Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) infection in North American wildlife: current status and opportunities for mitigation of risks of further infection in wildlife populations

  • R. S. MILLER (a1) and S. J. SWEENEY (a1)
Abstract
SUMMARY

Mycobacterium bovis (M. bovis), the causative agent of bovine tuberculosis, has been identified in nine geographically distinct wildlife populations in North America and Hawaii and is endemic in at least three populations, including members of the Bovidae, Cervidae, and Suidae families. The emergence of M. bovis in North American wildlife poses a serious and growing risk for livestock and human health and for the recreational hunting industry. Experience in many countries, including the USA and Canada, has shown that while M. bovis can be controlled when restricted to livestock species, it is almost impossible to eradicate once it has spread into ecosystems with free-ranging maintenance hosts. Therefore, preventing transmission of M. bovis to wildlife may be the most effective way to mitigate economic and health costs of this bacterial pathogen. Here we review the status of M. bovis infection in wildlife of North America and identify risks for its establishment in uninfected North American wildlife populations where eradication or control would be difficult and costly. We identified four common risk factors associated with establishment of M. bovis in uninfected wildlife populations in North America, (1) commingling of infected cattle with susceptible wildlife, (2) supplemental feeding of wildlife, (3) inadequate surveillance of at-risk wildlife, and (4) unrecognized emergence of alternate wildlife species as successful maintenance hosts. We then propose the use of integrated and adaptive disease management to mitigate these risk factors to prevent establishment of M. bovis in susceptible North American wildlife species.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) infection in North American wildlife: current status and opportunities for mitigation of risks of further infection in wildlife populations
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) infection in North American wildlife: current status and opportunities for mitigation of risks of further infection in wildlife populations
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) infection in North American wildlife: current status and opportunities for mitigation of risks of further infection in wildlife populations
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
The authors of this article are US government employees. The online version of the article is published within an Open Access environment and may be freely copied, subject to attribution.
Corresponding author
*Author for correspondence: R. S. Miller, 2150 Centre Avenue, Bldg B, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA. (Email: Ryan.S.Miller@aphis.usda.gov; Ryan.Miller@rsmiller.net)
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

3.LM O'Reilly , CJ Daborn . The epidemiology of Mycobacterium bovis infections in animals and man: a review. Tubercle and Lung Disease 1995; 76 (Suppl. 1): 146.

5. RJDelahay , The spatio-temporal distribution of Mycobacterium bovis (bovine tuberculosis) infection in a high-density badger population. Journal of Animal Ecology 2001; 69: 428441.

7. RWoodroffe , Spatial association of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle and badgers Meles meles . Journal of Applied Ecology 2005; 42: 852862.

8.RS Morris , DU Pfeiffer . Directions and issues in bovine tuberculosis epidemiology and control in New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 1995; 43: 256265.

11. GWDe Lisle , CGMackintosh , RGBengis . Mycobacterium bovis in free-living and captive wildlife, including farmed deer. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Épizooties 2001; 20: 86111.

15.SM Schmitt , Bovine tuberculosis in free-ranging white-tailed deer from Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 1997; 33: 749758.

16.V Naranjo , Evidence of the role of European wild boar as a reservoir of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex. Veterinary Microbiology 2008; 127: 19.

17. AParra , An epidemiological evaluation of Mycobacterium bovis infections in wild game animals of the Spanish Mediterranean ecosystem. Research in Veterinary Science 2006; 80: 140146.

18. DVCousins , NFlorisson . A review of tests available for use in the diagnosis of tuberculosis in non-bovine species. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office des International des Épizooties 2005; 24: 1039–59.

19. KSKhan , Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2003; 96: 118121.

26. JCRhyan , Bovine tuberculosis in a free-ranging mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) from Montana. Journal of Wildlife Disease 1995; 31: 432435.

27.DJ O'Brien , Tuberculous lesions in free-ranging white-tailed deer in Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2001; 37: 608613.

28.DJ O'Brien , Epidemiology of Mycobacterium bovis in free-ranging white-tailed deer, Michigan, USA, 1995–2000. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2002; 54: 4763.

