开发和使用 Biocheck.UGent™ 评分系统,量化传统室内(火鸡、鸭、种鸡)和散养(蛋鸡和肉鸡)家禽养殖场的生物安全。

IF 2.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES Preventive veterinary medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-20 DOI:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106288
Arthi Amalraj , Hilde Van Meirhaeghe , Nele Caekebeke , Rhea Creve , Anne-Christine Dufay-Lefort , Nathalie Rousset , Annick Spaans , Aitor Devesa , Giuditta Tilli , Alessandra Piccirillo , Artur Żbikowski , László Kovács , Ilias Chantziaras , Jeroen Dewulf
{"title":"开发和使用 Biocheck.UGent™ 评分系统,量化传统室内(火鸡、鸭、种鸡)和散养(蛋鸡和肉鸡)家禽养殖场的生物安全。","authors":"Arthi Amalraj ,&nbsp;Hilde Van Meirhaeghe ,&nbsp;Nele Caekebeke ,&nbsp;Rhea Creve ,&nbsp;Anne-Christine Dufay-Lefort ,&nbsp;Nathalie Rousset ,&nbsp;Annick Spaans ,&nbsp;Aitor Devesa ,&nbsp;Giuditta Tilli ,&nbsp;Alessandra Piccirillo ,&nbsp;Artur Żbikowski ,&nbsp;László Kovács ,&nbsp;Ilias Chantziaras ,&nbsp;Jeroen Dewulf","doi":"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>To assess and enhance the application of biosecurity measures in poultry farming, an objective measurement tool (Biocheck.UGent™) was already available for broiler and layer. This study describes the development, validation and application of a risk-based weighted scoring tool for breeder, turkey, duck, free-range layer and free-range broiler production. In collaboration with an expert panel (n= 38), five different questionnaires were developed, following the format of the existing Biocheck.UGent scoring tools. Weights were attributed to external (7–9 subcategories) and internal (3–4 subcategories) biosecurity categories, as well as to the corresponding individual questions within each subcategory. The biosecurity measures were prioritized and weighed based on their relative importance in preventing disease transmission. Upon completion of the questionnaire, and upload of all answers to the Biocheck.UGent website, the algorithm generates a biosecurity score varying between ‘’0’’ which equals the total absence of any biosecurity measure up to ‘’100’’ which refers to full application of all biosecurity measures. The final scoring systems are available online (<span><span>https://biocheckgent.com/en</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) for free and have been used to assess biosecurity in 70 breeders, 100 turkeys, 23 ducks, 16 free-range broilers, and 15 free-range layer farms originating from 12 countries so far. On average, the overall biosecurity score (mean ± std. dev) was 78 ± 7 % for breeders, 73 ± 11 % for turkeys, 71 ± 8 % for ducks, 73 ± 8 % for free-range layers and 70 ± 13 % for free-range broilers. There were significant differences (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) in biosecurity (both at the overall and subcategory levels) across different poultry types. The overall farm biosecurity score for breeders was significantly higher than that for turkey (<em>p</em> &lt;.001) and duck production (<em>p</em> = 0.001). External biosecurity levels were highest in breeders in comparison to turkeys (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), ducks (<em>p</em> = 0.008) and broiler free-range (<em>p</em> = 0.005). There was a notable difference in internal biosecurity levels between duck and turkey (<em>p</em> = 0.041) production as well. The study contributed to the poultry biosecurity database which allows benchmarking of the biosecurity levels of the users’ farm results to national or international averages, indicating room for improvement and aiding to motivate stakeholders to enhance their biosecurity levels.