**3.3 Trends**

Few studies address or allow addressing the time trend of bTB prevalence rates. In Doñana, bTB was not detected in targeted wildlife health surveillance until 1990's, when the population of cattle greatly increased, while in 2000's high prevalence rates were found in all ungulate species (Gortázar *et al*., 2008). In fact, prevalence rates in this area increased from 1998-2003 to 2006-2007 by 100% in wild boar and 50% in red deer (Gortázar *et al*., 2011b). In Extremadura region, West-central Spain, prevalence rates detected in routine meat inspection schemes steadily raised from 1994-2004, while not detected in 1992-1993 (de Mendonza *et al*., 2006). One study area in South-eastern Portugal showed an increase in *M. bovis* infection rates in wild boar from 0,46 in 2005/06 (Santos *et al*., 2009) to 0,78 in 2009/11 (Santos *et al*., unpublished data).

Wildlife Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review of the Epidemiology in Iberian Peninsula 279

(2000) CR 1 Iberian lynx BC 1 FR 1 - SW

(2001) CR 1 Iberian lynx BC 1 FR 1 - SW

(carcasses) 4 Iberian lynx 3 Iberian lynx

Diagnostic test

BC

SE (ELISA MPB70)

Spain Scanning

Time frame

2007

2004- 2006

2007

BC 2006- 2010

BC 1998- 2003

Spain Scanning

10 Iberian lynx 4 (40%) 5 red fox 2 (40%)

> SE (icELISA MPB70)

BC PCR SE (cELISA MPB70)

Prevalence

60 fallow deer

5 red fox (4%) 1 Iberian lynx (3%) 7 badger (23%)

18

17 (12,7%)

SE: 1 red fox 1 mongoose 2 badger BC: 2 red fox 2 Iberian lynx

IHC 1 FR 1 area N

21

8 found dead (6,6%) 0 trapped

(21%) FR

(18,5%) FR

1999 (50%) FR 1 area

BC 1 red fox FR

(67,4%) MX

(rate) Fencing Study

FR

FR

FR

FR

areas

Spain

Spain

2 area SW

1 area SW Spain

1 area SW Spain

1 area SW Spain

1 area SW Spain

1 area SW

1 area SW Spain

SE Spain

2 area SW Spain

Spain

1 area SW Spain

Several areas across Spain

Sample n

7 red fox 2 mongoose 2 genets 1 Iberian lynx 4 mustelids

118 red fox 5 mongoose 4 genets 39 Iberian lynx 32 mustelids

(culled) 97 fallow deer BC 2006-

(2008) CR 1 red fox BC 1 FR

(2008) CR 1 badger BC 1 FR

Reference Type Sampling

(2005) SU Scanning

(2006) SU Targeted

(2008) CS Targeted

(2009) CS Targeted

(2011a) CS Targeted

and fenced populations.

Briones *et al*.

Pérez *et al*.

Aranaz *et al*. (2004) SU

Atance *et al*.

Atance *et al*.

Gortázar *et al*.

Millán *et al*.

Romero *et al*. (2008) SU

Sobrino *et al*.

Candela *et al*.

Millán *et al*. (2009) SU

Balseiro *et al*.

Gortázar *et al*.

Balseiro *et al*. (2011) SU strategy

Targeted

(carcasses)

(trapped)

Targeted

(carcasses)

Targeted (trapped) Scanning (carcasses)

Targeted (trapped) Passive (carcasses)

(culled) 134 fallow deer

(hunted) 61 Barbary sheep

(2009) CR 1 roe deer PCR

26 Iberian lynx 33 red fox 24 mongoose 10 gennet 2 badger

157 badger (121 found dead, 36 trapped)

(culled) 100 fallow deer BC 2006-

Table 3. Studies dealing with other host species included in the analysis. Classification: SU – survey; CS - cross sectional study; CC – case-control study; Screening/diagnostic test: MI – official meat inspection scheme; GP – gross pathology; BC – bacteriological culture; SE – serology; IHC – immunohistochemistry; ELISA - enzyme-linked immune serum assay; Fencing: FR – free-ranging populations; FE – fenced populations; MX – mixed free-ranging

(hunted) 89 fallow deer


Table 2. Studies dealing with red deer included in the analysis. Classification: SU – survey; CS - cross sectional study; CC – case-control study; Screening/diagnostic test: MI – official meat inspection scheme; GP – gross pathology; BC – bacteriological culture; SE – serology; Fencing: FR – free-ranging populations; FE – fenced populations; MX – mixed free-ranging and fenced populations.