29.MV Palmer , Tonsillar lesions in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) naturally infected with Mycobacterium bovis. Veterinary Record 2002; 151: 149.

14.DJ O'Brien , Managing the wildlife reservoir of Mycobacterium bovis: the Michigan, USA, experience. Veterinary Microbiology 2006; 112: 313323.

33. MCarstensen , MWDonCarlos . Preventing the establishment of a wildlife disease reservoir: a case study of bovine tuberculosis in wild deer in Minnesota, USA. Veterinary Medicine International 2011; 2011: 10.

36.JS Nishi , T Shury , BT Elkin . Wildlife reservoirs for bovine tuberculosis Mycobacterium bovis) in Canada: strategies for management and research. Veterinary Microbiology 2006; 112: 325338.

37. CMedrano , Zoonotic pathogens among white-tailed deer, Northern Mexico, 2004–2009. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2012; 18: 1372.

38.H Barrios-García , Identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex by histopathology and PCR in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in Tamaulipas, Mexico. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 2012; 11: 10361040.

41. MEJolley , Fluorescence polarization assay for the detection of antibodies to Mycobacterium bovis in bovine sera. Veterinary Microbiology 2007; 120: 113121.

47. CSBruning-Fann , Bovine tuberculosis in free-ranging carnivores from Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2001; 37: 5864.

48. KCVerCauteren , Surveillance of coyotes to detect bovine tuberculosis, Michigan. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2008; 14: 18621869.

50. GWitmer , Epizootiologic survey of Mycobacterium bovis in wildlife and farm environments in northern Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2010; 46: 368378.

51. MVPalmer , WRWaters , DLWhipple . Susceptibility of raccoons (Procyon lotor) to infection with Mycobacterium bovis. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2002; 38: 266274.

52. SDFitzgerald , Experimental aerosol inoculation of Mycobacterium bovis in North American opossums (Didelphis virginiana). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2003; 39: 418423.

53. KLFDiegel Experimental inoculation of North American opossums (Didelphis virginiana) with Mycobacterium bovis . Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2002; 38: 275281.

54. KLButler , Experimental inoculation of European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) with Mycobacterium bovis . Avian Diseases 2001; 45: 709718.

56. KRClarke , Experimental inoculation of wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) with Mycobacterium bovis . Avian Diseases 2006; 50: 131134.

57. SDPillai , Failure to identify non-bovine reservoirs of Mycobacterium bovis in a region with a history of infected dairy-cattle herds. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000; 43: 5362.

58.PC Cross , Effects of management and climate on elk brucellosis in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem. Ecological Applications 2007; 17: 957964.

59. EJMaichak , Effects of management, behavior, and scavenging on risk of brucellosis transmission in elk of western Wyoming. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2009; 45: 398410.

60.LL Wolfe , A bighorn sheep die-off in southern Colorado involving a Pasteurellaceae strain that may have originated from syntopic cattle. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2010; 46: 12621268.

61. SOlsen . Brucellosis in the United States: role and significance of wildlife reservoirs. Vaccine 2010; 28: F73–F6.

62. SDCôté , Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 2004, pp. 113147.

63.TP Rooney . Deer impacts on forest ecosystems: a North American perspective. Forestry 2001; 74: 201208.

65.MJ Butler , Wildlife ranching in North America– arguments, issues, and perspectives. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2005; 33: 381389.

66.SM Cooper , Distribution and interspecies contact of feral swine and cattle on rangelands in South Texas: implications for disease transmission. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2010; 46: 152164.

67. MVPalmer , WRWaters , DLWhipple . Investigation of the transmission of Mycobacterium bovis from deer to cattle through indirect contact. American Journal of Veterinary Research 2004; 65: 14831489.

69.R Miller , Evaluation of the influence of supplemental feeding of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on the prevalence of bovine tuberculosis in the Michigan wild deer population. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2003; 39: 8495.