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20413,"journal":{"name":"Preventive veterinary medicine","volume":"230 ","pages":"Article 106288"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and use of Biocheck.UGent™ scoring system to quantify biosecurity in conventional indoor (turkey, duck, breeder) and free-range (layer and broiler) poultry farms\",\"authors\":\"Arthi Amalraj ,&nbsp;Hilde Van Meirhaeghe ,&nbsp;Nele Caekebeke ,&nbsp;Rhea Creve ,&nbsp;Anne-Christine Dufay-Lefort ,&nbsp;Nathalie Rousset ,&nbsp;Annick Spaans ,&nbsp;Aitor Devesa ,&nbsp;Giuditta Tilli ,&nbsp;Alessandra Piccirillo ,&nbsp;Artur Żbikowski ,&nbsp;László Kovács ,&nbsp;Ilias Chantziaras ,&nbsp;Jeroen Dewulf\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106288\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>To assess and enhance the application of biosecurity measures in poultry farming, an objective measurement tool (Biocheck.UGent™) was already available for broiler and layer. This study describes the development, validation and application of a risk-based weighted scoring tool for breeder, turkey, duck, free-range layer and free-range broiler production. In collaboration with an expert panel (n= 38), five different questionnaires were developed, following the format of the existing Biocheck.UGent scoring tools. Weights were attributed to external (7–9 subcategories) and internal (3–4 subcategories) biosecurity categories, as well as to the corresponding individual questions within each subcategory. The biosecurity measures were prioritized and weighed based on their relative importance in preventing disease transmission. Upon completion of the questionnaire, and upload of all answers to the Biocheck.UGent website, the algorithm generates a biosecurity score varying between ‘’0’’ which equals the total absence of any biosecurity measure up to ‘’100’’ which refers to full application of all biosecurity measures. The final scoring systems are available online (<span><span>https://biocheckgent.com/en</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) for free and have been used to assess biosecurity in 70 breeders, 100 turkeys, 23 ducks, 16 free-range broilers, and 15 free-range layer farms originating from 12 countries so far. On average, the overall biosecurity score (mean ± std. dev) was 78 ± 7 % for breeders, 73 ± 11 % for turkeys, 71 ± 8 % for ducks, 73 ± 8 % for free-range layers and 70 ± 13 % for free-range broilers. There were significant differences (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) in biosecurity (both at the overall and subcategory levels) across different poultry types. The overall farm biosecurity score for breeders was significantly higher than that for turkey (<em>p</em> &lt;.001) and duck production (<em>p</em> = 0.001). External biosecurity levels were highest in breeders in comparison to turkeys (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), ducks (<em>p</em> = 0.008) and broiler free-range (<em>p</em> = 0.005). There was a notable difference in internal biosecurity levels between duck and turkey (<em>p</em> = 0.041) production as well. The study contributed to the poultry biosecurity database which allows benchmarking of the biosecurity levels of the users’ farm results to national or international averages, indicating room for improvement and aiding to motivate stakeholders to enhance their biosecurity levels.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20413,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Preventive veterinary medicine\",\"volume\":\"230 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106288\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Preventive veterinary medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587724001740\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Preventive veterinary medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587724001740","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了评估和加强家禽饲养中生物安全措施的应用,已经有一种用于肉鸡和蛋鸡的客观测量工具(Biocheck.UGent™)。本研究介绍了针对种鸡、火鸡、鸭、散养蛋鸡和散养肉鸡生产的基于风险的加权评分工具的开发、验证和应用。与专家小组(38 人)合作,按照现有 Biocheck.UGent 评分工具的格式,开发了五种不同的问卷。外部(7-9 个子类别)和内部(3-4 个子类别)生物安全类别以及每个子类别中相应的单个问题都被赋予了权重。根据生物安全措施在预防疾病传播方面的相对重要性,对其进行了优先排序和权衡。完成问卷调查并将所有答案上传到 Biocheck.UGent 网站后,算法会生成一个生物安全得分,得分介于 "0 "和 "100 "之间,"0 "表示完全没有采取任何生物安全措施,"100 "表示完全采取了所有生物安全措施。最终评分系统可在网上(https://biocheckgent.com/en)免费查阅,迄今已用于评估来自 12 个国家的 70 个种鸡场、100 个火鸡场、23 个鸭场、16 个散养肉鸡场和 15 个散养蛋鸡场的生物安全状况。平均而言,种鸡的总体生物安全得分(平均值 ± 标准差)为 78 ± 7%,火鸡为 73 ± 11%,鸭为 71 ± 8%,散养蛋鸡为 73 ± 8%,散养肉鸡为 70 ± 13%。不同类型家禽的生物安全(总体和子类水平)存在明显差异(p < 0.05)。种鸡的总体农场生物安全得分明显高于火鸡(P<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Development and use of Biocheck.UGent™ scoring system to quantify biosecurity in conventional indoor (turkey, duck, breeder) and free-range (layer and broiler) poultry farms

To assess and enhance the application of biosecurity measures in poultry farming, an objective measurement tool (Biocheck.UGent™) was already available for broiler and layer. This study describes the development, validation and application of a risk-based weighted scoring tool for breeder, turkey, duck, free-range layer and free-range broiler production. In collaboration with an expert panel (n= 38), five different questionnaires were developed, following the format of the existing Biocheck.UGent scoring tools. Weights were attributed to external (7–9 subcategories) and internal (3–4 subcategories) biosecurity categories, as well as to the corresponding individual questions within each subcategory. The biosecurity measures were prioritized and weighed based on their relative importance in preventing disease transmission. Upon completion of the questionnaire, and upload of all answers to the Biocheck.UGent website, the algorithm generates a biosecurity score varying between ‘’0’’ which equals the total absence of any biosecurity measure up to ‘’100’’ which refers to full application of all biosecurity measures. The final scoring systems are available online (https://biocheckgent.com/en) for free and have been used to assess biosecurity in 70 breeders, 100 turkeys, 23 ducks, 16 free-range broilers, and 15 free-range layer farms originating from 12 countries so far. On average, the overall biosecurity score (mean ± std. dev) was 78 ± 7 % for breeders, 73 ± 11 % for turkeys, 71 ± 8 % for ducks, 73 ± 8 % for free-range layers and 70 ± 13 % for free-range broilers. There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in biosecurity (both at the overall and subcategory levels) across different poultry types. The overall farm biosecurity score for breeders was significantly higher than that for turkey (p <.001) and duck production (p = 0.001). External biosecurity levels were highest in breeders in comparison to turkeys (p < 0.001), ducks (p = 0.008) and broiler free-range (p = 0.005). There was a notable difference in internal biosecurity levels between duck and turkey (p = 0.041) production as well. The study contributed to the poultry biosecurity database which allows benchmarking of the biosecurity levels of the users’ farm results to national or international averages, indicating room for improvement and aiding to motivate stakeholders to enhance their biosecurity levels.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Preventive veterinary medicine
Preventive veterinary medicine 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
184
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Preventive Veterinary Medicine is one of the leading international resources for scientific reports on animal health programs and preventive veterinary medicine. The journal follows the guidelines for standardizing and strengthening the reporting of biomedical research which are available from the CONSORT, MOOSE, PRISMA, REFLECT, STARD, and STROBE statements. The journal focuses on: Epidemiology of health events relevant to domestic and wild animals; Economic impacts of epidemic and endemic animal and zoonotic diseases; Latest methods and approaches in veterinary epidemiology; Disease and infection control or eradication measures; The "One Health" concept and the relationships between veterinary medicine, human health, animal-production systems, and the environment; Development of new techniques in surveillance systems and diagnosis; Evaluation and control of diseases in animal populations.
期刊最新文献
The global prevalence of microsporidia infection in rabbits as a neglected public health concern: A systematic review and meta-analysis Operational lessons learned from simulating an elimination response to a transboundary animal disease in wild animals. Economic assessment of animal disease burden in Senegalese small ruminants Editorial Board Causes of abortion in Iranian goat herds and associated risk factors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1