EFSA Journal (Jul 2021)

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

  • EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW),
  • Søren Saxmose Nielsen,
  • Julio Alvarez,
  • Dominique Joseph Bicout,
  • Paolo Calistri,
  • Elisabetta Canali,
  • Julian Ashley Drewe,
  • Bruno Garin‐Bastuji,
  • Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas,
  • Christian Schmidt,
  • Mette Herskin,
  • Virginie Michel,
  • Barbara Padalino,
  • Paolo Pasquali,
  • Helen Claire Roberts,
  • Hans Spoolder,
  • Karl Stahl,
  • Antonio Velarde,
  • Christoph Winckler,
  • Sandra Blome,
  • Anette Boklund,
  • Anette Bøtner,
  • Sofie Dhollander,
  • Cristina Rapagnà,
  • Yves Van der Stede,
  • Miguel Angel Miranda Chueca

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6716
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 7
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract The European Commission asked EFSA to provide study designs for the investigation of four research domains (RDs) according to major gaps in knowledge identified by EFSA in a report published in 2019: (RD 1) African swine fever (ASF) epidemiology in wild boar; (RD 2) ASF transmission by vectors; (RD 3) African swine fever virus (ASFV) survival in the environment, and (RD 4) the patterns of seasonality of ASF in wild boar and domestic pigs in the EU. In this Scientific Opinion, the second RD on ASF epidemiology in wild boar is addressed. Twenty‐nine research objectives were proposed by the working group and broader ASF expert networks and 23 of these research objectives met a prespecified inclusion criterion. Fourteen of these 23 research objectives met the predefined threshold for selection and so were prioritised based on the following set of criteria: (1) the impact on ASF management; (2) the feasibility or practicality to carry out the study; (3) the potential implementation of study results in practice; (4) a possible short time‐frame study (< 1 year); (5) the novelty of the study; and (6) if it was a priority for risk managers. Finally, after further elimination of three of the proposed research objectives due to overlapping scope of studies published during the development of this opinion, 11 research priorities were elaborated into short research proposals, considering the potential impact on ASF management and the period of one year for the research activities.

Keywords