**3.2 Prevalence rates**

276 Epidemiology Insights

(hunted) 96 BC <sup>51</sup>

(hunted) 175 BC 2000-2003 <sup>82</sup>

(hunted) 8.478 MI BC 1992-2004

(hunted) 34.582 MI BC 1997-2002

Diagnostic test

> GP BC (not all)

> GP BC (not all)

(culled) 124 BC 2006-2007 <sup>65</sup>

(culled) 214 BC 1998-2003 <sup>60</sup>

(hunted) 162 BC 2005-2007 <sup>18</sup>

(culled) 124 BC 2006-2007 <sup>62</sup>

(hunted) 132 GP BC 2008-2009 <sup>21</sup>

Table 1. Studies dealing with wild boar 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

Investigation of bTB epidemiology in wild boar and red deer (most often studied hosts) are mostly cross-sectional (11/14), the rest being surveys (Tables 1-2). Most studies opt for

(hunted) 343 MI BC 2002-2010 (63%) MX

Time frame & tendency

(hunted) 112 MI BC 112 FE 1 region

increasing

increasing

1999-2004

1999-2004 (18,2%-

Prevalence

333

625

(42,51%, mean estate rate)

(rate) Fencing Study

(53,1%) MX 7 area

(47%) MX 7 areas

(3,92%) MX 1 area W

(1,81%) MX 1 region

100%) FE 19 area

(52,4%) FR 1 area

(28,0%) FR 1 area

(50%) FR 1 area

(11,1%) FR

(15,9%) MX

areas

SW Spain

SW Spain

W Spain

Spain

W Spain

SW Spain

SW Spain

SW Spain

8 areas Southcentral Portugal

Several areas across Portugal

SW Spain

1 area Central Portugal

MX 57 areas SW Spain

Reference Type Sampling

(2004) SU Targeted

(2005) CS Scanning

*et al*. (2006) CS Scanning

(2006) CS Scanning

(2006a) CS Targeted

(2006b) CS Targeted

(2008) CS Targeted

(2008) SU Targeted

(2009) CS Targeted

(2011) SU Scanning

(2011a) CS Targeted

(2011) CS Targeted

and fenced populations.

**3.1 Characterization of published articles** 

Aranaz *et al*.

Acevedo-Whitehouse *et al.* (2005)

Parra *et al*.

de Mendoza

Parra *et al*.

Vicente *et al*.

Vicente *et al*.

Gortázar *et al*.

Romero *et al*.

Santos *et al*.

Cunha *et al*.

Gortázar *et al*.

Pinto *et al*.

strategy

(hunted) 1.060

(hunted) <sup>412</sup>

CS Targeted

Sample n

Screening test

> For the wild boar populations surveyed by targeted-design studies using bacteriological culture as diagnostic test on all animals (n=6), prevalence rates ranged 0,11-0,53, with a meta prevalence rate of 0,36 (Table 5). Including all studies, regardless of design, prevalence rates ranged 0,18-1 (Table 1). For the red deer populations surveyed by targeted-design studies using bacteriological culture as diagnostic test on all animals samples (n=3), prevalence rates ranged 0,02-0,27, with a meta prevalence rate of 0,21 (Table 5). Including all studies, regardless of design, prevalence rates ranged 0,01-0,44 (Table 2). For the fallow deer populations surveyed by targeted-design studies using bacteriological culture as diagnostic test on all animals samples (n=4), prevalence rates ranged 0,13-0,67, with a meta prevalence rate of 0,28 (Table 5). For other host species, the sample size and/or the study design do not allow meta analysis.
