Assessment of the impact of zoonotic infections (bovine

DFID

ANIMAL HEALTH PROGRAMME

Assessment of the impact of zoonotic infections

(bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis) in selected regions of

The Gambia, Senegal, Guinea, and Guinea Bissau - A Scoping study -

Fred Unger and Susanne Münstermann

International Trypanotolerance Centre

Banjul, The Gambia, May 2004

1

List of acronyms and abbreviations

BTB Bovine Tuberculosis

B. abortus Brucella abortus

BQ Black quarter

C. bovis Cysticercus bovis

CIDT Comparative Intradermal Tuberculin Test

Cl. botulinum Clostridia botulinum

CRD Central River Division

DVO District Veterinary Officer

FMD Food and mouth disease

GB Guinea Bissau

GBA Greater Banjul Area

H.S. Haemorrhagic septicaemia

ILRI International Trypanotolerance Centre

LIPS Low input production system

MOPS Market orientated production system

M. bovis Mycobacterium bovis

PH Public health

p.m. post mortem

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

PPR Pest de Petite Ruminants

PROCORDEL Program Concerté recherche-développement sur l’élevage en

Afrique de l’Ouest

SR Small ruminants

SSA Sub-Saharan Africa

TB Tuberculosis

VH Veterinary health

WA Weighted average

WAS West African shorthorn

2

List of contents

SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................6

1. BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................11

2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY.......................................................................................13

3 PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS IN THE STUDY AREA................................................................................................13

3.1 Some country characteristics...................................................................................................16 3.1.1 The Gambia ..................................................................................................................... 16 3.1.2 Guinea Bissau.................................................................................................................. 17 3.1.3 Guinea ............................................................................................................................. 18 3.1.4 Senegal ............................................................................................................................ 19

4. MATERIALS AND METHODS...................................................................................21

4.1 Study period..............................................................................................................................21

4.2 Study area .................................................................................................................................21

4.3 Survey based on Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)........................................................24 4.3.1 Team members for PRA sessions..................................................................................... 25 4.3.2 Disease ranking ............................................................................................................... 25

4.4 Survey based on semi-structured questionnaire....................................................................26

4.5 Survey based on serological sampling for brucellosis ...........................................................26

4.6. Data analysis .............................................................................................................................26

5 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................27

5.1 Study population.......................................................................................................................27

5.2 Farmers’ perceptions of animal diseases................................................................................29 5.2.1 Disease importance ranking ............................................................................................ 29

5.2.1.1 Results presented by country ..........................................................................................29 5.2.1.2 Results presented by production system.........................................................................31

5.2.2 Chronic diseases.............................................................................................................. 33 5.2.2.1 Chronic diseases in cattle................................................................................................33 5.2.2.2 Chronic diseases in small ruminants...............................................................................35

5.3 Farmers perception on zoonoses .............................................................................................36 5.3.1 Questionnaire results for zoonoses.................................................................................. 36

5.3.1.1 Results by country ..........................................................................................................36 5.3.1.2 Results by production system .........................................................................................40

5.3.2 Group discussion results for zoonoses ............................................................................ 41

5.4 Specific observations on brucellosis ........................................................................................43 5.4.1 Symptoms of brucellosis ................................................................................................. 43

5.4.1.1 Results by country for cattle ...........................................................................................43 5.4.1.2 Results by country for small ruminants ..........................................................................44

3

5.4.1.3 Results by production system .........................................................................................45 5.4.2 Handling of aborted foetus .............................................................................................. 46

5.4.2.1 Results by country ..........................................................................................................46 5.4.2.2 Results by production system ........................................................................................47

5.4.3 Handling of milk from cows with previous history of abortion or observed hygromas .. 47 5.4.3.1 Results by country ..........................................................................................................47 5.4.3.2 Results by production system .........................................................................................48

5.5 Attitudes to the importance of quality of livestock products................................................49 5.5.1 Observations on meat quality related to animal diseases ............................................... 49 5.5.2 Observations on milk related to animal diseases ............................................................ 51 5.5.3 Handling of milk produced on farms ............................................................................... 53

5.6 Observations on zoonoses by other groups involved.............................................................55 5.6.1 Butchers ........................................................................................................................... 55

5.6.1.1 Butchers’ knowledge of zoonoses ..................................................................................56 5.6.1.2 Zoonotic diseases observed during the last 12 months...................................................57 5.6.1.3 Knowledge of animal diseases which can influence meat quality..................................57 5.6.1.4 Health status of butchers.................................................................................................58

5.6.2 Veterinary health authorities............................................................................................ 59 5.6.2.1 Observations on zoonotic infections in animals .............................................................60 5.6.2.2 Animal diseases observed during the last year ...............................................................60

5.6.3 Public health sector ......................................................................................................... 62 5.6.3.1 Observations of zoonotic infections during the last three years ....................................64 5.6.3.2 Diagnostic capacity of local health centres and hospitals with respect to brucellosis-like

infections and tuberculosis .............................................................................................64 5.6.3.3 Specific knowledge of brucellosis .................................................................................66

5.7 Potential direct and indirect losses due to brucellosis ...........................................................67 5.7.1 General herd parameters................................................................................................. 67 5.7.2 Direct and indirect losses due to brucellosis (abortions and cow sterility) .................... 69

5.8 Serological sampling for brucellosis .......................................................................................70 5.8.1 B. abortus in herd bulk milk samples .............................................................................. 70 5.8.2 B. abortus in man (volunteers) ........................................................................................ 71

5.9 Differences in local perceptions of the impact of zoonoses on livestock and man in relation to present and previous serological findings in cattle .............................................71

5.9.1 Brucellosis ....................................................................................................................... 71 5.9.2 Tuberculosis .................................................................................................................... 74

6 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................75

7 CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................81

8 RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................................................................82

8.1 Recommendations for the control of Bovine Brucellosis in the countries of this survey.........................................................................................................................................82

8.1.1 Guinea ............................................................................................................................. 82 8.1.2 Guinea Bissau.................................................................................................................. 83 8.1.3 Gambia and Senegal........................................................................................................ 84

8.2 Recommendations for future research ...................................................................................85

9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.............................................................................................86

4

10 REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................88

11 ANNEX .......................................................................................................................94

11.1 Results of this survey...............................................................................................................94 11.1.1 Annex 1a: Guidelines for PRA sessions.......................................................................... 94 11.1.2 Annex 1b: Tables 1 - 2 and Graphs 1 - 8 ........................................................................ 96

11.2 Results of previous ITC studies on bovine brucellosis and BTB........................................102

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Number of questionnaires administered per region and involved group............................28 Table 2: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in terms of importance by

country................................................................................................................................30 Table 3: Top-five diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in terms of importance

by country...........................................................................................................................31 Table 4: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in The Gambia in terms of

importance by production system.......................................................................................32 Table 5: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in Senegal in terms of

importance by production system.......................................................................................32 Table 6: Reports by farmers during group discussions of chronic (long lasting) diseases in cattle .34 Table 7: Consumption patterns (on farm) for meat and milk from chronic sick cattle related to

production system...............................................................................................................35 Table 8: Proportion of farmers by country with knowledge of unpecified zoonotic diseases..........36 Table 9: Numbers of farmers identifying diseases with perceived zoonotic character (first

mentioned disease)..............................................................................................................37 Table 10: Farmers´ ranking of the importance of four given zoonoses by country........................38 Table 11a: Specific knowledge of rabies and clinical observations in animals during the last three

years by country (% of farmers) .....................................................................................38 Table 11b: Specific knowledge of anthrax and clinical observations in animals during the last three

years by country (% of farmers) .....................................................................................39 Table 11c: Specific knowledge of BTB and clinical observations in animals during the last three

years by country (% of farmers) .....................................................................................39 Table 11d: Specific knowledge of bovine brucellosis and clinical observations in animals during

the last three years by country (% of farmers)................................................................40 Table 12: Clinical signs potentially indicative of brucellosis infection observed by farmers in

their cattle (proportion of farmers by country) ...............................................................44 Table 13: Clinical signs potentially indicative of brucellosis infection observed by farmers in

their small ruminants (proportion of farmers by country) .............................................45 Table 14: Abortions observed by farmers in their cattle or small ruminants (proportion of farmers

by production system and country).................................................................................45 Table 15: Ways of handling aborted foetuses by country (proportion of farmers interviewed).....46 Table 16: Ways of handling aborted foetuses by production system and country (proportion of

farmers interviewed).......................................................................................................47 Table 17 : Farmers ways of dealing with milk from cows with a history of abortion or observed

hygroma by country (proportion of farmers)..................................................................48 Table 18: Farmers ways of dealing with milk from cows with a history of abortion or observed

hygroma by production system and country (proportion of farmers).............................48 Table 19: Processing of milk produced on-farm presented by country (% of farmers)..................53 Table 20: Processing of milk produced on-farm presented by production system and country

(% of farmers).................................................................................................................54 Table 21: General information on aspects related to slaughter and sale of cattle and small

ruminants (number per butcher per week)......................................................................55 Table 22: Proportion of butchers with knowledge of unspecified zoonotic diseases by country ...56

5

Table 23: List of suspected diseases with zoonotic importance observed by individual butchers during slaughter (last 12 months) ...................................................................................57

Table 24: Butchers’ knowledge of symptoms and associated diseases which can influence meat quality .............................................................................................................................58

Table 25: Observations on health status of butchers ......................................................................59 Table 26: Information on the interviewed VH respondents............................................................59 Table 27: Zoonotic infection in animals and humans reported by VH respondents in the study

districts during the last 3 years .......................................................................................60 Table 28: Diseases or symptoms in cattle ranked by DVOs according to their importance over the

last 12 months by country...............................................................................................61 Table 29: Diseases or symptoms in SR ranked by DVOs according to their importance over the

last 12 months by country...............................................................................................61 Table 30: Numbers of interviewed public health facilities in the study districts by country..........62 Table 31: Exchange of information between PH and VH authorities.............................................63 Table 32: Reports of zoonoses in humans over the last three years in the health centres and

hospitals visited ..............................................................................................................64 Table 33: Selected information on diagnostic procedures and prevalences related to flu-like

infections and TB among patients that visited the health centre of this survey during the last year by country...................................................................................................65

Table 34: Knowledge of brucellosis symptoms in man and diagnostic procedures (number of hospitals or health centres by country) ...........................................................................66

Table 35: Mean herd sizes and proportion of bulls, cows, heifers and calves based on questionnaires by country...............................................................................................67

Table 36: Cattle breeds in the study population (number of farms) ...............................................68 Table 37: Selected herd fertility parameters ...................................................................................69 Table 38: Serological results for B. abortus for herd bulk milk samples .......................................70 Table 39: Respondents’ perceptions of brucellosis and serological findings by country ...............72 Table 40: Respondents’ perceptions of BTB and serological findings by country.........................74

6

Summary Introduction

In order to evaluate the direct and indirect impact of brucellosis and bovine

tuberculosis and other zoonoses on livestock and human health a scoping study was

commissioned by DFID to ITC. The study was carried out in selected areas of The

Gambia, Senegal, Guinea Bissau and Guinea Conakry during the period of March to

August 2003. This survey expands on work already done at ITC investigating the

distribution and prevalence of both diseases in different locations in all four

countries, which focussed primarily on updating the limited existing information on

the animal health aspects related to these diseases in the four countries.

Materials and methods

The study was carried out in form of a Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). The

PRA took place in 2 districts of The Gambia (Central River Division south, CRD and

Greater Banjul Area, GBA), Senegal (Kaolack and Fatick), Guinea (Dubréka and

Coyah) and in one district (Bafata) of Guinea Bissau. In each district three (GBA) up

to four (all other) half-day PRA sessions in different, randomly selected locations

were carried out. For each PRA session 10-24 respondents (on average 14) were

selected consisting of farmers, herdsmen and milk vendors from one and up to 4

surrounding villages. The study population consisted in the Gambia of 115, in

Senegal of 116, in Guinea of 100 and in Guinea Bissau of 58 respondents. Overall,

73% of the respondents were males and 27% females. The respondents were

composed of 47% farmers, 26% herders and 27% milk vendors. The PRA team was

composed of one national expert and two enumerators. One ITC scientist and a local

veterinary officer joined the sessions as observers.

Besides gaining information during the PRA, a semi-structured questionnaire was

applied in each district to farmers (n= 20), the Veterinary health authorities, local

butchers/meat inspectors (up to five) and Public health authorities. Key issues such as

observations on diseases transmissible to humans, observations after slaughter or at

post mortem inspection and awareness of diseases that affect the quantity and quality

of milk and meat were considered in these questionnaires.

7

To find correlations with results of already completed prevalence studies on

brucellosis, bulk milk samples from each village/farm participating in the study were

collected and tested for B. abortus. In addition serological sampling in man (farmers,

veterinarians and herders) was carried out in Dubréka, a district known to have a

high prevalence for brucellosis.

Results

• Results for disease ranking

Results from disease ranking for cattle differed between the countries, with high

ranks for Haemorrhagic Septicaemia (H.S.) and the “diarrhoea complex” in all four

countries. Reports on infections with zoonotic character varied widely between the

four countries. Anthrax was number two in Guinea. Clinical hygromas (indicating

brucellosis) were only mentioned by farmers in Guinea Bissau and Guinea and given

rank number five.. In small ruminants PPR was the highest ranked disease in three of

the four countries. In The Gambia, where unspecific diarrhoea and Pasteurellosis

were ranked higher, PPR was number three among the “top five”. Anthrax was only

among the top-five list in Guinea Bissau.

• Observations on chronic diseases

With regional variations brucellosis (only reported for Guinea and Guinea Bissau)

and trypanosomosis were the most frequently observed chronic diseases in cattle.

Chronic specific diseases in SR (n= 9) were less frequently reported than in cattle

(35). Mange (n= 3) was recorded most often.

• Farmers perceptions on zoonoses

Farmers’ knowledge of zoonoses differed between the countries but was not related

to the production system. Among four given zoonoses (rabies, anthrax, BTB and

brucellosis) rabies was ranked highest by farmers in Guinea, Guinea Bissau and

Senegal, followed by brucellosis in Guinea Bissau, Guinea and Senegal. The highest

level of knowledge based on interviews and group discussions can be attested to

farmers from Guinea Bissau. This includes the knowledge of symptoms and, with the

exception of anthrax, also the transmission route and how to prevent transmission.

Clinical cases of anthrax and brucellosis in cattle were more frequently reported by

farmers in Guinea Bissau than in the other three countries. In addition, brucellosis

was more often observed by farmers in Guinea than in Senegal and The Gambia,

8

where infections were not common. Results from group discussions on zoonoses

showed that in particular the knowledge of the public health importance of anthrax

was poor. The majority of participants in The Gambia, Senegal and Guinea indicated

that meat from such animals is consumed after proper cooking or application of

traditional treatment. Results of group discussions in Guinea indicate that cattle with

hygroma are often not considered to be sick and milk is consumed without heat

treatment.

• Observations related to abortions

The number of reported cases of abortions and hygromas in cattle were significantly

higher in Guinea and Guinea Bissau. Abortions in SR were not influenced by country

or production systems. The ways of handling of aborted foetuses and of milk from

cows with abortion history or observed hygroma differed also between countries but

not between production systems.

• Observations related to meat and milk quality

The main indicators for reduced meat quality mentioned by farmers in all four

countries were bad smell, pale colour and higher water content. The handling of such

meat and specific knowledge of the causing agent varies widely between the

countries. Highest level of knowledge was found in Guinea Bissau followed by

Guinea. Conversely, knowledge in The Gambia and Senegal was very limited.

Accordingly meat of bad quality was also handled differently, i.e. usually consumed

in Senegal and The Gambia while often discarded by farmers in Guinea Bissau.

• Observations related to milk quality and processing

During all group discussions it was agreed, that milk is a good source of energy and

healthy but certain animal diseases can affect the quality of the product and may even

transmit diseases to man. Changes in milk quality were generally characterized by

higher water content, clotting and faster fermentation. Milk of reduced quality is

usually not used for home consumption. Specific knowledge of the causative agent

and how to prevent transmission differed between the regions and was found highest

in Guinea Bissau. Milk in the region is usually consumed without treatment with the

exception of Guinea Bissau.. Farmers and milk vendors clearly believe that milk, if

boiled once, will not ferment, therefore milk is usually not heat treated because of

customers’ preference for fermented milk. The use of starter cultures for fermentation

after heating is not known. Moreover, a good number of farmers in Senegal and The

9

Gambia still believe that heating of milk may significantly reduce the milk yield of

the producing cow. This traditional believes might limit the willingness of these

farmers to accept pasteurisation as measure to prevent the transmission of zoonoses.

• Observations on zoonoses by butchers

The majority of butchers knew of at least one zoonotic infection. Their awareness of

a second and third zoonosis was clearly reduced. The zoonoses most frequently

observed by butchers were brucellosis, followed by anthrax. A higher frequency of

this infection was reported for Guinea Bissau and Guinea.

The execution of regular health checks of butchers varied between the countries.

However, none of the check ups was documented by health certificates.

• Observations by veterinary health authorities

The most important zoonosis in respect to mortality in man was rabies followed by

anthrax. The number of reported cases of rabies in animals (all of them dogs) was

very similar in the four countries. Conversely more cases of anthrax and brucellosis

were observed in Guinea and Guinea Bissau. The results for disease importance

ranking obtained from veterinary authorities were consistent with those obtained

from farmers

• Observations on zoonoses by public health authorities

Rabies was the highest ranked zoonosis by public health authorities followed by

Salmonella infections. Patients with “brucellosis or flu -like” infections (fever and

back/joint pain) are tested for malaria if laboratory facilities are available. If not,

malaria treatment is administered symptomatically without differential diagnosis, e.g.

for brucellosis. Knowledge of personnel on brucellosis (symptoms, transmission etc.)

was very poor, laboratory tests were not performed in any of the locations visited.

Strain identification for M. bovis in patients with symptoms of TB was not carried out

in the health centres/hospitals visited in Guinea Bissau and Senegal and rarely

undertaken in The Gambia and Guinea.

• Potential losses due to brucellosis

The number of cattle herds with reports on infertile cows or abortions was higher in

Guinea and Guinea Bissau than in Senegal and The Gambia.

10

• Results of serological sampling for brucellosis

B. abortus herd prevalence in bulk herd milk was significantly higher in Guinea and

Guinea Bissau.

Seven out of 20 volunteers tested positive for brucellosis in a high prevalence area for

cattle (Dubréka, Guinea) .

• Differences in local perception in relation to present and previous serological

findings in cattle

Differences observed in perception of farmers and other risk groups on brucellosis

(i.e. knowledge and results of disease importance ranking) were in agreement with

serological results for brucellosis in cattle. Brucellosis was ranked higher by farmers

and veterinarians in the high-risk areas for cattle.

The absence of BTB infection in cattle was confirmed by a general low importance

assigned to this disease by farmers and veterinary health authorities (i.e. it was not

considered as an important disease in the disease ranking).

11

1. BACKGROUND

The expansion of poverty and food insecurity is a cause of major concern in sub-

Saharan Africa (SSA). It is estimated that between 40 to 45% of the African

continent’s 730 million people live in absolute poverty with 30% classified as

extremely poor. West Africa has the highest population growth (3% p.a.) and

urbanisation (6 % p.a.) rates in SSA and one of the highest in the world. By 2050, the

human density of much of West Africa will be similar to present day Nigeria (114

persons/sq km). People’s attempts to secure livelihoods include diversification of

income with a significant increase in the share of the overall household income

coming from livestock production. In general, the livestock sector is intensifying in

response to population and urbanisation increase.

In rural areas, but also in peri-urban livestock production centres, a close relationship

between the people and their animals exists, often coupled with very poor hygienic

conditions. Livestock diseases are controlled only to a limited extent as veterinary

services are defunct and drugs neither readily available nor easily affordable for the

rural and urban poor farmers. Under these circumstances, zoonotic diseases, easily

transmissible from livestock to man and, in the case of tuberculosis also vice-versa,

can play an important role as a contributing factor to poor human health and poverty.

In a recent study commissioned by DFID on prioritising animal health research for

poverty reduction (PERRY et al, 2002), a strong link between poor human health and

low income and zoonotic diseases was stated. Zoonoses can be fatal and disabling

diseases, the prevention of which is usually through control in animals. For this

reason, their control is often left to veterinary services, with human health services

showing only a limited interest or awareness of them. For two classical animal

diseases transmissible to men through infection by contact or consumption of

contaminated animal products, brucellosis (B. abortus and B. melitensis) and

tuberculosis (M. bovis), farmers, herders and butchers have been considered to be the

main groups at risk (ADAMS & MAEGRAITH, 1984). A key risk factor is the

widespread consumption of raw milk in West Africa; which earlier studies at ITC

have shown to be highly contaminated with pathogens that pose a public health risk

to the consumer (HEMPEN et al., 2002, UNGER et al. 2003).

12

Human brucellosis is known as a disease presenting a variety of symptoms, affecting

multiple systems and causing different forms of localised infection. It is characterised

by a febrile reaction and usually associated with enlarged spleen (splenomegalie) and

osteoarticular manifestations (BATHKE, 1987; SEWELL and BROCKLESBY

1990). Further complications are hepatitis, endocarditis, orchitis and meningo-

encephalitis (BATHKE, 1987; DJORDJEVIC, et. al 2003; MASOURIDOU et. al

2003). The classical signs (fever and back/joint pain) are therefore easily confused

with other more common ailments, e.g. malaria and hence often wrongly treated.

These diagnostic difficulties are characteristic for developing countries since specific

tests for brucellosis are usually not available. Tuberculosis comes in the wake of

poverty, war, and immunosuppressive diseases, such as HIV and is on the increase in

most developing countries. In sub-Saharan Africa nearly 2 million TB cases per year

occur and the Genus Mycobacteria has pathogenetic and zoonotic importance

(DABORN et al., 1996). The presence of both diseases in livestock therefore

represents a significant public health risk.

In recent work to establish the geographic distribution and prevalence of both

infections in cattle carried out by ITC (2000 – 2003), various surveys were carried

out in The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau and Senegal. Brucellosis was diagnosed

in cattle with high variability in the prevalences between different locations within

and between countries. To be more specific, herd prevalences for bovine brucellosis

as high as 61 - 100 % were reported for selected districts in Guinea Bissau and

Guinea whereas in The Gambia and Senegal infections are not common. In contrast

to this, for bovine tuberculosis an unexpected absence of the infection was reported

for all four countries.

These studies focussed primarily on updating the lack of information on the animal

health aspects of brucellosis and tuberculosis in these four countries. In order to fully

understand the impact and importance of these diseases on livestock and people, the

perception of livestock owners and other people in close contact with animals of the

human health aspect needs also to be investigated in order to complement the

information obtained in livestock. Furthermore, information on the economic

13

importance (direct and indirect losses) of zoonotic diseases in livestock is required.

The latter investigations have rarely been addressed in these countries in the past.

It was therefore proposed to carry out a scoping study on the importance of those

zoonotic diseases for people in livestock environments.

2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This study was undertaken to evaluate the direct and indirect impact of zoonoses,

with special emphasis on brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis on livestock and human

health in selected areas of The Gambia, Senegal, Guinea Bissau and Guinea Conakry.

The study expands on work already done at ITC investigating the prevalence of both

diseases in different locations in all four countries.

3 PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND COUNTRY CHARACTERISTICS IN THE STUDY AREA

In the study region two livestock production systems have been identified:: the

predominant low-input system and the Market-oriented system.

The low-input production system (LIPS) operates at subsistence or semi-subsistence

level with farmers growing crops and keeping livestock. They are smallholder

farmers who rely mainly on family labour inputs for cropping and livestock related

activities. Because of the scarcity of resources, farmers in LIPS adopt a risk aversion

strategy which entails limited use of externally purchased inputs that in turn is not

conducive to adoption of new technologies. Livestock is kept for multiple objectives:

subsistence (milk, milk products), sales or exchange, inputs to agriculture (power,

manure), transportation and insurance against crop failure.

The study region is characterised by large areas of medium to high livestock disease

risk due to ecto- and endoparasites, vector- and vector borne diseases. LIPS farmers

consequently use indigenous breeds that are adapted to the feeding, health and

climatic environment, but that have limitations in their productivity.

14

Traditional N’Dama herd in Keneba, The Gambia

LIPS is also characterised by an extensive land use system, animals are fed on natural

pastures and crop residues, with feed supplementation limited to selected groups of

animals during the dry season. Consequently body weight and milk yield decline

during the long dry seasons (particularly in The Gambia and Senegal) to such low

productivity levels that leave limited surplus for marketing.

The vast majority of poor farmers in the study region are found in LIPS. The farmers

are unlikely to engage in innovative production processes in the absence of

infrastructure, easy access to markets and high costs of transportation. However,

LIPS has proven to be dynamic also and respond to new challenges like increased

demand for livestock products. For instance, farmers have changed species

composition due to drought and they are moving to more intensified and integrated

mixed farming systems. (Fall, 2003).

The LIPS is predominant in The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Guinea and in large parts of

Senegal. It is estimated that 95% of the milk production in this region is produced by

the LIPS (Mbogoh, 1984).

15

Traditional way of milking N’Dama herd in Guinea

A transition process towards intensification has taken place in those areas where

policies are conducive, inputs available and the agro-ecological environment suitable.

It is shown in Nicholson et al. (1999) that West Africa as a region has not only one of

the highest urbanisation and population growth rates, but also harbours the emerging

markets in the coastal cities (Dreschel et al., 1998) that will make the region a major

consumption centre of livestock products in general and dairy products in particular.

This transition to the market-oriented production (MOPS) has often been induced by

urbanisation and the establishment of peri-urban integrated agricultural enterprises.

The systems have developed prominently in the Greater Banjul Area, peri-urban

Dakar, the Nieyes and in the Bassin Arachidier of Senegal and have been studied in

the framework of PROCORDEL (Somda et al., 2003, Somda et al, 2004, Dia et al,

2004)

16

F1 crossbred (Holstein Frisian x N’Dama) with dam in Greater Banjul

Area, The Gambia

The MOPS is geared towards income generation and the maximization of profit. It

entails the introduction of new breeds (cross-bred or purebreds), feed

supplementation, resource inputs such as labour, drugs, feeds. The system is usually

established near marketing structures, existing infrastructure and service providers.

Management strategies need to take into consideration the major challenges:

provision of animal feeds in sufficient quantities year round, processing and

conservation of products (meat and milk) and marketing of products. (Akinbamijo,

2003).

3.1 Some country characteristics

3.1.1 The Gambia

The Gambia, with 11,300 km2 one of the smallest African countries, is completely

surrounded by Senegal, except for the Western Coast line. It has a population of 1,36

Million with 90% Muslim and 9% Christian. It is administratively divided in 5

Divisions and Banjul city. English is the official language, but Mandinka, Wolof and

Fula are widely spoken. Population density is one of the highest in West Africa and

can be compared with Nigeria. The drift to move to growing urban centres is

increasing with presently 40% of the population living in towns. Agriculture

17

contributes 23% to the GDP (1997 estimates) with the main products groundnuts,

millet, sorghum, rice, corn, cassava and palm kernels.

A mixed, crop-livestock farming system is practised throughout the country. The

pattern of rural settlement in The Gambia is described by villages surrounded by

areas of regularly cultivated fields and fallows with, at increasing ranges, long-term

fallows merging into woodland. The cattle population is estimated at 360,000, sheep

at 190,000, goats at 265,000, equines at 51,000 (livestock census, 1993). More than

90% of ruminants in The Gambia are trypanotolerant breeds, namely N’Dama cattle,

Djallonke sheep and West African Dwarf goats. The recent introduction of cross-bred

cattle for the evolving dairy sector is limited to the Greater Banjul Area. The climate

is characterised by a uni-modal rainfall pattern with a long dry season (November to

June). Characteristics of the livestock sector, principal constraints and counter

strategies are well described by Snow in Bourn et al., 2001.

3.1.2 Guinea Bissau

Guinea Bissau covers an area of 36,120 km2, is neighbour to Senegal in the north and

Guinea in the south and east and the Atlantic coast line in the west. It is a low-lying

coastal region of swamps, rain forests, and mangrove, coastal wetlands, with about 25

islands off the coast. The Bijagos archipelago extends 48 km out to sea. The

population is estimated at 1,38 Mill with a growth rate of 2% and 45% Muslims, 5%

Christians and 50% animists. The official language is Portuguese, but Creole is the

language spoken most widely. The country is administratively divided into nine

regions where the population is unevenly distributed. Likewise, the regional density

of the livestock population and specifically cattle is unequal. The Eastern zone

(regions of Bafata and Gabu) has the highest livestock density accounting for 74% of

cattle (MDRA/DGP, 1991). The Northern zone (regions of Cacheu and Oio) follows

the east in terms of livestock numbers, particularly the Oio region with 13% of cattle.

Cattle belong exclusively to the N’Dama breed (FAO, 1980) and are extensively

managed in relation with the socio-economic background of the livestock owners

(Gonçalves, 1995).

18

N’Dama herd at watering point and nearby rice fields in Guinea Bissau

Recent political developments have seen a coup d’état in September 2003 by General

Correia Seabra who later handed over to an interim government led by President

Henrique Rosa. Legislative elections took place in March 2004 and a new

government is expected to be formed in the coming weeks. Presidential elections are

scheduled to take place early 2005. International disputes exist over the separatist war

in Senegal’s Casamance region which results in refugees and cross-border raids, arms

smuggling and other illegal activities, and political instability in Guinea- Bissau.

3.1.3 Guinea

Guinea covers an area of 245,857 km2, is bordered by Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, Mali,

Côte D’Ivore, Liberia and Sierra Leone and has a coast line in the west. The country

consists of a coastal plain, a mountainous region, a savannah interior and forest areas

in the Guinea Highlands with the highest peak of Mount Nimba (1,752 m).It has a

population of 9,25 Million with a relatively low density (19 inhabitants/km2 as

compared to 122/km2 in The Gambia). The growth rate is 2.4% and religion is 85%

Muslim, 8% Christian and 7% animists. Official language is French, but Malinké,

Susu and Fulani are widely spoken.

The country possesses enormous agricultural potential, which varies according to the

four natural agro-ecological zones: Guinée Maritime, Moyenne Guinée, Haute

Guinée and Guinée Forestière. Livestock numbers are 2,5 Mill cattle, 1,5 Mill small

ruminants, 55,000 pigs and 9 Mill poultry (livestock census 1995).. The livestock

19

sector contributes 16% to the agricultural segment of the GDP. The predominant

dairy cattle breed is the N’Dama, which is managed under the low-input system.

However, few crosses (N’Dama x zebu cattle) are found in Haute Guinea. The

regional distribution of cattle from the census conducted in 1995, is as follows:

Maritime (17%), Moyenne (41%), Haute (34%) and Forestière (8%). The Haute

Guinea thus represents the second most important region in terms of livestock

production. Furthermore, several projects, including the ITC led PROCORDEL, are

being implemented with a dairy component and the introduction of crossbreds.

International disputes arise over domestic fighting among disparate rebel groups in

Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. They have created skirmishes, deaths and refugees

in border areas.

Nature’s beauty after the first rains in Guinea

3.1.4 Senegal

Senegal covers an area of 196,190 km2 and is bordered by Mauritania in the north,

Mali in the east, Guinea and Guinea Bissau in the south and it encloses The Gambia.

The Atlantic coast line forms the western limit. It has a population of 10,59 Mill with

94% Muslim and 5% Christian. The official language is French, Wolof is widely

spoken, other languages are Pular, Serr, Joal, Malinke and Soninke. Agriculture,

which employs more than half the working population, represents 20% of GDP.

Fishing is the country’s primary source of income. Exports are concentrated in the

areas of groundnuts, fishing, tourism and phosphates. The country has a per capita

20

GSP of $459. According to recent surveys, 65% of households consider themselves

poor. (The Courier, 2003). The Casamance conflict is still not fully resolved.

The subdivision of the country into ecological zones relates well to the distribution of

livestock species. The trypanosusceptible Zebu, Sahelian sheep and goats and horses

occupy the Sahelian region, devoid of tsetse, while the south is inhabited mainly by

trypanotolerant N’Dama cattle, Djallonké sheep and dwarf goats and donkeys.

Diakore cattle in Senegal

The sudano-sahelian and north Sudan zones (middle part of the country) have mixed

populations including the Diakore (Zebu x N’Dama cross), which has an intermediate

level of trypanotolerance. The Diakore is a popular draught animal in this region

because it is larger than the N’Dama. The southern soudanian and north Guinean

vegetation zones (Casamance region) are the most important areas of Senegal for

rearing trypanotolerant N’Dama cattle.

At the national level, a period of stable cattle population is seen in the 1980s

probably associated with droughts that occurred during this period. There is however

a trend of a steady increase since the early 1990s. This trend is also seen in the Kolda

and Ziguinchor regions where the majority of trypanotolerant livestock are found.

Three main livestock production systems are described in Senegal. These are (1) the

pastoral system in the Sahel zone with limited rainfall (300-500mm) and therefore

scarce feed and water resources that drive people and livestock to great mobility

21

according to seasons, (2) the peri-urban production system in the Niayes area with

appr. 1000 exotic dairy cattle and in the surroundings of large cities like Kaolack and

Fatick where crossbred dairy cattle have been introduced since the mid 1990s and (3)

the agro-pastoral system with the integration of crop and livestock enterprises.

4. MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.1 Study period

The study was carried out in form of a Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) for a

period of 6 months, starting in March 2003. March 2003 was considered as the

Preparation Period for the main study. During this period the national PRA teams,

local authorities, villages and all target groups were identified and sensitised for the

study. The PRA sessions were carried out in April and May in the chosen districts of

The Gambia and Senegal, in June in Guinea and in July in Guinea Bissau.

4.2 Study area

The PRA took place in two districts of The Gambia, Senegal, Guinea and one district

of Guinea Bissau. All chosen districts are known for their high cattle density.

Another criterion for the selection of a district was the involvement in previous ITC

disease prevalence studies on bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis, since useful

background information was already available. For Senegal and The Gambia the

locations represented also different production systems (low input and market-

orientated systems).

In The Gambia the Central River Division south (CRD) and the Greater Banjul Area

(GBA) were selected. The CRD is a rural area and located in the eastern part of The

Gambia. The distance to Banjul is around 300 km. The cattle population consists of

trypanotolerant N´Dama kept on natural pasture under traditional husbandry. The

GBA is a peri-urban area located around Banjul, the capital of The Gambia. The area

is characterised by its current transition from the low-input to the market-orientated

system. The cattle population consists of N´Dama and few crossbred cattle which

22

where recently introduced by ITC. Milk is usually sold to markets in Banjul and the

GBA.

Map of Senegal and The Gambia

In Senegal the districts of Kaolack and Fatick were identified, located in the Bassin

Arachidier (groundnut production basin) southwest of Dakar. The distance to Dakar

is 220 km from Kaolack and 190 km from Fatick. Programmes for intensification of

the existing livestock system are already on-going in the Bassin Arachidier. The

cattle population consists mainly of Zebu type cattle and crossbreds. The proportion

of crossbreds is continuously increasing due to a national artificial insemination

programme.

In Guinea the Districts of Dubréka and Coyah were selected. Dubréka and Coyah are

rural areas. Coyah District is located in the close vicinity of Conakry; the District

capital is 60km away from Conakry. Dubréka District is also situated close to

Conakry. The distance from Dubréka town to Conakry is around 70 km. Milk

produced in the Dubréka and Coyah District is therefore sold also at Conakry

markets. The cattle population consists of pure N´Dama kept on natural pasture under

traditional husbandry. The majority of cattle herds in both districts are on

transhumance during March to June and thereafter move to communal pastures.

23

Map of Guinea

The district of Bafata was selected in Guinea Bissau which is situated in the centre of

Guinea Bissau, bordering Guinea. The distance from Bafata to Bissau is 120 km.

Milk produced in Bafata is sold also at Bissau markets. Bafata holds 40% of the cattle

population of the country and the predominant breed is the N´Dama.

24

Map of Guinea Bissau

4.3 Survey based on Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)

Four half day PRA sessions were held in all selected districts, except for the GBA,

were only three sessions were carried out. In total 27 PRA sessions formed the basis

for this study. Sessions were set to be attended by a minimum of 10 and a maximum

of 15 people with 5 to 8 farmers (owners of cattle and small ruminants), 2 to 4

herders (being family members or labourers often paid with milk) and 2 to 4 milk

vendors as participants. Four to 12 villages in each district were randomly chosen by

the District Veterinary Officers (DVO). Hence, 40 to 60 respondents were expected

per district.

Before performing a PRA exercise in a selected location, the village chief was

identified by the DVO, the aims of the study were explained and permission was

sought to carry out the study in the village. The participants from each village were

chosen by the DVO, often in agreement with the local chief, on the basis of

willingness to participate.

25

The PRAs were carried out as group discussions. However, for specific questions,

quantification of group answers was achieved by randomly selecting five individuals

amongst the group of farmers.

The structure of the PRA sessions is listed in Annex 1a.

PRA during the rain in Guinea Bissau and in the open in Guinea 4.3.1 Team members for PRA sessions

The PRA team consisted of 6 individuals, with a variety of skills encompassing

veterinary knowledge, PRA experience, local knowledge of the area and livestock

systems, and fluency in the local languages, and was led by a national PRA expert.

More specifically the team consisted of a PRA expert, 2 enumerators (one of them

socio-economist), the project co-ordinator, the local DVO and one translator. In The

Gambia, Guinea and Guinea Bissau a national PRA team was recruited for the study,

while in Senegal the team consisted of 2 Gambian and one Senegalese enumerator.

4.3.2 Disease ranking

This method was used to obtain perceptions about the differences in disease

importance ranking within and between the countries. In a first step all clinical

symptoms observed by respondents during the last 12 months were recorded. These

clinical symptoms were then related to specific diseases whenever possible. Five

26

farmers (owners of cattle and of small ruminants) were randomly selected among the

group and asked to rank the 5 most important diseases.

4.4 Survey based on semi-structured questionnaire

In addition to the information obtained during the PRA, a semi-structured

questionnaire was administered in each district to randomly selected farmers (n= 20),

Veterinary health authorities, local butchers/meat inspectors (up to five) and Public

health authorities. Key issues like the reproduction status of herds, observations on

diseases transmissible to humans, observations after slaughter or in post mortem and

awareness of diseases that affect the quality and quantity of milk and meat were

considered in these questionnaires.

4.5 Survey based on serological sampling for brucellosis

To find correlations with results of previous prevalence studies on brucellosis, bulk

milk samples from the majority of farms participating in the study were collected and

tested for the presence of B. abortus antibodies using Milk ELISA (Bommeli®).

In addition, to obtain some base line information on brucellosis in man in a known

high risk area for cattle, serological sampling in potential risk groups (farmers,

veterinarians and herders) was carried out in Dubréka (Guinea). According to the

recommendation of the German Reference Laboratory for brucellosis in Berlin these

sera were tested for B. abortus antibodies using Rose Bengal Plate Test followed by

Complement Fixation Test.

4.6. Data analysis

For entry of data, descriptive and quantitative analysis and for graphical presentation

Microsoft Excel, Statgraphics Plus and EPI-Info 5.2 software was used. For

comparison of means simple t-test was applied. To find likely associations between

observations (e.g. abortion occurrence and management) Yates-corrected chi-square

test or Fisher exact test were performed. Significantly differences were expressed as

27

differences between categories marked with different superscripts. The level of

significance is given separate.

5 RESULTS

5.1 Study population

A total of 389 people participated in the PRA sessions, composed of 115 in the

Gambia, 116 in Senegal, 100 in Guinea and 58 participants in Guinea Bissau. The

average number of participants in each PRA session was 14.4 (13.19,15.61).

On average, in each PRA session per location 64.9 to 82.1% (overall mean 72.6%)

were male respondents and 17.5 to 35.1% (overall mean: 27.4%) were females. The

highest proportion of women was found in Dubréka, Guinea (35.1%), the lowest

during group discussions in the LIPS in the Bassin Arachidier of Senegal (17.9%). In

general the gender distribution was quite homogenous for each district and country

(Graph 1).

Graph 1: Gender distribution during group discussion by region and country

The respondents were composed of 39.7 to 54.8% (overall mean: 47.1%) farmers,

18.7 to 37.9% herders (overall mean: 25.9%) and 19.3 to 33.3% milk vendors

(overall mean: 27.0%). The specific distributions for each region are presented in

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

GBA(MOS)

CRD(LIS)

MOS LIS Dubreka Coyah Bafata

The Gambia Senegal (BassinArachidier)

Guinea GuineaBissau

Overall

male female

28

Graph 2. The proportion of herders was slightly lower in both districts of Guinea

whereas the proportion of milk vendors was a bit higher.

Graph 2: Composition of respondents in group discussions by region and country

The number of respondents in the semi-structured questionnaires is summarized in

Table 1. The reduced amount of farmers selected for The Gambia results from the

limited number of farmers representing the market-orientated system in the GBA (n=

15).

Table 1: Number of questionnaires administered per region and involved group

Farmers Veterinary health

authorities

Public health authorities

Butchers Total

The Gambia (GBA and CRD)

35 8 5 8 56

Senegal (Kaolack and Fatick)

40 6 4 9 59

Guinea (Dubréka and Coyah)

40 3 4 7 54

Guinea Bissau (Bafata)

20 3 3 5 31

Total 135 20 16 29 200

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

GBA(MOS)

CRD (LIS) MOS LIS Dubreka Coyah Bafata

The Gambia Senegal (BassinArachidier)

Guinea GuineaBissau

Overall

farmer herder milk vendors

29

5.2 Farmers’ perceptions of animal diseases 5.2.1 Disease importance ranking

5.2.1.1 Results presented by country

In order to obtain information on the importance of diseases/symptoms as perceived

by the PRA participants a ranking was applied during the group discussions. Results

for ranks are based on scoring for the 5 highest ranked diseases/symptoms in all

countries and expressed as weighted average.

Results for cattle are shown in Table 2. Potential zoonoses or clinical symptoms,

which could indicate zoonotic infections, are shaded in grey. In addition results

including the top-ten list of diseases/symptoms are presented graphically by country

in Annex 1b (Graphs 1-4).

The ranking for the five most important diseases/symptoms indicated always in all

countries “unspecific diarrhoea” and H.S. (pasteurellosis). With the exception of

Guinea, also Black quarter was ranked high, even number one in Guinea Bissau.

Symptoms/diseases with likely zoonotic implications were reported in all countries

with regional variations. Anthrax was considered as the second most important

disease in Guinea Bissau. Abortions and hygromas (local name “bakale”) were

ranked as number four and five respectively in Guinea and Guinea Bissau but not

mentioned by farmers in Senegal and The Gambia.

30

Table 2: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in terms

of importance by country

Symptoms/ diseases

Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal

Total no. of farmers 35 40 20 40

Ranking WA* Ranking WA* Ranking WA* Ranking WA*

Abortion - - 4 1.3 4 1.4 - -

Anthrax - - 5 1.1 2 1.9 - -

BQ 4 1.1 - - 1 2.7 4 1.3

Diarrhoea (unspecific) 1 2.8 1 1.9 3 1.6 5 0.9

FMD 5 1.0 - - - - - -

H.S. 3 1.4 5 1.1 4 1.4 1 2.6

Hygroma - - 5 1.1 5 1.3 - -

Foot problems (unspecific)

- - 3 1.5 - - - -

Lumpy skin - - 2 1.6 - - - -

Tick damage/fly sore - - - - - - 2 2.3

Trypanosomosis 2 1.8 - - - - 3 1.6

* Weighted average (WA) of scores

The results for disease ranking for the five most important diseases/symptoms for

small ruminants are presented in Table 3. Potentially zoonotic diseases or associated

symptoms are shaded grey. In addition, the results for the ten highest ranked

diseases/symptoms are presented graphically by country in the Annex 1b (Graph 5-

8).

PPR was considered in three countries as the “number-one” disease and in one

country number three. All other diseases/symptoms including likely zoonoses varied

widely between the countries. With the exception of Guinea Bissau abortions were

always within the top-five list. As stated already for cattle in Guinea Bissau anthrax

was highly ranked also in SR in this country.

31

Table 3: Top-five diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in terms

of importance by country

Symptoms Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

Total no. of farmers 35 40 20 40

Ranking WA* Ranking WA* Ranking WA* Ranking WA*

Abortion 4 1.0 2 0.9 2 2.0

Anthrax 2 2.3

BQ 4 1.0

Diarrhoea (unspecific) 1 2.7 4 0.6

Foot problems (unspecific) 3 0.8 5 0.8

Mange 3 1.3

Nervous symptoms 5 0,4

Pasteurellosis 3 1.1 3 1.4

PPR 2 1.2 1 3.7 1 4.3 1 2.6

Tick damage/fly sore 4 1.3

Trypanosomosis 5 0.5 5 0.8


5.2.1.2 Results presented by production system

In The Gambia and in Senegal the PRA was carried out on farms characterised by

different production systems. Results for the five most important diseases/symptoms

in cattle according to the production system are shown in Table 4 for The Gambia

and Table 5 for Senegal.

In The Gambia differences in disease ranking between the production systems were

observed. Trypanosomosis was ranked highest in the MOPS, but only given 5th rank

in the LIPS. In addition, more importance was attributed to tick infestations in the

MOPS, wherever BQ, FMD and constipation were more frequent in the LIPS.

32

Table 4: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in The

Gambia in terms of importance by production system

Symptoms/diseases GBA (MOPS) CRD (LIPS)

Total no. of farmers 15 20

Ranking WA* Ranking WA*

BQ - - 2 1.7

Constipation (unspecific) - - 3 1.1

Diarrhoea (unspecific) 2 2.9 1 2.8

FMD 5 0.7 3 1.1

H.S. - - 2 2.2

Lumpy skin 4 0.5 4 0.8

Tick damage/fly sore 3 1.9 - -



Results for disease ranking according to production systems were more homogeneous

in Senegal (Bassin Arachidier) than in The Gambia. The five most important

diseases/symptoms were nearly equally ranked with the exception of diarrhoea, FMD

and poisoning (Table 5). Diarrhoea and poisoning were ranked more highly in the

MOPS, FMD higher in the LIPS.

Table 5: Top-five diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in

Senegal in terms of importance by production system

Symptoms MOPS LIPS

Total no. of farmers 20 20

Ranking WA* Ranking WA*

BQ 4 1.2 4 1.3

Diarrhoea 3 1.3 - -

FMD - 5 0.9

H.S. 2 2.0 1 3.3

Poisoning 5 1.0 - -

Tick damage/fly sore 1 2.4 2 2.3

33



Summary: • Results from disease ranking from cattle differed between the countries. However,

H.S. and symptoms of diarrhoea were always among the top-five in all four

countries.

• Reports on infections with zoonotic character varied widely between the four

countries. Anthrax was number two in Guinea. Clinical hygromas (indicating

brucellosis) were only mentioned by farmers in Guinea Bissau and Guinea and

ranked as number 5.

• In small ruminants PPR was the highest ranked disease in three of the four

countries. In The Gambia, where unspecific diarrhoea and Pasteurellosis were

ranked higher, PPR was number three among the “top five”.

• Potential zoonotic infections such as anthrax were only among the top-five list in

Guinea Bissau.

• Differences in disease importance ranking according to the production system

were observed for The Gambia while in Senegal responses were more similar.

5.2.2 Chronic diseases

During group discussions information was collected on chronic diseases in cattle and

small ruminants. Results for cattle are shown in Table 6 and for small ruminants in

Table 7. Five farmers amongst the PRA groups were selected randomly in each

location to quantify responses (see 4.3). A chronic disease was defined as an illness,

which lasted more than four weeks.

5.2.2.1 Chronic diseases in cattle

During group discussions a total of 68 cases of long lasting diseases in cattle were

reported by respondents. In 21 cattle the cause of the disease was unknown. The 68

cases were observed on 60 different farms.

34

Among the chronic diseases reported in cattle, brucellosis (14/47) and

trypanosomosis (10/47) were most frequently reported. The latter disease was noted

by participants in all four countries, whereas brucellosis was only reported in Guinea

and Guinea Bissau. The differences observations of brucellosis between countries

were significant.

Table 6: Reports by farmers during group discussions of chronic (long lasting)

diseases in cattle

Disease suspected Overall Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

Total no of farmers 185 35 40 20 40

No. of farmers with cattle

suffering from chronic diseases

47 19 25 13 7

Brucellosis (Hygroma) 14 0 a 10 b 4 b 0 a

BQ 3 0 3 0 0

Diarrhoea (unspecific) 1 0 1 0 0

Endoparasites 3 0 2 1 0

H.S. 3 3 0 0 0

Poisoning (plastic bag) 2 0 2 0 0

Lumpy skin 4 1 0 3 0

Mange 3 0 0 3 0

Mastitis 1 0 0 1 0

Pasteurellosis 3 0 0 1 2

Trypanosomosis 10 4 3 0 3

Unknown (unspecific symptoms) 15 9 4 0 2

a:b (p<0.05)

When asking farmers on their consumption habit of meat and milk of chronically sick

cattle, the majority (34/60) reported that they always consume such meat and milk.

Among the observed chronic diseases in cattle brucellosis (n= 14) and mastitis (n= 1)

have relevant importance as milk-borne infection for man, yet milk was always

consumed from diseased animals.

35

Differences in milk consumption patterns related to the production system were

observed (Table 7). A significantly higher proportion of farmers in the LIPS

consumed meat from sick cattle. The difference in milk consumption practices was

significant (p= 0,06) although not at the p=0.05 level.

Table 7: Consumption patterns (on farm) for meat and milk from chronic sick

cattle related to production system

MOPS LIPS

No. of farmers who reported having chronically sick cattle 14 46

No. of farmers consuming raw/fermented milk from sick animals 3 * 25 *

No. of farmers consuming meat from sick animals 1 a 33 b

a:b (p<0.05) * (p= 0.06)

5.2.2.2 Chronic diseases in small ruminants

A total of 22 chronic cases of diseases in SR was reported by 22 farmers (Annex 1b,

Table 1). Only in nine of these cases were the symptoms described sufficientsly by

respondents to identify the disease. Mange was reported most frequently (3/9),

followed by one case each of arthritis, BQ, heartwater, lumpy skin, metritis and orf.

Differences in the consumption practices according to production system were also

observed for small ruminants. None of the farmers reporting chronically sick animals

in the MOPS (n= 4) consumed meat from such animals whereas 13 of 18 did it in the

LIPS. Milk from small ruminants is usually not consumed at all.

Summary:

• With regional variations, brucellosis and trypanosomosis were the most

frequently observed chronic diseases in cattle. Cases of brucellosis were only

observed by farmers in Guinea and Guinea Bissau.

• Specific chronic diseases in SR (n= 9) were less frequently reported than in cattle

(35). Mange (n= 3) was recorded most often.

• The practice of consuming milk and/or meat from chronically ill animals clearly

differed between the production systems. The majority of farmers in the LIPS

36

system still consume meat and/or milk from chronic sick cattle or SR, while this

was done only exceptionally by farmers from the MOPS.

5.3 Farmers perception on zoonoses

5.3.1 Questionnaire results for zoonoses

5.3.1.1 Results by country

In the semi-structured questionnaires farmers were asked to name at least three

animal diseases, which might cause also infection in man. Results are presented in

Table 8.

Compared to Senegal a significantly higher proportion of farmers in The Gambia,

Guinea and Guinea Bissau had knowledge of at least one zoonotic infection. With the

exception of Guinea Bissau the knowledge of second or third zoonoses was weak in

all other countries. The difference was significant.

Table 8: Proportion of farmers by country with knowledge of unspecified

zoonotic diseases

Overall Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

No. of farmers interviewed 135 35 40 20 40

Farmers knowing of one disease

likely to be zoonotic (%) 53 51a 58 a 65 a 20 b

Farmers knowing of two diseases

likely to be zoonotic (%) 18 6 a 10 a 65 b 13 a

Farmers knowing of three diseases

likely to be zoonotic (%) 12 0 a 5 a 55 b 8 a

a:b (p<0.05)

Thereafter, farmers were asked to list these zoonotic infections. Table 9 gives a list

by country of the first disease mentioned by farmers as likely to be zoonotic.

37

Brucellosis was reported most frequently, followed by anthrax, rabies and bovine

tuberculosis. All these infections were reported by farmers in each of the four

countries, however with regional variations. Brucellosis was again more frequently

reported in Guinea and Guinea Bissau (p= 0.06) than in Senegal and The Gambia.

Less frequently reported in some of the countries were Cl. butolinum and FMD. One

farmer in Senegal believed that HIV and BQ were zoonotic infections.

Table 9: Numbers of farmers identifying diseases with perceived zoonotic

character (first mentioned disease)

Overall Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal

Total no of farmers 135 35 40 20 40

Brucellosis 26 3 a 15 b 7 b 1 a

Anthrax 20 7 4 6 7

Rabies 19 7 4 6 2

BTB 7 2 1 1 3

Cl. botulinum 2 - - - 2

FMD 1 - - - 1

HIV 1 - - - 1

BQ 1 - - - 1

a:b (p<0.05)

In the next step farmers were asked to rank four given selected zoonoses (rabies,

anthrax, BTB and brucellosis) according to their importance. The aggregate ranks

were calculated based on scorings as follows: the first zoonotic disease mentioned

was assigned a score of 4, the second 3 etc. Then the total scores were calculated.

Results are presented in Table 10 by country.

Among these four zoonoses, rabies was ranked highest in three of the four countries.

In Guinea anthrax was graded as the most important zoonotic disease. In three of the

four countries, brucellosis was believed to be the second most important zoonosis.

Less importance was accorded to BTB.

38

Table 10: Farmers´ ranking of the importance of four given zoonoses by country

Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

Total no of farmers 35 40 20 40

Rabies 1 3 1 1

Anthrax 2 1 3 4

BTB 4 4 4 3

Brucellosis 3 2 2 2

Information was also collected on farmers’ specific knowledge for each of these four

zoonoses. Results are presented in Table 11a – d. The following topics were

discussed:

• Knowledge of the disease and key symptoms in cattle

• Modes of transmission

• Preventive measures

• Cases in animals observed by farmers (during the last three years).

For rabies (Table 11a) regional differences in farmers’ level of knowledge were

observed, this being significantly higher in Guinea Bissau followed by Senegal.

Measures to prevent transmission (i.e. vaccination) were known by 100% of farmers

in Guinea Bissau and 83% of farmers in Senegal, but only by a minority of

respondents in The Gambia and Guinea. Suspected cases of rabies, all of them

observed in dogs, were reported by farmers in all countries.

Table 11a: Specific knowledge of rabies and clinical observations in animals during the last three years by country (% of farmers)

Rabies Gambia Guinea Guinea

Bissau Senegal

Total no of farmers 35 40 20 40

39

Disease & symptoms in animals 69 a 65 a 100 b 93 b

Modes of transmission 54 a 38 a 100 b 90 b

Preventive measures 43 a 28 a 100 b 83 b

Observed in animals* 14 a 3 a 5 a 10 a

a:b (p<0.05) * dogs

Similar differences in farmers’ knowledge of anthrax were observed. Symptoms in

cattle were best known in Guinea Bissau. However, knowledge about transmission

and prevention was generally poor in all countries. Clinical cases of anthrax in cattle

and small ruminants were most frequently observed in Guinea Bissau.

Table 11b: Specific knowledge of anthrax and clinical observations in animals

during the last three years by country (% of farmers)

Anthrax Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal

Total no farmers 35 40 20 40

Disease & symptoms in animals 40 a 50 a 75 b 10 b

Modes of transmission 20 a 33 a 25 a 0 c

Preventive measures 17 a 28 a 25 a 0 b

Observed in animals* 9 a 5 a 25 b 0 a

a:b:c (p<0.05) *cattle or small ruminants

Symptoms, transmission and prevention of BTB were well known by farmers in

Guinea Bissau, whereas it was very poor in the other three countries. Suspected

clinical cases of BTB (described as a vasting disease and characterised by loss of

weight and chronic pulmonary symptoms) were only observed by farmers in Guinea

Bissau.

Table 11c: Specific knowledge of BTB and clinical observations in animals

during the last three years by country (% of farmers)

BTB Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal


Disease & symptoms in animals 20 a 50 b 75 b 15 a

40

Modes of transmission 9 a 15 a 75 b 13 a

Preventive measures 6 a 3 a 75 b 10 a

Observed in animals* 0 0 10 0

a:b (p<0.05) *cattle

The differences in reports of bovine brucellosis between the countries were

significant. More farmers had specific knowledge of all aspects in Guinea Bissau.

Though the symptoms of the disease are better known by farmers in Guinea, the

knowledge of transmission and prevention was poor, likewise in The Gambia and

Senegal. Suspected brucellosis-like symptoms in cattle were most frequently

observed in Guinea Bissau, followed by Guinea (see also 5.9.1).

Table 11d: Specific knowledge of bovine brucellosis and clinical observations in

animals during the last three years by country (% of farmers)

Brucellosis Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal


Disease & symptoms in animals 23 a 75 b 100 c 55 b

Modes of transmission 11 a 28 a 100 b 23 a

Preventive measures 6 a 3 a 65 b 18 a

Observed in animals* 3 a 30 b 80 c 8 a

a:b:c (p<0.05) * cattle

5.3.1.2 Results by production system

Farmers’ knowledge about these four zoonoses (rabies, anthrax, BTB and brucellosis)

was not significantly influenced by the production system. The results are presented

in Annex 1b (Tables 2a-d).

Summary:

• Farmers’ knowledge of zoonoses differed between countries but not by the

production system.

• Among the four given zoonoses (rabies, anthrax, BTB and brucellosis) rabies was

ranked highest by farmers in Guinea Bissau, The Gambia and Senegal while in

41

Guinea anthrax was ranked highest. Number two zoonosis was brucellosis

(Guinea, Guinea Bissau and Senegal) and anthrax respectively in The Gambia.

• The highest level of knowledge about these zoonoses was found in farmers from

Guinea Bissau. This includes the knowledge of symptoms and, with the exception

of anthrax, also the transmission route and how to prevent transmission.

• Clinical cases of anthrax and brucellosis in cattle were more frequently reported

by farmers in Guinea Bissau than in the other three countries. In addition,

brucellosis in cattle was more often observed by farmers in Guinea than in

Senegal and The Gambia, where infections were not common as evidenced by the

ITC prevalence study (see 5.9.1).

5.3.2 Group discussion results for zoonoses Farmers’ knowledge about zoonoses in The Gambia was very limited. There was a

general understanding that some animal diseases can be transmitted to people but the

respondents could not be more specific. Anthrax was mentioned as a zoonosis by four

respondents in two of the seven locations. However, the high risk of transmission to

man was unknown. It was actually reported that meat of suspected anthrax cases is

consumed after a specific local treatment (adding of thorns of a local plant called

“sumpo” when cooking). Another disease of zoonotic importance mentioned was

lumpy skin disease in cattle. One respondent pointed out that human TB can be

transmitted via sputum from man to cattle; another farmer suffered from serious

diarrhoea in the last year and related it to the consumption of meat from a chronically

sick and emaciated bovine.

In seven of the eight selected locations in Guinea farmers had some knowledge of

animal diseases, which can also affect man. Anthrax was always cited. Some

respondents believed the steam during cooking to be a likely source of infection for

man. Only in two locations were animals, suspected to have died from anthrax,

burned and buried. In particular if veterinary services are not available, e.g. when an

animal died “far away in the bush” during transhumance, only the spleen is discarded

but the meat is consumed after proper cooking. Recent outbreaks of anthrax in cattle

were reported from two locations. In addition 10-15 cases of anthrax in cattle were

observed in 2001 in a cattle herd from Tambaya when on transhumance in

42

Forehcariah. Furthermore rabies, brucellosis, BQ, lumpy skin and tuberculosis were

mentioned. However, the modes of transmission were often not known. Related to

brucellosis the majority of farmers pointed out that cattle with hygromas are not

considered to be sick. Therefore the milk of those cattle is consumed. However, there

was a consensus that they would never buy such an animal from markets or

neighbours. In three of the eight locations respondents mentioned BQ as a zoonotic

infection. Only in one location are such carcasses burned, otherwise the meat is

consumed, with the exception of the affected parts.

The majority of participants in the group discussions in Senegal believed that some

animal diseases can be transmitted to humans through milk and meat. However, they

were usually not able to specify any such disease. Only in two locations was anthrax

cited as a zoonosis. When observed, meat is not consumed and the carcass needs to

be burned and buried. Other diseases, thought to be zoonotic, which were mentioned

only in one location each, were mastitis, BTB, FMD and rabies. Respondents related

some experiences of similar disease symptoms observed in livestock and people, but

these were of anecdotal value only. With respect to the handling of an aborted foetus

(see below) there is a traditional belief in one location that hanging it on a tree might

reduce the occurrence of abortion in the herd.

As was the case with the replies to the questionnaire, the level of knowledge

emerging from the group discussions was found to be higher in Guinea Bissau than in

the other three countries. In all locations participants had specific knowledge of

rabies, brucellosis, BTB and anthrax. The transmission routes and preventive

measures were usually clearly known. Only in two locations no knowledge of the

measures for avoiding anthrax infection in man was established.

Summary:

• Farmers in Guinea Bissau appear to have a higher level of knowledge about

zoonotic diseases. This includes knowledge of the symptoms, transmission routes

and how to avoid transmission.

• In particular, knowledge of the public health importance of anthrax was

generally poor. The majority of participants in The Gambia, Senegal and Guinea

43

indicated that meat of such animals is consumed after proper cooking or

application of traditional treatment.

• The results of group discussions in Guinea indicated that cattle with hygroma are

often not considered to be sick and their milk is consumed unpasteurised.

5.4 Specific observations on brucellosis 5.4.1 Symptoms of brucellosis

Information on the pathognomic symptoms of brucellosis in cattle (hygroma) and

potentially linked symptoms like abortions (cattle and SR) and sterility (cattle) were

collected during interviews and in group discussions. For quantification of results

obtained from group discussions, five farmers with cattle and/or SR were selected

randomly during each group session (see 4.3).

Cow with hygroma in Guinea Bissau

5.4.1.1 Results by country for cattle

Results from questionnaires and group discussions are consistent regarding reports of

clinical hygromas and abortions in cattle (Table 12). The frequency of abortions was

higher in cattle on farms in Guinea Bissau and Guinea than in The Gambia and

Senegal. The differences are significant.

44

Table 12: Clinical signs potentially indicative of brucellosis infection observed

by farmers in their cattle (proportion of farmers by country)


Questionnaire results

No. of farmers interviewed 35

40 20 40

% observing abortions in their

cattle (during last 12 months) 23 a

53 b 70 b 33 a

% observing hygromas in

their cattle 3 a

65 b 75 b 5 a

% observing infertile cows in

their cattle

(>2 years without calf) 6 a

45 a 60 b 25 a

Group discussion results

No. of respondents 1 35 40 20 40


cattle (during last 12 months)

29 a 6% b 95 c 43 a

% observing hygromas in

their cattle

0 a 60 b 75 b 0 a

1 Five randomly selected farmers per group discussion a:b:c (p<0.05)

5.4.1.2 Results by country for small ruminants

Results from interviews and group discussions on abortions observed in SR both

indicate that there is no significant difference between countries (Table 13).

45

Table 13: Clinical signs potentially indicative of brucellosis infection observed

by farmers in their small ruminants (proportion of farmers by country)


Questionnaire results

No. of farmers interviewed 35 40

20 40


small ruminants

(during last 12 months) 34 20

15 35

Group discussion results No. of respondents 1 35 40 20 40


small ruminants (during last 12

months) 57 53 35 65 1 Five randomly selected farmers per group discussion


The number of abortions reported during the last 12 months did not differ

significantly between the production systems within the same country as shown in

Table 14.

Table 14: Abortions observed by farmers in their cattle or small ruminants

(proportion of farmers by production system and country)

Questionnaire Results Gambia Senegal

MOPS LIPS MOPS LIPS

No. of farmers interviewed 15 20 20 20

46


cattle (during last 12 months)

20 35 60 55


small ruminants (during last

12 months)

40 70 75 60

1 Five randomly selected farmers per group discussion

5.4.2 Handling of aborted foetus


Information was collected during the interviews on how aborted foetuses are handled.

Farmers’answers were categorised as follows:

• Definite destruction (foetus are buried or cremated)

• Partial destruction

o Thrown away

o Fed to dogs

o Hanging on a tree

• Seasonal (dry season) definite or partial (rainy season) destruction (same

subcategories as described above)

Results from the questionnaire indicate regional differences in handling of aborted

foetuses. A significantly higher proportion of farmers in Guinea Bissau (13/20) and

in Guinea (16/40), bury the aborted foetuses. This proportion is even higher in the

rainy season as some farmers practise this method only during this period. The

majority of farmers in The Gambia (29/35) and Senegal (28/40) simply throw away

the foetuses (Table 15).

Table 15: Ways of handling aborted foetuses by country (proportion of farmers

interviewed)

Questionnaire Results Gambia Guinea

Guinea Bissau Senegal


% burying or cremating (definite destruction) 9 a 40 b 65 b 20 a

47

% throwing away (partial destruction) 82 a 20 b - b 70 a

% hanging on a tree (partial destruction) - - - 5 % feeding to dogs (partial destruction) 9 - - 5 % throwing away or burying according to season - a 38 b 25 a - a % didn’t know 0 2 15 -

a:b (p<0.05)


No differences in the handling of aborted foetuses on farm according to the

production system were found. Results are nearly similar as presented in Table 16.

Table 16: Ways of handling aborted foetuses by production system and country

(proportion of farmers interviewed)


MOPS LIPS MOPS LIPS


% burying or cremating (definite

destruction)

7 10 15 20

% hanging on a tree (partial

destruction)

-

- - 10

% feeding to dogs (partial

destruction) 13 7 5 5

% throwing away or burying

according to season 80 83 80 65

5.4.3 Handling of milk from cows with previous history of abortion or observed

hygromas


Farmers were asked what they do with milk from cows with an history of abortion

(last 12 months) or with clinical hygromas. As shown in Table 17, the majority of

48

farmers still consume milk from such cattle. However, fewer farmers do it in Guinea

Bissau (11/20) and nine of twenty farmers indicated that this milk is fed to dogs, a

habit which was more common in Guinea Bissau than in the other three countries.

Table 17 : Farmers’ ways of dealing with milk from cows with a history of

abortion or observed hygroma by country (proportion of farmers)

Questionnaire Results Gambia Guinea

Guinea Bissau Senegal


% throwing milk away 23 a 23 a 0 b 13 ab

% feeding milk to dogs 0 a 3 a 45 b 8 a

% consuming milk 77 73 55 80

a:b (p<0.05)


The handling of milk from cows with a history of abortion or observed hygromas did

not differ significantly between the production systems (Table 18).

Table 18: Farmers’ ways of dealing with milk from cows with a history of

abortion or observed hygroma by production system and country

(proportion of farmers)


MOPS LIPS MOPS LIPS


% throwing milk away 26 10 10 15

% feeding milk to dogs - - - 15

% consuming milk 74 90 90 70

Summary:

49

• The number of reports of abortions and hygromas in cattle was significantly

higher in Guinea and Guinea Bissau. Reports of sterile cows were more frequent

in Guinea Bissau.

• The occurrence of abortions and hygromas in cattle was similarly distributed in

both production system

• Abortions in SR were not influenced by country or production systems

• Handling of aborted foetuses differed between countries but not between

production systems

• Handling of milk produced from cows with abortion history or observed hygroma

differed also between countries but not between production systems

5.5 Attitudes to the importance of quality of livestock products During group discussions farmers’ perceptions of the importance of meat and milk-

quality produced on-farm was discussed. This included the following key issues:

• diseases which can influence the quality of milk and meat,

• changes related to animal diseases observed in meat and milk,

• handling of affected milk and meat.

Information from the questionnaire on handling of milk produced on-farm was also

included (5.4.3).

5.5.1 Observations on meat quality related to animal diseases

In all group discussions participants agreed that livestock diseases can affect the

quality of meat. The main indicators for reduced meat quality mentioned were bad

smell, pale colour, and higher water content. The handling of such meat and specific

knowledge of the causes varied widely between the countries.

Participants in The Gambia noted the following changes in meat quality from sick

animals: slimy, higher water content, black spots on meat and intestines, pale colour

and hardening of the liver. The causes were usually not known. In two locations

participants were able to relate changes in meat, such as black colour of meat and

blood to anthrax infection. As mentioned above, some participants had some

50

knowledge about the zoonotic character of this disease. Meat from animals thought to

be diseased or meat of bad quality is usually consumed after proper cooking or

sometimes washed with vinegar before cooking. No differences in perceptions related

to meat quality were observed in the different production systems.

The main changes in meat of bad quality reported by respondents in Senegal were:

black spots on the meat, pale, containing less blood/anaemic, higher water content,

tasteless, bad smell and spots on the liver. The causes were usually not known. Some

participants in one location related bad smell and taste of meat, slimy and pale colour

to emaciation and pulmo-nasal symptoms in cattle, yet they consumed this meat.

There was a general consensus that such affected meat can still be consumed after

proper cooking. Differences in perception related to the production systems were not

observed.

The observations of participants in Guinea regarding meat quality were in general

similar to the observations made in Senegal and The Gambia. In addition,

respondents were able to relate some changes to animal diseases. Farmers’

knowledge was better than in Senegal and The Gambia. In six of the eight locations,

participants were able to describe clearly the changes in meat due to anthrax:

enlarged spleen, black colour of meat and blood and rapid rotting. However, there

was little awareness of the related high risk to humans. As mentioned earlier (see

5.3.2) meat is often consumed in particular when animals died “far way in the bush”.

Other diseases causing changes in meat quality were BQ and lumpy skin.

Oedematous swelling of muscles was related to BQ. The affected part is discarded

but the remaining carcass usually consumed after proper cooking. Bad odour and

blood spots in meat, was linked to lumpy skin disease in cattle by some participants.

Participants in Guinea Bissau considered anthrax, BQ, pasteurellosis and

trypanosomosis as animal diseases, which reduce the quality of meat. Furthermore,

chronic diseases, which were not further specified, might lead to watery and anaemic

meat. The general changes in meat of bad quality were the same as listed for The

Gambia and Senegal. The changes in anthrax-infected animals were well known.

Only in one of the four locations did respondents state that such meat should be

51

consumed only after proper cooking and discarding of the spleen. Oedema in meat

was related to BQ; in this case the affected parts are discarded and the remaining

carcass is consumed.

Summary:

• The main indicators for reduced meat quality mentioned by farmers in all four

countries were bad smell, pale colour, and higher water content.

• The handling of such meat and specific knowledge of the causative agent varies

widely between the countries. The highest level of knowledge was found in

Guinea Bissau followed by Guinea. Comparatively, knowledge in The Gambia

and Senegal was poor. Accordingly meat of bad quality was also handled

differently, i.e. usually consumed in Senegal and The Gambia while often

discarded by farmers in Guinea Bissau.

5.5.2 Observations on milk related to animal diseases

There was a general agreement in all group discussions that milk is an excellent

source of energy and healthy but that certain animal diseases can affect the quality of

the product and may even be transmissible to man. Changes in milk quality were

generally characterized by a higher water content, clotting and faster fermentation.

Some respondents (Senegal and The Gambia) mentioned also slower fermentation as

a sign of reduced quality. This observation was mainly made by milk vendors.

The main indicators for milk of bad quality noted during group discussions in The

Gambia were as described above, plus discolouring, bad smell and presence of blood

spots. Participants agreed that such milk is not sold or consumed because it can pose

a health risk for the consumer. However, the nature of this risk could not be specified

by any of the respondents (milk vendors). Despite the general agreement that milk

can transmit diseases to man, it is usually not pasteurised. There is a traditional belief

of farmers that boiling of milk might reduce the milk yield of the lactating cow. Only

52

two farmers in one location (Sareh-Ngai, LIPS) pointed out that women after delivery

should only drink pasteurised milk to avoid the risk of transmission of disease.

During group discussions in Senegal milk of bad quality was characterized as

described above. Such milk is not sold and discarded by the farmers or vendors. In

Kaolack (a location representing the market-orientated system), some farmers related

reduced milk quality and changes in consistency to mastitis in F1 cattle. In the same

location milk vendors have heard about the advantages of boiling but they do not do

this because of the difficulty of selling such a milk product. However, some farmers

pasteurise their milk for home consumption. In two more locations, one representing

the MOPS (Fatick) and one the LIPS (Koutal), milk vendors and farmers boil their

milk when used for home consumption in particular when used for pregnant women

and young children. Milk is usually not heated due to the local belief that boiling of

milk over fire may result in sores on the udder of the cow which produced the milk.

Participants in Guinea described the same changes as mentioned above for reduced

milk quality. This milk is generally discarded. Respondents were usually not able to

relate changes in milk quality to animal diseases. Only in Tambaya one respondent

related lumpy skin disease to reduced quality of milk. The zoonotic importance of

brucellosis was only mentioned by farmers in Tanene and Tambaya. Farmers do not

boil milk in any of these locations.

The highest level of knowledge was again found in Guinea Bissau. Milk of poor

quality was characterized in group discussions by higher water content, faster

fermentation and clotting. If this is observed such milk will be discarded. The

diseases mentioned as influencing the quality of milk were brucellosis (mentioned in

3 locations) and TB (mentioned in one location). In three of the four chosen locations

(Sintuna Mamodou, Aguira and Buntusso) farmers boil milk for home consumption

so as to avoid the transmission of animal diseases. Fermented milk is never boiled.

Summary

• During all group discussions it was agreed, that milk is a good source of energy

and healthy but certain animal diseases can affect the quality of the product and

may even be transmissible to man.

53

• Poor quality milk was generally characterized by higher water content, clotting

and faster fermentation.

• Milk of reduced quality is usually not used for home consumption.

• Specific knowledge of the causative agents and of how to prevent transmission

varied between regions and was found to be best in Guinea Bissau.

• Milk in the region is usually consumed without heat treatment. However, most of

the respondents in Guinea Bissau heated their milk when used unfermented for

home consumption.

5.5.3 Handling of milk produced on farms

During the interviews, information was collected on the handling of milk produced

on farm. Results are given in Table 19.

All farmers filtered their milk before home consumption or sale. How the milk was

handled depended on the final product desired. In the case of sour milk production,

none of the farmers in the regions heated the milk. However, when consumed as raw

(unfermented) milk at home, regional differences were observed regarding boiling of

milk. Milk was boiled by the majority of farmers in Guinea Bissau (15/20).

Conversely in Senegal (9/40) and The Gambia (4/35) heat treatment was rarely

undertaken and in Guinea not at all.

Table 19: Processing of milk produced on-farm presented by country (% of

farmers)


No. of farmers interviewed 35 40 20 40 % filtering 100 100 100 100

54

Raw milk % not heating 88 a 100 a 15 b 78 a % heating if used at home 9 a 0 a 85 b 22 a % heating

(only for pregnant woman) 3 - - -

Sour milk % not pasteurising 100 100 100 100 a:b (p<0.05)

Farms in the MOPS showed a higher acceptance of pasteurisation (Table 20).

However, the differences were not significant.

Table 20: Processing of milk produced on-farm presented by production system

and country (% of farmers)

Gambia Senegal

MOPS LIPS MOPS LIPS No of farmers interviewed 15 20 20 20 % filtering 100 100 100 100 Raw milk % not heating 87 90 65 90 % heating if used at home

13 5 35 10 Pasteurised

(only for pregnant woman) in % - 5 - - Sour milk Not pasteurised in % 100 100 100 100 Summary

• Milk produced on-farm was always filtered.

• Only raw milk was pasteurised.

• Acceptance of pasteurisation differed between the countries and was more

common on farms in Guinea Bissau.

55

• Use of pasteurisation was not significantly influenced by different production

systems.

5.6 Observations on zoonoses by other groups involved 5.6.1 Butchers

An overview of selected aspects of the slaughter process, such as number of animals

slaughtered per week, place of slaughter, time of slaughter etc. is given in Table 21.

The average number of animals slaughtered per week, location and butcher varied

between the countries. Generally fewer cattle (range 4.7 – 11.4) were slaughtered

than SR (6.8 – 24). With the exception of some butchers in Guinea (n= 2)

slaughtering was carried out at the local abattoirs and mainly between 6.00 and 10.00

in the morning. Meat was sold by the majority of butchers on the same day. Some

(7/28) sold their meat also on the following day. With few exceptions no records on

disease observations were kept by butchers. However, all butchers indicated that the

local veterinarian will be informed in case of any suspicion of epidemic diseases.

Table 21: General information on aspects related to slaughter and sale of cattle

and small ruminants (number per butcher per week)


Slaughter animals per butcher/week

56

Cattle (mean) 11.4 (4.9,17.9) 4,7 (2.7, 6.7) 7.0 (6.3, 7.7) 4,9 (3.2, 6.6)

SR (mean) 24.0 (8.5, 39.5) 7,3 (1.2, 13.4) 17.5 (7.9, 27.1) 6,8 (2.7, 10.9)

No of butchers interviewed

8 7 6 9

Place of slaughter

Farm - 2 - -

abattoir 8 5 5 9

Time of slaughter

6-10 AM 6 5 5 8

other 2 2 - 1

Time of sale

Same day 7 6 4 5

Same & next day 1 1 1 4

Records on observations during slaughter do exist

yes 2 1 - -

Contacts to VH do exist

yes 8 7 5 9

In brackets CI for the mean

5.6.1.1 Butchers’ knowledge of zoonoses

Butchers were asked to list at least three zoonotic animal diseases. The knowledge of

butchers was found broadly similar in all locations and differences were not

significant (Table 22). The majority of butchers did know of at least one zoonotic

infection. Their knowledge of a second and third zoonosis was clearly limited. It

appears that butchers in The Gambia were better informed.

Table 22: Proportion of butchers with knowledge of unspecified zoonotic

diseases by country


Senegal

No. of butchers interviewed 8 7 5 9 Butchers knowing of one disease 87 85 80 55

57

likely to be zoonotic (%) Butchers knowing of two diseases likely to be zoonotic (%) 50 28 40 22 Butchers knowing of three diseases likely to be zoonotic (%) 25 14 - 11

5.6.1.2 Zoonotic diseases observed during the last 12 months

The observations of zoonotic infections made by butchers during slaughter are shown

in Table 23. As most of the butchers did not record their observations it was usually

not possible to exactly quantify the number of cases observed. Therefore, the

numbers in Table 23 should be interpreted as recall data rather than as indicating the

exact number of cases.

The most frequently observed zoonosis was brucellosis, followed by anthrax and

cysticercosis. A higher frequency of anthrax and brucellosis were found in Guinea

Bissau and Guinea and of C. bovis infections in The Gambia.

Table 23: List of suspected diseases with zoonotic importance observed by

individual butchers during slaughter (last 12 months)

Symptoms Suspected disease


Senegal

No. of butchers interviewed

8 7 5 9

Enlarged spleen Anthrax 1/8 3/7 3/5 -

Hygroma Brucellosis 1/8 4/7 3/5 -

Oedema (muscle) BQ 1/8 - - 1/9

Aphthae FMD - - - 1/9

Cysts C. bovis 4/8 - - 1/9

TB like lesions TB (M. bovis)* 1/9 - 1/5 1/9

* not confirmed

5.6.1.3 Knowledge of animal diseases which can influence meat quality

Butchers were asked to list diseases or to describe clinical symptoms, which can

influence the quality of meat (Table 24). The only symptom, which was known by

the majority of butchers, was liver indurations due to fasciolosis. Eight out of thirty

58

butchers indicated that symptoms related to anthrax and BTB can reduce meat

quality. Other diseases mentioned were trypanosomosis, cysticercosis and BQ.

Table 24: Butchers’ knowledge of symptoms and associated diseases which can

influence meat quality

Symptom observed

Related disease

Gambia (No.)

Guinea (No.)

GB (No.)

Senegal (No.)

No. butchers 8 7 5 9

Dark blood,

enlarged spleen

Anthrax 3/8 2/7 3/5 1/9

Liver

indurations

Fasciolosis 4/8 4/7 3/5 5/9

Pneumonia Pasteurellosis - 2/7 - -

Emaciation/

caseatic lesions

BTB 2/8 2/7 3/5 1/9

Watery/

pale meat

Trypanosomosis 3/8 - - 3/9

Cyst Cysticercosis 4/8 - 1/5 1/9

Oedema BQ - - - 4/9

5.6.1.4 Health status of butchers

Information was collected on the health status of butchers, including their regular

health check ups. Special emphasis was given on the occurrence of symptoms likely

related to TB infections and/or brucellosis, such as: arthritis and orchitis for possible

brucellosis infections and chronic coughing for TB.

Regular health checks and examination of faecal samples was noted when carried out

at least once during the last year. As shown in Table 25 the execution of regular

health checks of butchers varied between the countries. All butchers in The Gambia

confirmed having had such an investigation during the last year, a minority in

Senegal and Guinea and none of the butchers in Guinea Bissau. However, we could

not verify these health checks by a medical statement. No significantly differences

between countries were observed for brucellosis-like symptoms. Chronic cough, a

59

clinical symptom that could be related to TB in man, had a similar distribution in the

countries.

Table 25: Observations on health status of butchers

Total (No.)

Gambia (No.)

Guinea(No.)

GB (No.) Senegal (No.)

Total no. of butchers 28 8 5 7 9

Regular medical check-up 13 8 2 0 4

Self observation of selected symptoms possible related to brucellosis or TB:

Arthritis 18 5 5 4 3

Orchitis 5 1 0 3 1

Cough (chronic) 12 5 2 2 4

Summary • The majority of butchers knew of at least one zoonotic infection. Their knowledge

of a second and third zoonosis was clearly reduced.

• The zoonosis most frequently observed by butchers was brucellosis, followed by

anthrax. A higher frequency of these infections was reported for Guinea Bissau

and Guinea.

• 8 of 30 butchers indicated that symptoms related to anthrax and BTB can reduce

meat quality

• The extent to which butchers had regular health checks varied between

countries, None of these check-ups were documented by health certificates.

5.6.2 Veterinary health authorities

The veterinary authorities consulted were veterinarians and veterinary technicians as

shown in Table 26. The District Veterinary Officer (DVO) was always among the

respondents in each location.

Table 26: Information on the interviewed VH respondents

60

Gambia Guinea GB Senegal Total

Total respondents 8 3 3 6 20

Veterinarian 5 2 1 2 10

Veterinary technician 3 1 2 4 10 5.6.2.1 Observations on zoonotic infections in animals

This information was obtained from records of DVO´s for the last three years. The

most serious zoonosis was rabies followed by anthrax (Table 27). The number of

reported cases of rabies in animals (all of them dogs) was broadly similar in the four

countries. Conversely anthrax seems to occur more frequently in Guinea and Guinea

Bissau. The same applies for brucellosis in cattle. Infections due to C. bovis in cattle

were reported for Senegal and The Gambia. Rift Valley Fever (RVF) was only

observed in The Gambia were people also died. However, there was no proof of a

direct relationship between observed cases in animals and man in this outbreak.

Table 27: Zoonotic infection in animals and humans reported by VH respondents

in the study districts during the last 3 years

Symptoms How diagnosed

Gambia (No.)

Guinea (No.)

GB. (No.) Senegal (No.)

animals humans animals humans animals humans animals humans

Anthrax p.m. 2 - 6 1 4 - 2 -

Brucellosis Clinical &

p.m. - - 9 - 6 - 1 -

C. bovis p.m. 3 - - - - - 2 - Rabies RL* 3 2 5 - 2 2 5 - RVF RL* 3 3 - - - - - - * Reference laboratory p. m. post mortem 5.6.2.2 Animal diseases observed during the last year

Veterinary services were asked to list the most common animal diseases observed in

the last year and to rank them according to their importance. Results are presented in

Table 28 for cattle and Table 29 for SR. Zoonotic diseases are shaded grey. For

comparison the results from group discussions (see 5.2.1.1) are also included in the

Table.

61

Trypanosomosis was ranked highest in The Gambia, anthrax in Guinea and Guinea

Bissau and H.S. in Senegal. Brucellosis and anthrax were indicated as important

diseases only in Guinea and Guinea Bissau. With some exceptions there was a good

agreement between results obtained from veterinarians and farmers.

Table 28: Diseases or symptoms in cattle ranked by DVOs according to their

importance over the last 12 months by country


Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Abortions - 5 (4) - -

Anthrax - 1 (5) 1 (2) -

BQ 4 (4) 4 (9) 3 (1) 3 (4)

Brucellosis - 3 (5) 4 (7) -

Endoparasites 3 (-) - - -

FMD 5 (5) - - -

H. S. 2 (3) 2 (5) 2 (5) 1 (1)

Lumpy skin - 5 (2) - 5 (-)

Pasteurellosis

Red water - - - 4 (-)

Trypanosomosis 1 (2) 4 (-) - 2 (3)

(*) Results of disease ranking by farmer (see 5.2.1.1)

In SR the highest ranked disease was PPR, followed by abortions (The Gambia) and

pasteurellosis (Guinea and Guinea Bissau). With one exception (Pasteurellosis in

Guinea was ranked lower by farmers than veterinarians) the results were broadly

similar to the rankings made by the farmers during the group discussions.

Table 29: Diseases or symptoms in SR ranked by DVOs according to their

importance over the last 12 months by country

Symptoms Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

62

Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Ranking (*)

Abortions 2 (4) - - -

Orf - 5 - -

Diarrhoea (unspecific) 4 (1) 4 (4) - 3 (6)

Pasteurellosis 3 (3) 2 (8) 2 (3)

Cowdryosis 3 (5) 5 (8)

PPR 1 (2) 1 (1) 1 (1) 1 (1)

Ticks 5 (7) - - -

Trypanosomosis - 2 - 4

(*) Results of disease ranking by farmer (see 5.2.1.1) Summary • The most important zoonosis in terms of mortality in man was rabies followed by

anthrax. The number of reported rabies cases in animals (all of them dogs) was

much the same in the four countries. However, more cases of anthrax and

brucellosis were observed in Guinea and Guinea Bissau than in the other

countries.

• The ranking of diseases by veterinarians was broadly similar to that done by the

farmers (see 5.2.1.1).

5.6.3 Public health sector

Hospitals and local health centres were visited in each country and a questionnaire

was administered (Table 30). Whenever possible the central hospital for the region

was contacted. In addition, local health centres were visited. The respondents

consisted of physicians, PH-officers and laboratory technicians.

Table 30: Numbers of interviewed public health facilities in the study districts

by country

Gambia GB Guinea Senegal

Location Hospital 3 1 1 2

Health centre 2 2 3 2

63

Respondent’s jobs

Physician 2 2 1 2

PH officer 2 1 3 2

Laboratory technician 1 - - -

When asked about exchange of information with veterinary health authorities,

differences between countries were observed as shown in Table 31. All respondents

in Guinea Bissau (3/3) and the majority in Guinea (3/4) indicated that there is a

regular exchange of data related to zoonoses.

Health Centres in Guinea Bissau (left) and Guinea (right)

Table 31: Exchange of information between PH and VH authorities


Number of respondents 5 4 3 4

Number exchanging information

with VH authorities on a regular

basis 2 3 3 1

64

5.6.3.1 Observations of zoonotic infections during the last three years

Information about zoonotic infections reported during the last three years was

collected from PH authorities. The results are based only on reports made by the

personnel interviewed in hospitals or health centres and might be not representative

for the country.

Cases of rabies in humans were observed in all countries and in each location (Table

32), Rift Valley Fever (RVF) only in the CRD of the Gambia. Salmonellosis

infections in man were reported in all hospitals where the capacity for

microbiological investigations existed.

Table 32: Reports of zoonoses in humans over the last three years in the health

centres and hospitals visited

How diagnosed Gambia Guinea Guinea

Bissau Senegal

GBA CRD Coyah Dubréka Bafata Bassin Arachidier

Rabies RL yes yes yes yes yes yes Rift Valley Fever (RVF) RL - yes - - - -

Salmonellosis Bacteriology yes yes yes ? N.A. yes * Reference Laboratory N.A: Data not available 5.6.3.2 Diagnostic capacity of local health centres and hospitals with respect to

brucellosis-like infections and tuberculosis

Human brucellosis is characterised by a febrile reaction and usually associated with

osteoarticular manifestations (BATHKE, 1987, SEWELL and BROCKLESBY

1990). Diagnostic difficulties exist due to the similarity of these key symptoms (fever

and back/joint pain) with other widespread diseases such as malaria or flu-like

infections. Table 33 is an attempt to obtain information on the diagnosis and

65

prevalence of “flu-like infections” as well as TB in man covering the period of 12

months..

