Event Abstract

Back to Event

Surveillance system for avian influenza in wild birds and implications for the improvement with insights into highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreaks during 2004-2017 in Japan

Sachiko Moriguchi1*, Rin Hosoda1, Nana Ushine1, Takuya Kato1 and Shin-ichi Hayama1
  • 1 Nippon Veterinary and Life Science University, Japan

Since re-emergence of Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in 2004, we experienced outbreaks of HPAI-H5N1, H5N8 and H5N6 in all of wild birds, poultry and zoo birds in Japan (Mase 2005; Yamamoto et al. 2010; Sakoda et al. 2010; Kanehira et al. 2015; Saito et al. 2015; Okamatsu et al. 2017; Hiono et al. 2017; Takemae et al. 2017). The Ministry of Environment Government of Japan lead avian influenza (AI) surveillance from 2005 and has published “HPAI surveillance manual in wild birds (wild bird manual)” since 2008 with several updates (Ministry of the Environment Government of Japan 2018). In the manual, the objectives of HPAI surveillance are early detection for HPAIV and assessment of HPAI infection in wild birds. Ministry of the Environment Government of Japan ask prefectural Nature conservation divisions for HPAI surveillance in wild birds based on “Wildlife protection and appropriate hunting law” as clerical works of local government. The wild bird manual defined three surveys, bird monitoring & patrols at migratory bird habitats, AI tests for reported dead or rescued birds and water bird droppings. AI tests in wild birds have three steps. Sampling and rapid AI test are conducted by organizations decided by prefectures or regional environment offices. Genetic test is conducted at a national genetic test laboratory, with RT-LAMP method (Onuma et al. 2017). Genetic and pathogenically test is conducted at 4 national reference laboratories, one of them is also the only one national reference laboratory for poultry. The tests according to a standard protocol of OIE (OIE, 2011) was conducted to confirm the results (Ministry of the Environment Government of Japan 2018). HPAI alert levels and focusing areas in wild birds are designated by the Ministry of Environment Government of Japan. There are three alert levels; Level 1 (no HPAI occurrences), Level 2 (single HPAI occurrence), and Level 3 (multiple HPAI outbreaks in Japan). Less than 10 km radius from HPAI occurrence site is also designated as focusing area in wild birds (= focusing area). In the area, surveillance in wild birds should be enhanced. It is designated if we get positive in rapid AI tests, genetic tests in wild birds, even for in poultry, and zoo birds. As the alert levels goes up, AI test target of dead bird numbers at the same sites becomes smaller. Originally, in order to early detection in Japan, it is critical to detect HPAIV in wild birds before in poultry and zoo birds. However, in all of the recent history of HPAI outbreaks in Japan, early detection for HPAIV in wild birds was achieved only one season by national HPAI surveillance in wild birds, and other six seasons were failed. After HPAI invasion to Japan, the surveillance objective changed the phase to assessment of HPAI infection in Japan, consisted of early detection and assessment of HPAI infection in regions. According to seasonal change for HPAI outbreaks in wild birds in 3 seasons, HPAI in wild birds occurred simultaneously and frequency all around Japan. Therefore, HPAI surveillance should be ensured at level 2, single HPAI was detected in Japan. However, regional surveillance system is decided by each regional environment office and prefecture, even if ministry of the Environment, have never known them enough. In this study, we investigated regional surveillance system for AI in wild birds in Japan for understanding of the actual HPAI surveillance system. We also suggest implications to improve AI surveillance methods. We conducted questionnaires and/or interviews for 11 regional environmental offices and nature conservation divisions in 47 prefectures about their surveillance system and the detail surveillance methods. Nine of regional environment offices and 37 of prefectural nature conservation divisions were answered. At level 1, most of prefectures collected droppings and dead birds. Less than half of prefectures conducted bird monitoring and patrols, and AI tests for rescued birds. Dead bird AI tests were ensured as the manuals with increasing HPAI tests of carcasses. Bird monitoring and/or patrols was mostly ensured if HPAI occurred in their own prefectures. For endangered bird species, AI rapid tests were conducted by both of regional environment office and the prefectures. In the national wildlife protection areas, even they were managed by regional environment offices, both of the offices and prefectures collected dead birds if they received the reports. In conclusion, HPAI tests for water bird dropping and passive surveillance for dead birds were main surveillance at level 1. The surveillance was not ensured until occurred in their own prefectures or focusing area. And in the focusing areas, bird monitoring and/or patrols are ensured, however, dropping and rescued bird’s AI test were not ensured. For endangered species and in the national wildlife protection areas, HPAI surveillance was conducted by both of regional environment office and prefectures. AI rapid tests in prefectures were strongly depended on livestock hygiene service centers which lead HPAI surveillance in poultry. Moreover, rescued birds are not targeted as HPAI surveillance in the majority of prefectures. Primary tests with AI rapid test kits for dead birds were most commonly conducted by Livestock hygiene service centers, and secondly, nature conservation divisions. For future management implications, at first, active surveillance should be coordinated to be more effective for early detection. It is necessary to verify the effectiveness of the surveillance methods, for example, AI tests for dropping, environmental water, and other samples. Since most of the regional surveillance members are not professionals for birds and infectious diseases, training sessions would build up their skill. Risk-based approaches such as AI risk maps in wild birds should be contributed in HPAI early detection and surveillance for endangered species vulnerable to HPAI (e.g. Moriguchi et al. 2013; Moriguchi et al. 2016). Second, in order to assess HPAI infection in Japan after the invasion, HPAI surveillance should be ensured immediately after the first HPAI occurrence. At last, regional members should be prepared to test wild birds at all situation including rescued bird, and in the middle of outbreaks of livestock diseases.

