Seoul orthohantavirus (SEOV) is a rat-associated zoonotic pathogen with an almost worldwide distribution. In 2019, the first autochthonous human case of SEOV-induced hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome was reported in Germany, and a pet rat was identified as the source of the zoonotic infection. To further investigate the SEOV reservoir, additional rats from the patient and another owner, all of which were purchased from the same vendor, were tested. SEOV RNA and anti-SEOV antibodies were found in both of the patient’s rats and in two of the three rats belonging to the other owner. The complete coding sequences of the small (S), medium (M), and large (L) segments obtained from one rat per owner exhibited a high sequence similarity to SEOV strains of breeder rat or human origin from the Netherlands, France, the USA, and Great Britain. Serological screening of 490 rats from breeding facilities and 563 wild rats from Germany (2007–2020) as well as 594 wild rats from the Netherlands (2013–2021) revealed 1 and 6 seropositive individuals, respectively. However, SEOV RNA was not detected in any of these animals. Increased surveillance of pet, breeder, and wild rats is needed to identify the origin of the SEOV strain in Europe and to develop measures to prevent transmission to the human population.

In countries with intensive pig husbandry in stables, the prevalence of livestock-associated (LA) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on such farms has remained high in the last few years or has also further increased. Simple measures to reduce the LA-MRSA among pigs have not yet been successfully implemented. Earlier publications showed a decontamination of LA-MRSA was only possible with great effort. The aim of this study is to determine the suitability of routine cleaning and disinfection (C&D) for adequate LA-MRSA decontamination. For this purpose, at least 115 locations in a piglet-rearing compartment were examined before and after cleaning and disinfection. The sample locations were stratified according to accessibility for pigs and the difficulty of cleaning. The cleaning work was carried out routinely by farm employees, who were not informed about the sampling (single blinded). While before cleaning and disinfection, 85% of the samples from the surfaces were LA-MRSA positive, while only 2% were positive thereafter. All LA-MRSA-positive samples after cleaning and disinfection were outside the animal area. Air samples also showed no LA-MRSA after cleaning and disinfection. Conclusion: In well-managed livestock farms, decontamination of the LA-MRSA barn is quite possible; after C&D no LA-MRSA was detectable at animal height.

In countries with professional pig husbandry in stables, the prevalence of livestock-associated (LA) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on farms has remained high or has further increased in recent years. Simple measures to reduce LA-MRSA among pigs have not yet been successfully implemented. The aim of this pilot study is twofold: first, to examine how the LA-MRSA status of LA-MRSA positive fattening pigs at the date of housing changes over the fatting period on straw bedding and, second, whether this change could be influenced by the quality of cleaning and disinfection (C&D). For this purpose, 122 animals are individually tested for LA-MRSA carriage at five sequential time points comparing pigs housed on a farm using straw bedding plus C&D (n = 59) vs. straw bedding plus simple cleaning (n = 63). At the time of housing, all animals in both groups are LA-MRSA positive. This status changes to 0% in the group with simple cleaning until the end of fattening and 28% in the C&D group. LA-MRSA in environmental and air samples is also reduced over the fattening period. The results indicate that keeping pigs on straw might be one way to reduce LA-MRSA during the fattening period with simple cleaning appearing to be more beneficial than C&D. Further investigations are necessary to determine the influencing factors more precisely.

Non-aureus staphylococci (NAS) are ubiquitous bacteria in livestock-associated environments where they may act as reservoirs of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes for pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus. Here, we tested whether housing conditions in pig farms could influence the overall AMR-NAS burden. Two hundred and forty porcine commensal and environmental NAS isolates from three different farm types (conventional, alternative, and organic) were tested for phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility and subjected to whole genome sequencing. Genomic data were analysed regarding species identity and AMR gene carriage. Seventeen different NAS species were identified across all farm types. In contrast to conventional farms, no AMR genes were detectable towards methicillin, aminoglycosides, and phenicols in organic farms. Additionally, AMR genes to macrolides and tetracycline were rare among NAS in organic farms, while such genes were common in conventional husbandries. No differences in AMR detection existed between farm types regarding fosfomycin, lincosamides, fusidic acid, and heavy metal resistance gene presence. The combined data show that husbandry conditions influence the occurrence of resistant and multidrug-resistant bacteria in livestock, suggesting that changing husbandry practices may be an appropriate means of limiting the spread of AMR bacteria on farms.

Rodents in livestock farming constitute a threat to the one health approach. In the present observational case study, livestock farmers worked together with a pest controller within a pilot project. The aim of the study was to assess determinants associated with rodent-prevention potential. The study started in March 2019 on 24 livestock farms in a municipality in North Rhine-Westphalia/Germany. At the beginning of the project a survey on the determinants expected to be related to prevention potential was conducted. To determine the potential for rodent prevention, an expert person, who was not involved in the project before, assessed the on-site conditions of the farms after 1.5 years of project duration in 2020. The potential for rodent prevention was good for about half of the farms. There were significant differences in the willingness to make changes at the project’s start between farms with a high and a low potential for rodent prevention after 1.5 years. There is a general need for action to provide farmers with more practical information on rodent control. This is aggravated by the insufficient advisory services offered to farmers. This study confirms the importance of implementing preventive measures in the control of rodents to ensure that anticoagulant rodenticides are handled responsibly to reduce the impact on non-target species.

Due to the risk of spreading epizootic diseases through rodents, pest control is mandatory in pig farming in European countries. However, there is limited research focused on rodent control practices, usage of anticoagulant rodenticides, and the acceptance of Pest Control Operators (PCOs) in pig farming in Germany. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate current control practices in pig holdings and to analyze the potential of a financial support on the implementation of professional pest control. Data were collected from monitoring records of PCOs and personal interviews with farmers and PCOs. 33 of 47 farmers, who were offered the possibility to outsource rodent control to PCOs supported by financial contribution of the North Rhine-Westphalian Animal Disease Fund (TSK) for a period of 2 years, joined the project. Despite the widespread opinion that the professional would not be beneficial – the authors figured out that farmers could financially benefit in time saved and by improved rodent control measures from the work of the PCOs. Costs of pest control measures per operation on average did not differ significantly between costs incurred by employment of PCOs (1.310 € per year) and calculated costs that arise by farmers themselves (1.217 € per year). All PCOs used Difenacoum and Brodifacoum against pest infestations. In doing so, the infestation with rodents was reduced and most of the participating farmers assessed the project as successful and employ the PCOs permanently. However, mapping the farm locations to resistance areas of the Rodenticide Resistance Action Committee (RRAC) shows that Brodifacoum was frequently used in areas which are marked as areas that are at low risk or rather have no risk for resistance. The environmental risks, however, are increased in these areas. The instrument of temporal start-up financing professional pest control allows ensuring the continuous engagement of PCOs after the project period. This could possibly lead to long-term effects on the individual farm hygiene and on disease prevention. Nevertheless, important research questions with regard to the application of anticoagulant rodenticides of farmers and PCOs in livestock farming and with regard to risk mitigation measures were generated, meriting further investigation.