73. BLSmith . Winter feeding of elk in western North America. Journal of Wildlife Management 2001; 65: 173190.

77.LAL Corner . The role of wild animal populations in the epidemiology of tuberculosis in domestic animals: how to assess the risk. Veterinary Microbiology 2006; 112: 303–12.

78.JP McInerney , KJ Small , P Caley . Prevalence of Mycobacterium bovis infection in feral pigs in the Northern Territory. Australian Veterinary Journal 2008; 72: 448451.

79.A Aranaz , Bovine tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis) in wildlife in Spain. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2004; 42: 26022608.

80.JH de Mendoza , Bovine tuberculosis in wild boar (Sus scrofa), red deer (Cervus elaphus) and cattle (Bos taurus) in a Mediterranean ecosystem (1992–2004). Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2006; 74: 239247.

81. NSantos , Epidemiology of Mycobacterium bovis infection in wild boar (Sus scrofa) from Portugal. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2009; 45: 10481061.

83.G Wasserberg , Host culling as an adaptive management tool for chronic wasting disease in white tailed deer: a modelling study. Journal of Applied Ecology 2009; 46: 457466.

84.S Thirgood . New perspectives on managing wildlife diseases. Journal of Applied Ecology 2009; 46: 454456.

103. TMörner , Surveillance and monitoring of wildlife diseases. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Épizooties 2002; 21: 6776.

86.M Hartley , E Gill . Assessment and mitigation processes for disease risks associated with wildlife management and conservation interventions. Veterinary Record 2010; 166: 487490.

87.M Hartley , R Lysons . Development of the England Wildlife Health Strategy – a framework for decision makers. Veterinary Record 2011; 168: 158164.

88.R Lysons , J Gibbens , L Smith . Progress with enhancing veterinary surveillance in the United Kingdom. Veterinary Record 2007; 160: 105–12.

89. ASainsbury , Status of wildlife health monitoring in the United Kingdom. Veterinary Record 2001; 148: 558563.

91.MA McCarthy , HP Possingham . Active adaptive management for conservation. Conservation Biology 2007; 21: 956963.

92.DJ O'Brien , Management of bovine tuberculosis in Michigan wildlife: current status and near term prospects. Veterinary Microbiology 2011; 151: 179–87.

97.K VerCauteren , T Gehring , J Landry . The dynamic role of livestock protection dogs in a changing world. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 2010; 6: 7374.

98. KVerCauteren , MLavelle , SHygnstrom . Fences and deer-damage management: a review of designs and efficacy. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2006; 34: 191200.

99. MCarstensen , DJO'Brien , SMSchmitt . Public acceptance as a determinant of management strategies for bovine tuberculosis in free-ranging US wildlife. Veterinary Microbiology 2011; 151: 200204.

100.R Woodroffe , Bovine tuberculosis in cattle and badgers in localized culling areas. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 2009; 45: 128143.

101.ME Meyer , M Meagher . Brucellosis in free-ranging bison (Bison bison) in Yellowstone, Grand Teton, and Wood Buffalo National Parks: a review. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 1995; 31: 579598.

102. KVerCauteren , JShivik , MLavelle . Efficacy of an animal-activated frightening device on urban elk and mule deer. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2005; 33: 12821287.

105.MK Cosgrove , Modeling vaccination and targeted removal of white-tailed deer in Michigan for bovine tuberculosis control. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2012; 36: 676684.

106.AR Berentsen , Active use of coyotes (Canis latrans) to detect bovine tuberculosis in northeastern Michigan, USA. Veterinary Microbiology 2011; 151: 126–32.

110.CS Bruning-Fann , Mycobacterium bovis in coyotes from Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 1998; 34: 632–6.

111. JBKaneene , Epidemiologic investigation of Mycobacterium bovis in a population of cats. American Journal of Veterinary Research 2002; 63: 15071511.

115. DOJoly , FMessier . Factors affecting apparent prevalence of tuberculosis and brucellosis in wood bison. Journal of Animal Ecology 2004; 73: 623631.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Epidemiology & Infection
  • ISSN: 0950-2688
  • EISSN: 1469-4409
  • URL: /core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords: