) Compos analysis, version 6.2 plus. Smith Ecology Ltd., Abergavenny, UKGoogle Scholar
- Tolhurst BA, Ward AI, Delahay RJ, MacMaster AM & Roper TJ (2008) The behavioural responses of badgers (Meles meles) to exclusion from farm buildings using an electric fence. 113:224–235. 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.11.006