Import risk analysis: Llamas (Lama glama) and alpacas (Vicugna ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3.were subjected to the tuberculin test for bovine tuberculosis with negative results during the 30 days prior to shipment and come from a herd free from bovine tuberculosis; or 4.have been isolated for at least 90 days prior to entry into the herd including protection from contact with wildlife reservoirs of bovine tuberculosis and were subjected to at least two tuberculin tests carried out at a six-month interval with negative results with the second tuberculin test performed during the 30 days prior to entry into the herd. The following options could be considered in order to effectively manage the risks. 1. No measures for camelids from any country. NB: this reflects that infection in camelids and transmission by them is considered to be rare. It also reflects that there is no testing of camelids carried out in New Zealand under the NPMS and there are no international standards for bovine tuberculosis in camelids. 2. For countries that are free from bovine tuberculosis or countries that have an official control program that has resulted in a prevalence in cattle and deer herds as low as or lower than that in New Zealand, no measures. N.B. This measure would be the least trade restrictive measure for countries of an equivalent or higher bovine tuberculosis status than New Zealand. 3. For countries where the prevalence of bovine tuberculosis is higher than New Zealand. a. Bovine tuberculosis must be a notifiable disease, and during the 3 months immediately prior to entering PEQ facilities the animals have not been on any property where M. bovis has been diagnosed occurred during that period. NB: this measure is the current New Zealand requirement in the IHS for camelids from the USA OR b. The camelids originated from establishments where no case of bovine tuberculosis occurred during the past 5 years AND c. The camelids were tested for bovine tuberculosis by an approved single intradermal tuberculin test at the axillary site (using 0.1ml of tuberculin PPD), with negative results (negative being no swelling or a swelling not greater than 2mm at the site of injection 72 hours after injection), within 14 days of entering PEQ but more than 90 days after any previous tuberculin test. NB: this measure reflects the Australian requirements for camelids from the USA, Canada and New Zealand. The NZAA voluntary scheme has a similar measure, but the test must not be carried out with 60 days of any tuberculin test. OR d. Apply the Code recommendations for bovine tuberculosis in cattle and farmed deer to camelids. 98 ● Import risk analysis: Llamas and alpacas from specified countries MAF Biosecurity New Zealand
References References marked * were sighted as abstracts in electronic data-bases. Barlow AM, Mitchel KA, Visram KH (1999). Bovine tuberculosis in a llama (Lama glama) in the UK. Veterinary Record, 145(22), 639-40. Connolly DJ, Dwyer PJ, Fagan J, Hayes M, G. RE, E. C, Kilroy A, More SJ (2008). Tuberculosis in alpaca (Lama pacos) on a farm in Ireland. 2. Results of an epidemiological investigation. Irish Veterinary Journal, 61(8), 533-7. Defra (2008). Animal Health 2008: The Report of the Chief Veterinary Officer. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK. www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/about/who/cvo/documents/2008report.pdf Emmanuel FX, Seagar AL, Doig C, Rayner A, Claxton P, Laurenson I (2007). Human and animal infections with Mycobacterium microti, Scotland. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 13(12), 1924-7. http://www.cdc.gov/eid/content/13/12/contents_v13n12.htm, downloaded 9/9/2009. Everett KD, Bush RM, Andersen AA (1999). Emended description of the order Chlamydiales, proposal of Parachlamydiaceae fam. nov. and Simkaniaceae fam. nov., each containing one monotypic genus, revised taxonomy of the family Chlamydiaceae, including a new genus and five new species, and standards for the identification of organisms. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology, 49 Pt 2, 415-40.* Fowler ME (1992). Infectious diseases. In: Medicine and Surgery of South American Camelids. Second edition. Blackwell Publishing, USA, pp. 102-32. Lyashchenko KP, Greenwald R, Esfandari J, Meylan M, Burri IH, Zanolari P (2007). Antibody responses in New World camelids with tuberculosis caused by Mycobacterium microti. Veterinary Microbiology, 125(2/3), 265-73. Oevermann A, Pfyffer GE, Zanolari P, Meylan M, Robert N (2004). Generalized tuberculosis in llamas (Lama glama) due to Mycobacterium microti. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 42(4), 1818-21. Ryan EG, Dwyer PJ, Connolly DJ, J. F, Costello E, More SJ (2008). Tuberculosis in alpaca (lama pacos) on a farm in Ireland. 1. A clinical report. Irish Veterinary Journal, 61(8), 527-31. Stevens JB, Thoen CO, Rohonczy EB, Tessaro S, Kelly HA, Duncan JR (1998). The immunological response of llamas (Lama glama) following experimental infection with Mycobacterium bovis. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research, 62(2), 102-9. Thoen CO, Richards, W. D., Jarnigan JL (1977). Mycobacteria isolated form exotic animals. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 170(9), 987-90. Twomey DF, Crawshaw TR, Anscombe JE, Farrant L, Evans LJ et al (2007). TB in llamas caused by Mycobacterium bovis. The Veterinary Record. 160, 170. Wernery U, Kaaden O-R (2002). Tuberculosis. In: Infectious Diseases in Camelids. Second edition, Pp. 91-6, Blackwell Science, Berlin-Vienna. Zanolari P, Robert N, Lyashchenko KP, Pfyffer GE, Greenwald R, Esfandiari J, Meylan M (2009). Tuberculosis caused by Mycobacterium microti in South American camelids. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.* MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Import risk analysis: Llamas and alpacas from specified countries ● 99
Page 1 and 2:
Import risk analysis: Llamas (Lama
Page 3 and 4:
MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Pastora
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 1. Int
Page 7 and 8:
Acronyms CDC United States Centers
Page 9 and 10:
Executive Summary This risk analysi
Page 11 and 12:
1. Introduction The importation of
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1. The risk analysis process
Page 15 and 16:
Following public consultation on th
Page 17 and 18:
Disease agent Foot and mouth diseas
Page 19 and 20:
Disease agent PROTOZOA Eimeria alpa
Page 21 and 22:
Bacteria, rickettsias and spirochae
Page 23 and 24:
McKenna PB (2009). An updated check
Page 25 and 26:
6. African horse sickness virus 6.1
Page 27 and 28:
7. Bluetongue virus 7.1. HAZARD IDE
Page 29 and 30:
8. Borna virus 8.1. HAZARD IDENTIFI
Page 31 and 32:
8.2.2. Risk estimation Since entry
Page 33 and 34:
It has been suggested that as many
Page 35 and 36:
Therefore, since the the consequenc
Page 37 and 38:
Givens MD, Heath AM, Brock KV, Brod
Page 39 and 40:
