France attained 'Officially Tuberculosis-Free' status in 2000. However, the Côte d'Or department (a French administrative unit) has since seen an increase in bovine tuberculosis (bTB) cases, with 35% of cases attributed to neighbourhood contamination. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of neighbourhood contacts in an area affected by bTB in 2010, through the use of social network methods. We carried out a survey to determine the frequency and distribution of between-herd contacts in an area containing 22 farms. Contacts were weighted, as not all types of contact carried the same risk of bTB transmission. Cattle movement was considered to be associated with the highest risk, but was not observed within the studied area during the study period. Contact with wild boars was the most frequent type of contact, but was associated with a very low risk. Direct cattle-to-cattle contacts in pasture and contacts with badger latrines were less frequent, but entailed a greater risk of M. bovis transmission. Centrality values were heterogeneous in these two networks. This would enable the disease to spread more rapidly at the start of epidemics than in a perfect randomly mixed population. However, this situation should also result in the total number of infected herds being smaller. We attributed 95% of the contacts to direct contact in pasture or contact with wild boars or badger latrines. Other kinds of contact occurred less frequently (equipment sharing, cattle straying) or did not occur at all (attendance at a show). Most of the contact types were correlated, but none was sufficient in itself to account for all contacts between one particular farm and its neighbours. Contacts with neighbours therefore represent a challenge for the implementation or improvement of control measures.
[1]
C. Saegerman,et al.
Classification of worldwide bovine tuberculosis risk factors in cattle: a stratified approach
,
2009,
Veterinary research.
[2]
R. Clifton-Hadley,et al.
Tuberculosis in badgers; a review of the disease and its significance for other animals.
,
2000,
Research in veterinary science.
[3]
S J Jay,et al.
Computers and clinical judgment: the role of physician networks.
,
1985,
Social science & medicine.
[4]
R. Christley,et al.
Infection in social networks: using network analysis to identify high-risk individuals.
,
2005,
American journal of epidemiology.
[5]
A. Klovdahl,et al.
Social networks and the spread of infectious diseases: the AIDS example.
,
1985,
Social science & medicine.
[6]
David Krackardt,et al.
QAP partialling as a test of spuriousness
,
1987
.
[7]
C. Webb,et al.
Farm animal networks: unraveling the contact structure of the British sheep population.
,
2005,
Preventive veterinary medicine.
[8]
Vladimir Batagelj,et al.
Pajek - Program for Large Network Analysis
,
1999
.
[9]
R. Christley,et al.
Direct and indirect contacts between cattle farms in north-west England.
,
2008,
Preventive veterinary medicine.
[10]
D. Young,et al.
Survival of Mycobacterium bovis in defined environmental conditions.
,
1985,
Veterinary microbiology.