Acknowledgements

Questionnaires and interviews to relevant organizations could not conducted without help of The Ministry of Environment Government of Japan, Prefecture officers, Hokkaido University, Tottori University, Kagoshima University, National Institute for Environmental Studies, and K. Kamiya. This research was supported by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (SⅡ-1) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan.

References

Hiono, T., Okamatsu, M., Matsuno, K., Haga, A., Iwata, R., Nguyen, L.T., Suzuki, M., Kikutani, Y., Kida, H., Onuma, M., and Sakoda, Y. (2017) Characterization of H5N6 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses isolated from wild and captive birds in the winter season of 2016–2017 in Northern Japan. Microbiology and Immunology 61:387-397. Kanehira, K., Uchida, Y., Takemae, N., Hikono, H., Tsunekuni, R., and Saito, T. (2015) Characterization of an H5N8 influenza A virus isolated from chickens during an outbreak of severe avian influenza in Japan in April 2014. Arch Virol 160:1629-1643. Mase, M., Tsukamoto, K., Imada, T., Imai, K., Tanimura, N., Nakamura, K., Yamamoto, Y., Hitomi, T., Kira, T., Nakai, T., Kiso, M., Horimoto, T., Kawaoka, Y., and Yamaguchi, S. (2005) Characterization of H5N1 influenza A viruses isolated during the 2003–2004 influenza outbreaks in Japan. Virology 332:167-176. The Ministry of Environment Government of Japan (2018) HPAI surveillance manual in wild birds, Ministry of the Environment Government of Japan, Tokyo Moriguchi, S., Onuma, M., and Goka, K. (2013) Potential risk map for avian influenza A virus invading Japan. Diversity and Distributions 19:78-85. Moriguchi, S., Onuma M., and Goka, K. (2016) Spatial assessment of the potential risk of avian influenza A virus infection in three raptor species in Japan. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 78:1107-1115. Okamatsu, M., Ozawa, M., Soda, K., Takakuwa, H., Haga, A., Hiono, T., Matsuu, A., Uchida, Y., Iwata, R., Matsuno, K., Kuwahara, M., Yabuta, T., Usui, T., Ito, H., Onuma, M., Sakoda, Y., Saito, T., Otsuki, K., Ito, T., and Kida, H. (2017) Characterization of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus A(H5N6), Japan, November 2016. Emerging Infectious Diseases 23:691-695. Onuma, M., Kakogawa, M., Yanagisawa, M., Haga, A., Okano, T., Neagari, Y., Okano, T., Goka, K., and Asakawa, M. (2017) Characterizing the temporal patterns of avian influenza virus introduction into Japan by migratory birds. The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 79:943-951. Saito, T., Tanikawa T., Uchida, Y., Takemae, N., Kanehira, K., and Tsunekuni, R. (2015) Intracontinental and intercontinental dissemination of Asian H5 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (clade 2.3.4.4) in the winter of 2014–2015. Reviews in Medical Virology 25:388-405. Yamamoto, Y., Nakamura, K., Yamada, M., and Mase, M. (2010) Comparative pathology of chickens and domestic ducks experimentally infected with highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses (H5N1) isolated in Japan in 2007 and 2008. Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 44:73-80.

Keywords: HPAI, active surveillance, passive surveillance, rapid test, Endangered Species

Conference: GeoVet 2019. Novel spatio-temporal approaches in the era of Big Data, Davis, United States, 8 Oct - 10 Oct, 2019.

Presentation Type: Regular oral presentation

Topic: Spatio-temporal surveillance and modeling approaches

Citation: Moriguchi S, Hosoda R, Ushine N, Kato T and Hayama S (2019). Surveillance system for avian influenza in wild birds and implications for the improvement with insights into highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreaks during 2004-2017 in Japan. Front. Vet. Sci. Conference Abstract: GeoVet 2019. Novel spatio-temporal approaches in the era of Big Data. doi: 10.3389/conf.fvets.2019.05.00049

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 31 May 2019; Published Online: 27 Sep 2019.

* Correspondence: Dr. Sachiko Moriguchi, Nippon Veterinary and Life Science University, Musashino, Japan, smoriguchi@nvlu.ac.jp