{"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 , 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","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> < 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> <.001) and duck production (<em>p</em> = 0.001). External biosecurity levels were highest in breeders in comparison to turkeys (<em>p</em> < 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 , 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\",\"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> < 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> <.001) and duck production (<em>p</em> = 0.001). External biosecurity levels were highest in breeders in comparison to turkeys (<em>p</em> < 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}
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.
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.