Tuberculosis (TB) caused by Mycobacterium bovis and closely related members of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex continues to affect humans and animals worldwide and its control requires vaccination of wildlife reservoir species such as Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa). Vaccination efforts for TB control in wildlife have been based primarily on oral live BCG formulations. However, this is the first report of the use of oral inactivated vaccines for controlling TB in wildlife. In this study, four groups of 5 wild boar each were vaccinated with inactivated M. bovis by the oral and intramuscular routes, vaccinated with oral BCG or left unvaccinated as controls. All groups were later challenged with a field strain of M. bovis. The results of the IFN-gamma response, serum antibody levels, M. bovis culture, TB lesion scores, and the expression of C3 and MUT genes were compared between these four groups. The results suggested that vaccination with heat-inactivated M. bovis or BCG protect wild boar from TB. These results also encouraged testing combinations of BCG and inactivated M. bovis to vaccinate wild boar against TB. Vaccine formulations using heat-inactivated M. bovis for TB control in wildlife would have the advantage of being environmentally safe and more stable under field conditions when compared to live BCG vaccines. The antibody response and MUT expression levels can help differentiating between vaccinated and infected wild boar and as correlates of protective response in vaccinated animals. These results suggest that vaccine studies in free-living wild boar are now possible to reveal the full potential of protecting against TB using oral M. bovis inactivated and BCG vaccines.

Controlling infectious diseases at the wildlife/livestock interface is often difficult because the ecological processes driving transmission between wildlife reservoirs and sympatric livestock populations are poorly understood. Thus, assessing how animals use their environment and how this affects interspecific interactions is an important factor in determining the local risk for disease transmission and maintenance. We used data from concurrently monitored GPS-collared domestic cattle and wild boar (Sus scrofa) to assess spatiotemporal interactions and associated implications for bovine tuberculosis (TB) transmission in a complex ecological and epidemiological system, Doñana National Park (DNP, South Spain). We found that fine-scale spatial overlap of cattle and wild boar was seasonally high in some habitats. In general, spatial interactions between the two species were highest in the marsh-shrub ecotone and at permanent water sources, whereas shrub-woodlands and seasonal grass-marshlands were areas with lower predicted relative interactions. Wild boar and cattle generally used different resources during winter and spring in DNP. Conversely, limited differences in resource selection during summer and autumn, when food and water availability were limiting, resulted in negligible spatial segregation and thus probably high encounter rates. The spatial gradient in potential overlap between the two species across DNP corresponded well with the spatial variation in the observed incidence of TB in cattle and prevalence of TB in wild boar. We suggest that the marsh-shrub ecotone and permanent water sources act as important points of TB transmission in our system, particularly during summer and autumn. Targeted management actions are suggested to reduce potential interactions between cattle and wild boar in order to prevent disease transmission and design effective control strategies.

In recent decades the management of large game mammals has become increasingly intensive in south central Spain (SCS), resulting in complex epidemiological scenarios for disease maintenance, and has probably impeded schemes to eradicate tuberculosis (TB) in domestic livestock. We conducted an analysis of risk factors which investigated associations between the pattern of tuberculosis-like lesions (TBL) in wild boar (Sus scrofa) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) across 19 hunting estates from SCS and an extensive set of variables related to game management, land use and habitat structure. The aggregation of wild boar at artificial watering sites was significantly associated with an increasing risk of detecting TBL in both species, which probably relates to enhanced opportunities for transmission. Aggregation of wild boar at feeding sites was also associated with increased risks of TBL in red deer. Hardwood Quercus spp. forest availability was marginally associated with an increased risk of TB in both species, whereas scrubland cover was associated with a reduced individual risk of TBL in the wild boar. It is concluded that management practices that encourage the aggregation of hosts, and some characteristics of Mediterranean habitats could increase the frequency and probability of both direct and indirect transmission of TB. These findings are of concern for both veterinary and public health authorities, and reveal tuberculosis itself as a potential limiting factor for the development and sustainability of such intensive game management systems in Spanish Mediterranean habitats.

Background: The role of wildlife as a brucellosis reservoir for humans and domestic livestock remains to be properly established. The aim of this work was to determine the aetiology, apparent prevalence, spatial distribution and risk factors for brucellosis transmission in several Iberian wild ungulates. Methods: A multi-species indirect immunosorbent assay (iELISA) using Brucella S-LPS antigen was developed. In several regions having brucellosis in livestock, individual serum samples were taken between 1999 and 2009 from 2,579 wild bovids, 6,448 wild cervids and4,454 Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa), and tested to assess brucellosis apparent prevalence. Strains isolated from wild boar were characterized to identify the presence of markers shared with the strains isolated from domestic pigs. Results: Mean apparent prevalence below 0.5% was identified in chamois (Rupicapra pyrenaica), Iberian wild goat (Capra pyrenaica), and red deer (Cervus elaphus). Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), fallow deer (Dama dama), mouflon (Ovis aries) and Barbary sheep (Ammotragus lervia) tested were seronegative. Only one red deer and one Iberian wild goat resulted positive in culture, isolating B. abortus biovar 1 and B. melitensis biovar 1, respectively. Apparent prevalence in wild boar ranged from 25% to 46% in the different regions studied, with the highest figures detected in South-Central Spain. The probability of wild boar being positive in the iELISA was also affected by age, age-by-sex interaction, sampling month, and the density of outdoor domestic pigs. A total of 104 bacterial isolates were obtained from wild boar, being all identified as B. suis biovar 2. DNA polymorphisms were similar to those found in domestic pigs. Conclusions: In conclusion, brucellosis in wild boar is widespread in the Iberian Peninsula, thus representing an important threat for domestic pigs. By contrast, wild ruminants were not identified as a significant brucellosis reservoir for livestock.

Population density estimations are essential for wildlife management and conservation. Camera traps have become a promising cost‐effective tool, for which several methods have been described to estimate population density when individuals are unrecognizable (i.e. unmarked populations). However, comparative tests of their applicability and performance are scarce. Here, we have compared three methods based on camera traps to estimate population density without individual recognition: Random Encounter Model (REM), Random Encounter and Staying Time (REST) and Distance Sampling with camera traps (CT‐DS). Comparisons were carried out in terms of consistency with one another, precision and cost‐effectiveness. We considered six natural populations with a wide range of densities, and three species with different behavioural traits (red deerCervus elaphus, wild boarSus scrofaand red foxVulpes vulpes). In three of these populations, we obtained independent density estimates as a reference. The densities estimated ranged from 0.23 individuals/km²(fox) to 34.87 individuals/km²(red deer). We did not find significant differences in terms of density values estimated by the three methods in five out of six populations, but REM has a tendency to generate higher average density values than REST and CT‐DS. Regarding the independents’ densities, REM results were not significantly different in any population, and REST and CT‐DS were significantly different in one population. The precision obtained was not significantly different between methods, with average coefficients of variation of 0.28 (REST), 0.36 (REM) and 0.42 (CT‐DS). The REST method required the lowest human effort. Synthesis and applications. Our results show that all of the methods examined can work well, with each having particular strengths and weaknesses. Broadly, Random Encounter and Staying Time (REST) could be recommended in scenarios of high abundance, Distance Sampling with camera traps (CT‐DS) in those of low abundance while Random Encounter Model (REM) can be recommended when camera trap performance is not optimal, as it can be applied with less risk of bias. This broadens the applicability of camera trapping for estimating densities of unmarked populations using information exclusively obtained from camera traps. This strengthens the case for scientifically based camera trapping as a cost‐effective method to provide reference estimates for wildlife managers, including within multi‐species monitoring programmes.