Socio-Economic Impact of Brucellosis in Cattle At Banadır Region, Somalia
Abstract views: 364 / PDF downloads: 131
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6759601Keywords:
Brucella, cattle, Mogadisho-SomaliaAbstract
Brucellosis is a highly contagious zoonotic and devastating disease that affects households‟ potential to improve their well-being through trade in livestock and livestock commodities. Despite the disease being endemic in Somalia, there is inadequate information, on its socio-economic impact. Therefore, a cross-sectional study was conducted in Banadir region, Somalia to determine the impact of brucellosis on socio-economic wellbeing of cattle farmers at household and livestock exporters. The specific objectives of the study were to investigate the Socio economic impact of Brucellosis at households; and to identify their impacts on livestock exporters. Structured questionnaires and key informant interviews were used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data in this research. The study population is comprised of households, livestock exporters, and the estimated target population was 40 people. Therefore the sample of the study was 36 respondents drawn from the estimated target population. The data are code and analyses by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) computer software Version 22.0. All costs and monetary losses were in households was due to abortions accounting for 32,400,000 Sh.SO equivalents to USD 1,350. Animals were exposed to. Losses due to discarded milk from infected herds at household level (3,360,000equivalent to USD 140). Similar results have been reported in Sudan by Angara et al. (2016) who estimated the quantity of milk lost due to brucellosis to be Sudanese Pounds (SDG) 30,302,212.2 (Equivalent to USD 6,587.4). This study has established that brucellosis is an important livestock production constraint that results in farmers losing a significant amount of income due to losses and costs attributed to the disease such as abortions, milk loss, and costs of vaccination, livestock mortality and trade barrier.
References
Alton, G.G. 1990. In: Nielsen K, Duncan JR, eds. Animal brucellosis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 379.
Alton Jones, A.R., Verger, J. 1988. Techniques for the Brucellosis laboratory. Institute National de la Recherche Agronomique.
Biancifiori, F. 1996. Compend Immunol Microbiol Infect Disease 19:17.
Blasco, J.M. 2006. Existing and future vaccines against brucellosis in small ruminants. Small Ruminant Research, 62(1): 33-37.
Blasco, J.M., Molina-Flores, B. 2011. Control and eradication of Brucella melitensis infection in sheep and goats. Veterinary Clinics: Food Animal Practice, 27(1): 95-104. Bricker, B.J. 2002. PCR as a diagnostic tool for brucellosis. Veterinary microbiology, 90(1-4): 435-446.
Bricker, B.J., Halling, S.M. 1994. Differentiation of Brucella abortus bv. 1, 2, and 4, Brucella melitensis, Brucella ovis, and Brucella suis bv. 1 by PCR. Journal of clinical microbiology, 32(11): 2660-2666.
Bricker, B.J., Ewalt, D.R., Olsen, S.C., Jensen, A.E. 2003. Evaluation of the Brucella abortus species–specific polymerase chain reaction assay, an improved version of the Brucella AMOS polymerase chain reaction assay for cattle. Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation, 15(4): 374-378.
Bshop, G.C., Busman, P.P., Herr, S.D. 1994. Brucellosis: In Cotzer, Thomson and Tustin (eds), Infectious disease of live stock. Oxford University Press. 2: 1053-1066.
Chukwu, C.C. 1987. Brucellosis in Africa; Part II: The prevalence of animal Brucellosis.
Clavareau, C., Wellemans, V., Walravens, K., Tryland, M., Verger, J.M., Grayon, M., Godfroid, J. 1998. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of a Brucella strain isolated from a minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Microbiology, 144(12): 3267-3273.
Cloeckaert, A., Verger, J.M., Grayon, M., Grepinet, O. 1995. Restriction site polymorphism of the genes encoding the major 25 kDa and 36 kDa outermembrane proteins of Brucella. Microbiology, 141(9): 2111-2121.
Diaz-Aparicio, E., Hernandez, L., Suárez-Güemes, F. 2004. Protection against brucellosis in goats, five years after vaccination with reduced-dose Brucella melitensis Rev 1 vaccine. Tropical animal health and production, 36(2): 117-121.
European Commission 2001. Brucella melitensis. Retrieved January 26, 2012 from http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scah/out59_en.pdf.
FAO 2003. Guidelines for coordinated human and animal brucellosis surveillance.FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 156, Rome, Italy. Pp. 1–45.
Funk, N.D., Tabatabai, L.B., Elzer, P.H., Hagius, S.D., Martin, B.M., Hoffman, L.J. 2005. Indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detection of Brucella melitensis-specific antibodies in goat milk. J. Cl. M. 43(2):721-735
Gupta, V.K., Verma, D.K., Rout, P.K., Singh, S.V., Vihan, V.S. 2006. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of Brucella melitensis in goat milk. Small Ruminant Research, 65: 79-84
Kuzdas, C.D., Morse, E.V. 1953. A selective medium for the isolation of brucellae from contaminated materials. J. Bacteriol. 66: 502-534.
McDermont, J.J., Arimi, S.M. 2002. Brucellosis in sub-Saharan Africa: epidemiology, control and impact. Vet Microbiol., 20: 111–134.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 MAS Journal of Applied Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.