10. Bovine herpesvirus type 1 10.1.
Page 41 and 42:
10.2.2. Exposure assessment Importe
Page 43 and 44:
Bartha A, Haidu G, Aldassy P, Paczo
Page 45 and 46:
11. Epizootic haemorrhagic disease
Page 47 and 48:
12. Eastern equine encephalitis vir
Page 49 and 50:
13. Equine herpesvirus type 1 13.1.
Page 51 and 52:
13.2.2. Exposure assessment Assumin
Page 53 and 54:
Davison AJ, Erberle R, Hayward GS,
Page 55 and 56: 1993). According to Fowler (1992),
Page 57 and 58: Veterinary Authorities should requi
Page 59 and 60: 15. Louping-ill virus 15.1. HAZARD
Page 61 and 62: 16. Rabies virus 16.1. HAZARD IDENT
Page 63 and 64: � Rabies is a serious zoonotic di
Page 65 and 66: 17. Vesicular stomatitis virus 17.1
Page 67 and 68: incubation period of the disease. T
Page 69 and 70: quarantined with protection from in
Page 71 and 72: Pharo HJ (1999). Vesicular stomatit
Page 73 and 74: 18.1.5. Hazard identification concl
Page 75 and 76: necessarily be competent vectors, a
Page 77 and 78: 20. Bacillus anthracis 20.1. HAZARD
Page 79 and 80: 20.3. RISK MANAGEMENT 20.3.1. Optio
Page 81 and 82: 21. Brucella spp. 21.1. HAZARD IDEN
Page 83 and 84: 21.2.4. Risk estimation Since entry
Page 85 and 86: Gilsdorf MJ, Thoen CO, Temple RM, G
Page 87 and 88: References References marked * were
Page 89 and 90: Serological tests include the compl
Page 91 and 92: with negative results using the com
Page 93 and 94: 24. Coxiella burnetii 24.1. HAZARD
Page 95 and 96: � Although quarantine is not suit
Page 97 and 98: 25. Leptospira serovars 25.1. HAZAR
Page 99 and 100: immune response is a low titre that
Page 101 and 102: Retention of this empty Chapter, wi
Page 103 and 104: 26. Mycobacterium bovis 26.1. HAZAR
Page 105: 26.3. RISK MANAGEMENT 26.3.1. Optio
Page 109 and 110: without any measures for detecting
Page 111 and 112: References References marked * were
Page 113 and 114: Animals become septicaemic a few ho
Page 115 and 116: 29. Salmonella spp. 29.1. HAZARD ID
Page 117 and 118: animals and sporadic cases of salmo
Page 119 and 120: Hansen KR, Nielsen LR, Lind P (2006
Page 121 and 122: Camelidae diseases, or as transmitt
Page 123 and 124: 32. Trypanosoma spp. 32.1. HAZARD I
Page 125 and 126: T. evansi and T. vivax occur in Sou
Page 127 and 128: 5. Animals to be imported could be
Page 129 and 130: (Kittelberger et al 2002) and is th
Page 131 and 132: � The role of an IHS is to specif
Page 133 and 134: 34. Internal parasites 34.1. HAZARD
Page 135 and 136: 34.1.4.2. Trematodes The following
Page 137 and 138: 34.2.4. Risk estimation Since entry
Page 139 and 140: 35. Mites, lice and fleas 35.1. HAZ
Page 141 and 142: 35.2. RISK ASSESSMENT 35.2.1. Entry
Page 143 and 144: N.B. This measure reflects the curr
Page 145 and 146: Hard ticks (Ixodidae) have a lifecy
Page 147 and 148: 1. Camelids could be treated with p
Page 149 and 150: the Eastern Cape and North-West Pro
Page 151 and 152: The larvae reach maturity about 4-8
Page 153 and 154: exploration, debriding and flushing
Page 155 and 156: a. all animals have been re-examine
Page 157 and 158:
38. Weeds and seeds 38.1. HAZARD ID
Page 159 and 160:
edding materials include wood shavi
show all

Import risk analysis: Llamas (Lama glama) and alpacas (Vicugna ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?