Driven to Extinction

Science (Impact Factor: 33.61). 04/2008; 319(5870):1606-9. DOI: 10.1126/science.319.5870.1606
Source: PubMed


Rinderpest, an animal disease that devastated cattle and other animals--and their human keepers--across Eurasia and Africa
for millennia, may join smallpox as the only viral diseases to have been eradicated.

20 Reads
  • Source
    • "The administration of vaccines is now commonplace and is considered one of the most important aspects of global disease control (Tizard 2009). Strategic implementation of vaccination is important to cattle health and welfare, as vaccination can help to control and eradicate disease, as demonstrated by the global eradication of rinderpest (Normile 2008), and control of rabies, foot and mouth disease and swine erysipelas (Lombard and others 2007). In order for disease control to be effectively achieved via vaccination, correct usage is required, which includes administering vaccines via the correct route, at the appropriate time and to a specified target group of animals (Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture Alliance (RUMA) 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Vaccination is a widely used strategy for disease control in cattle in the UK and abroad. However, there has been limited research describing the uptake and use of cattle vaccines on UK farms. Aim To describe the current uptake and usage of cattle vaccines in the UK. Design A questionnaire, available in paper and online format, was distributed to cattle farmers by convenience sampling. Participants All UK cattle farmers were eligible to participate in the study. Results Eighty-six per cent of respondents (n=229/266) had vaccinated their cattle in the past year. Diseases most commonly vaccinated against were Bovine Viral Diarrhoea, Leptospirosis and Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis. Vaccination compliance was limited in certain areas, for example only 48 per cent of respondents stated that they administered the second dose in the primary course within the recommended timeframe, and 14 per cent of respondents stated that they vaccinated earlier than the youngest recommended age. Although outside the scope of this study, further work is needed to establish the extent of inadequate compliance and the effect this has on vaccine efficacy. The role of the veterinarian was highlighted as the main supplier of vaccines and preferred source of vaccination information. Respondents preferred to receive recommendations regarding vaccination by face-to-face communication with the veterinarian. Conclusions The results provide a description of the current uptake and usage of cattle vaccines in the UK. Uptake is generally high but there are areas of usage of vaccines which could be improved upon. The veterinarian plays a key role as supplier of vaccines and a source of information for the majority of farmers. Although outside the scope of this study, further work is needed to establish the extent of inadequate compliance and the effect this has on vaccine efficacy. Although the respondents in this study represent a biased population of farmers, the findings indicate areas for future investigation in order to improve vaccination strategies in cattle in the UK.
    07/2014; 1(1). DOI:10.1136/vropen-2014-000042
  • Source
    • "While rinderpest, one of the oldest recorded livestock plagues, was a great threat in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia, it has been almost certainly eradicated from these countries by the success of the Global Rinderpest Eradication Programme. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is planning to declare the global rinderpest eradication at 2010 [2] [3]. In addition, morbilliviruses were recently reported to cause mass mortalities among marine mammals [4] [5]. "

  • Source
    • "Many pest organisms reach their most damaging levels away from their native geographic range. This general pattern has been documented for weeds [1], insect pests [2], and pathogens [3,4] among others. Extensive bodies of literature have developed around both the causes and consequences of invasive pests [5–7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Greenhouse gas emissions associated with pesticide applications against invasive species constitute an environmental cost of species invasions that has remained largely unrecognized. Here we calculate greenhouse gas emissions associated with the invasion of an agricultural pest from Asia to North America. The soybean aphid, Aphis glycines, was first discovered in North America in 2000, and has led to a substantial increase in insecticide use in soybeans. We estimate that the manufacture, transport, and application of insecticides against soybean aphid results in approximately 10.6 kg of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent greenhouse gasses being emitted per hectare of soybeans treated. Given the acreage sprayed, this has led to annual emissions of between 6 and 40 million kg of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gasses in the United States since the invasion of soybean aphid, depending on pest population size. Emissions would be higher were it not for the development of a threshold aphid density below which farmers are advised not to spray. Without a threshold, farmers tend to spray preemptively and the threshold allows farmers to take advantage of naturally occurring biological control of the soybean aphid, which can be substantial. We find that adoption of the soybean aphid economic threshold can lead to emission reductions of approximately 300 million kg of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gases per year in the United States. Previous studies have documented that biological control agents such as lady beetles are capable of suppressing aphid densities below this threshold in over half of the soybean acreage in the U.S. Given the acreages involved this suggests that biological control results in annual emission reductions of over 200 million kg of CO2 equivalents. These analyses show how interactions between invasive species and organisms that suppress them can interact to affect greenhouse gas emissions.
    PLoS ONE 08/2013; 8(8):e72293. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0072293 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more


20 Reads
Available from