Diagnostic test

> GP BC (not all)

> GP BC (not all)

(culled) 95 BC 2006-2007 <sup>26</sup>

(culled) 168 BC 1998-2003 <sup>26</sup>

(hunted) 551 MI BC 2007-2009 <sup>28</sup>

(culled) 95 BC 2006-2007 <sup>24</sup>

(hunted) 339 GP BC 2008-2009 <sup>35</sup>

Table 2. Studies dealing with red deer included in the analysis. Classification: SU – survey; CS - cross sectional study; CC – case-control study; Screening/diagnostic test: MI – official meat inspection scheme; GP – gross pathology; BC – bacteriological culture; SE – serology; Fencing: FR – free-ranging populations; FE – fenced populations; MX – mixed free-ranging

(hunted) 59 MI BC 59 FE 1 region

Time frame & tendency

increasing

increasing

MI BC 2002-2010 (51%) MX

1999-2004 (13,71%

Prevalence

394

591

1999-2004 (0-44,0%) FE 19 areas

(25,3%) FR

(10,3%) MX

(rate) Fencing Study

(24,1%) MX 5 areas

(1,09%) MX 1 area W

(1,18%) MX 1 region

mean rate) MX 21 areas

(27,4%) FR 1 area SW

(15,5%) FR 1 area SW

(5,1%) MX 2 areas

areas

SW Spain

W Spain

Spain

W Spain

SW Spain

SW Spain

Spain

Spain

SW Spain

Several areas across Portugal

1 study area SW Spain

1 area Central Portugal

Reference Type Sampling

*al*. (2004) SU Targeted

(2005) CS Scanning

(2006) CS Scanning

*al*. (2006a) CS Targeted

*al*. (2006b) CS Targeted

*al*. (2008) CS Targeted

*al*. (2008) SU Targeted

*al*. (2010) CS Scanning

*al*. (2011a) CS Targeted

and fenced populations.

SU Scanning (hunted)

CS Targeted

CS Scanning

(hunted) 1.368

(hunted) <sup>574</sup>

544 samples with lesion

Aranaz *et* 

Parra *et al*.

de Mendoza *et al*. (2006)

Parra *et al*.

Vicente *et* 

Vicente *et* 

Gortázar *et*

Romero *et* 

Castillo *et* 

Cunha *et al*. (2011)

Gortázar *et*

Pinto *et al*. (2011)

strategy

Sample n

Screening test

(hunted) 36.144 MI BC 1992-2004

(hunted) 50.009 MI BC 1997-2002

(hunted) 108 BC <sup>26</sup>


Table 3. Studies dealing with other host species included in the analysis. Classification: SU – survey; CS - cross sectional study; CC – case-control study; Screening/diagnostic test: MI – official meat inspection scheme; GP – gross pathology; BC – bacteriological culture; SE – serology; IHC – immunohistochemistry; ELISA - enzyme-linked immune serum assay; Fencing: FR – free-ranging populations; FE – fenced populations; MX – mixed free-ranging and fenced populations.

Wildlife Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review of the Epidemiology in Iberian Peninsula 281

Several risk and protective factors for bTB in both wild boar and red deer have been identified (Table 4). Most of the identified risk factors relate to host and other sympatric host's population factors, but also to environmental, management and historical factors. On the other hand, protective factors are mainly associated with environmental variables (Table 4). Notably, only one study has identified fencing, feeding and watering of wild ungulate

Determinants of disease Wild boar Red deer

bTB prevalence rate in sympatric wild boar Wild boar abundance

Red deer abundance bTb prevalence rate in sympatric red deer

Distance to historical

Distance to freshwater Sparse forestry land cover Genetic variability

Table 4. Determinant factors of bTB occurrence identified in wild boar and red deer

Wild boar and red deer are usually considered maintenance hosts in Iberian Peninsula and epidemiological evidence has been gathered to support this view (Table 5) based on the

Reproductive season

bTB prevalence rate in sympatric

bTb prevalence rate in sympatric

Aggregation of wild boar at watering and feeding sites

Supplementary feeding Presence water ponds Presence of livestock

Past cattle density

Distance to freshwater

Age Sex

red deer

wild boar

Fencing

Host population Reproductive season Age Sex

Other hosts Red deer presence

Historical Past cattle density

All Shrub land cover

epidemiological studies in the Iberian Peninsula.

**3.5 Host epidemiological status** 

refuges

Environmental Agro forestry land cover Management Aggregation at watering sites

**3.4 Determinant factors of disease** 

Type of risk

factor

populations as risk factors.

Risk factors

Protective factors

Fig. 1. Map displaying reported prevalence rates for bTB in the wild boar by administrative divisions of Iberian Peninsula (provinces in Spain, districts in Portugal). Bacteriological culture data (Aranaz *et al*., 2004; de Mendoza *et al*., 2006; Vicente *et al*., 2006a; Gortázar *et al*., 2008; Santos *et al*., 2009; Pinto *et al*., 2011) and serology data (Boadella *et al*., 2011; Santos *et al*., unpublished data) combined. The highest recorded prevalence for each administrative division is shown.

Again, few published articles address or allow addressing the geographical trend in bTB prevalence rates. In South-central Spain, an area roughly corresponding to Sierra Morena and Montes de Toledo was shown to have high prevalence rates, which declined towards the periphery of the area (Vicente *et al*., 2006a). In Doñana, wild boar and red deer show an increasing South-North gradient in prevalence rates (Gortázar *et al*., 2008). In Portugal, bTB was not detected in western regions, while present in the eastern portion of the country (Santos *et al*., 2009). Also in Eastern-central Portugal, wild boar and red deer populations show an increasing North-South gradient in prevalence rates (Pinto *et al*., 2011). In Southcentral Spain, lack of geographical autocorrelation in prevalence rates was reported (Vicente *et al*., 2006b).