If laboratory facilities exist a malaria test is usually carried out in patients with such

“flu-like” infections. Otherwise malaria treatment is administered symptomatically.

The interviews in health centres and hospitals revealed that 1-5% (Senegal and The

Gambia) and 1-10% (Guinea and Guinea Bissau) of patients who test negative for

malaria still receive anti-malaria drugs without any differential diagnosis. Thus such

patients, could well be infected with brucellosis or other diseases with similar

symptoms.

The prevalence of TB-infections in man was found in the majority of locations in The

Gambia, Senegal and Guinea to be less than one percent. However, in Guinea Bissau

prevalences were higher and ranged between 6 and 10%. In most of the hospitals or

health centres visited no strain identification or transfer of samples to the National

Reference Laboratories was done. Hence the possible role and importance of M.

bovis in the epidemiology of human TB in these countries could not be assessed.

Samples are only occasionally sent for further identification to the National

Reference Laboratories from few of the locations in Guinea and The Gambia.

Table 33: Selected information on diagnostic procedures and prevalences related

to flu-like infections and TB among patients that visited the health

centres of this survey during the last year by country


Location GBA CRD Bafata Coyah Dubréka Bassin Arachidier

Number of health

centres / hospitals 2 3 3 2 2 4

66

visited

Standard procedure for patients with “flu-like symptoms” (i.e. malaria, flu, brucellosis)

Malaria test done if

available 2 2 2 2 0 2

If test unavailable

malaria treatment

given without test 0 1 1 0 0 2

Proportions of malaria test negative patients reported (No. of PH facilities)

1-5% 2 2 1 1 0 4

6-10% 0 0 2 1 0 0

Test not applied 0 1 0 0 2 0

Proportions of TB patients reported in the last year (No. of PH facilities)

<1% 2 3 0 2 1 3

1-5% 0 0 0 1 0 1

6-10% 0 0 3 0 0 0

Strain identification for M. bovis undertaken (No. of PH facilities)

Not performed at all 1 2 3 1 0 4

Applied but not

regularly 1 1 0 2 1 0

5.6.3.3 Specific knowledge of brucellosis

The specific knowledge of personnel interviewed in the hospitals or health centres

was found to be very limited (Table 34). Only in five of the 16 locations visited were

the disease and symptoms in man known. The diagnostic capacity to apply

brucellosis specific tests did not exist in any of the locations. Moreover, only one

physician from Senegal had knowledge of the diagnostic procedures.

Table 34: Knowledge of brucellosis symptoms in man and diagnostic procedures

(number of hospitals or health centres by country)


Location GBA CRD Bafata Coyah Dubréka Bassin

Arachidier

67

Health centre/hospitals

visited

2 3 3 2 2 4

Number with knowledge of:

Brucellosis infection and

symptoms in man 1 0 1 1 0 2

Diagnostic procedures 0 0 0 0 0 1

Number where test is applied if the disease is suspected 0 0 0 0 0 0

Summary • Rabies was the zoonosis ranked highest by public health authorities followed by

Salmonella infections.

• Patients with “brucellosis or flu -like” infections (fever and back/joint pain) are

tested for malaria where laboratory facilities are available. If not, malaria

treatment is administered symptomatically without differential diagnosis, e.g. for

brucellosis.

• The personnel’s knowledge of brucellosis (symptoms, transmission etc.) was very

limited, laboratory tests were not undertaken in any of the visited locations.

• Strain identification for M. bovis in patients with symptoms of TB was not carried

out in any of the health centres/hospitals visited in Guinea Bissau and Senegal

and rarely performed in The Gambia and Guinea.

5.7 Potential direct and indirect losses due to brucellosis 5.7.1 General herd parameters

The herd structure is presented in Table 35. Herd sizes differed significantly between

the regions with larger average herd sizes in Guinea Bissau (159) and Guinea (136)

than in Senegal (81) and The Gambia (61).

Table 35: Mean herd sizes and proportion of bulls, cows, heifers and calves

based on questionnaires by country

Herd size/ Gambia Guinea Guinea Senegal

68

composition Bissau Overall mean size (100%)

61a

(46.6,74,6) 136 b

(108.7,162.9) 159 b

(92.1,218.7) 81a

(62.8,98.6)% Bulls (not castrated >3 yrs) 2,3% 6,7% 2,2% 3,6% % Cows (after calving) 43,6% 44,3% 53,3% 54,7% % Heifers (>1 year until calving) 23,1% 22,0% 25,3% 19,0% % Calves (0 – 1yr.) 24,1% 19,6% 18,9% 13,6%

a:b (<0.05) In brackets: CI

The predominant cattle breed in Guinea, The Gambia and Guinea Bissau is the

trypanotolerant N´Dama and in Senegal the Zebu type of cattle. F1 cattle (crosses

with exotic breeds) were only present in Senegal and The Gambia on farms

representing the MOPS (Table 36).

Table 36: Cattle breeds in the study population (number of farms)

Gambia Guinea Guinea

Bissau Senegal*

Breed/Location GBA

(MOPS)

CRD

(LIPS)

Coyah Dubréka Bafata MOPS LIPS

No of farms 15 20 20 20 20 20 20

N´Dama - 20 20 20 20 - 1

N´Dama & F1 14 - - - - - -

N´Dama & WAS* - - - - - - 2

F1 1 - - - - 1 -

69

Zebu - - - - - - 11

Zebu & F1 - - - - - 14 -

Zebu & N´Dama - - - - - - 5

Zebu & N´Dama &

F1

- - - - - 5 -

Zebu & WAS* - - - - - 4

* West African shorthorn

5.7.2 Direct and indirect losses due to brucellosis (abortions and cow sterility)

To get some information on the direct and indirect losses potentially attributable to

brucellosis, observations on infertile cows and cases of abortions in cattle and SR on

herd level were recorded. A cow was considered to be sterile if it had not produced a

calf during the last three years. Observations on sterile cows and cases of abortions

were more frequent in herds from Guinea Bissau and Guinea (Table 37). In SR no

significant differences between the countries were detected.

Table 37: Selected herd fertility parameters

Gambia Guinea Guinea

Bissau

Senegal

Location CRD Dubréka Bafata LIPS

No of farmers interviewed 35 40 20 40

Observations in cattle


cattle (obtained from group

discussion) 10 a 27b

19 c 17 a

% observing abortions in their 8 a 21 b 6 a

70

cattle * 14 b

% observing infertile cows in their

cattle

(>2 years without calf) * 2 a 18 b

12 b 10 a

Observations in SR

% observing abortions in their SR

(obtained from group discussion) 20 21

7 26

% observing abortions in their SR

* 12 8

3 14

* Obtained from questionnaires a:b (p<0.05)

Summary:

• The number of cattle herds with infertile cows or abortions was higher in Guinea

and Guinea Bissau than in Senegal and The Gambia

5.8 Serological sampling for brucellosis

5.8.1 B. abortus in herd bulk milk samples

On some farms herd bulk milk samples were taken and tested for B. abortus using

milk-ELISA (Table 38). Bulk milk samples were not collected in the GBA (The

Gambia) and Coyah (Guinea) as most of the herds were on transhumance.during the

time of the study Significantly higher herd prevalences for bovine brucellosis were

found on farms from Guinea and Guinea Bissau confirming previous observations in

serological surveys (see 5.9.1 and Annex 2, Table 1).

Table 38: Serological results for B. abortus for herd bulk milk samples

Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal*

Location GBA CRD Bafata Coyah Dubréka MOPS LIPS

No of herds sampled - 20 20 - 12 20 20

% Herds with positive bulk

milk for B. abortus

- 15 a

(3/20)

75 b

(15/20)

- 83 b

(10/12)

10 a

(2/20)

5 a

(1/20)

a:b (p<0.05)

71

5.8.2 B. abortus in man (volunteers)

In a local health centre in Dubréka (Guinea), identified as a high brucellosis

prevalence area for cattle in previous ITC studies (see 5.9.1 and Annex 2, Table 1),

some individuals in the potential risk groups (eight herders, seven farmers, three milk

vendors and two veterinary technicians) were tested for the presence of brucella

abortus antibodies. Out of 20 volunteers seven reacted positive, all of them herders

(n= 4) or farmers (n= 3).

Summary

• B. abortus herd prevalence in bulk herd milk was significantly higher in Guinea

and Guinea Bissau.

• Seven out of 20 volunteers tested positive for brucellosis in a high prevalence

area for cattle (Dubréka, Guinea).

5.9 Differences in local perceptions of the impact of zoonoses on livestock

and

man in relation to present and previous serological findings in cattle

Since 2000 ITC has undertaken several studies to get base line information on the

distribution of bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis in cattle in The Gambia, Senegal,

Guinea and Guinea Bissau. The studies were carried out in the form of abattoir (BTB)

and herd screening surveys (BTB and brucellosis).

5.9.1 Brucellosis

Results of previous serological studies are summarized in Table 1 of Annex 2 and

indicate different epidemiological situations in the four countries. Highest mean

72

prevalences for bovine brucellosis were found in Guinea Bissau (Bafata: 18.6%) and

Guinea with 9.2% (Dubréka and Coyah). These values were considerably lower in

the surveyed districts of The Gambia (CRD: 1.1 %) and Senegal (Bassin Arachidier.

0.6 %). No samples were taken in the GBA of The Gambia.

During the course of this study, herd bulk milk samples were collected from

participating farmers. The results are presented in Section 5.8.1. and are consistent

with previous serological findings.

It was expected that differences in farmers’ and risk groups’ perception of the impact

of brucellosis would be related to the distribution of the infection in cattle. Therefore

the results of the PRA and semi-structured questionnaires were compared with

previous and actual (herd bulk milk) serological findings.

As shown in Table 39, brucellosis was ranked high as a disease by farmers and local

veterinarians in the high prevalence areas of Guinea and Guinea Bissau. Also, in

these countries, clinical symptoms of brucellosis in cattle were more frequently

observed and there was greater familiarity with the disease and its modes of

transmission. However, farmers’ knowledge about the prevention of infection did not

necessarily correlate with serological findings e.g. high herd prevalences were found

in areas with high (Guinea Bissau) as well as in areas with low knowledge (Guinea)..

Despite the different epidemiological situations for brucellosis in cattle and the

observed differences in perception of farmers and veterinary health services, the

awareness of the public health sector for this zoonosis was very low in all four

countries. Currently, no diagnostic tests on patients with brucellosis-like-symptoms

were either performed or available in any of the health centres visited.

Table 39: Respondents’ perceptions of brucellosis and serological findings by

country

Gambia (CRD)

Guinea Guinea Bissau

Senegal

Farmers perceptions (see 5.2.1.1)

Ranking of brucellosis among 5

Most important diseases

Not among

first 5

Rank No.

5

Rank No.

5

Not among

first 5

Ranking of brucellosis among

chronic infections

Not

mentioned

Rank No. 1 Rank No. 1 Not

mentioned

Farmers observation on brucellosis (see 5.4.1)

73

No. of farmers knowing the

symptoms 4/15 30/40 20/20 23/40


modes of transmission 3/15 11/40 20/20 22/40


preventive measures 2/15 1/40 13/20 9/40

VH authorities’ perceptions (see 5.6.2.2)

Ranking of brucellosis among 5

Most important diseases Not among

first 5

Rank No.

3

Rank No.

4 Not among

first 5

PH authorities, perceptions (see 5.6.3.3)

No. of officers knowing

the zoonotic character 0/3 1/4 1/3 2/4

No. of officers knowing the

diagnostic procedures in man No knowledge 1/4

Serological survey (previous studies, see Annex 2, Table 1)

Mean animal prevalence 1.1 a

(0.2,2.0)

9.2 b

(7.8,10.6) 18.6 c

(15.3,21.9) 0.6 a (0,1.3)

Mean herd prevalence 15 a

(0,30.6)

88.6 b

(78.1,99.0) 100 b 10 a

(0,20.7)

Serological screening of bulk milk (present study, see 5.8.1)

Mean herd prevalence 15 a - 83 b 7.5 a

In brackets: CI for the mean

74

5.9.2 Tuberculosis

Findings obtained from previous on-farm and abattoir ITC investigations into bovine

tuberculosis are summarized in Table 2 of Annex 2. No confirmed cases of M. bovis

were found in any of the countries.

Results are consistent with observations obtained from the PRA and questionnaires

(Table 40) administered in this study. Farmers as well as veterinarians did not

consider BTB to be an important disease. However, farmers’ knowledge of

symptoms in cattle and how to prevent transmission to man was significantly better in

Guinea Bissau. There were no differences in perception of PH authorities. No

confirmed case of BTB was reported in any of the health centres or hospitals visited.

Table 40: Respondents’ perceptions of BTB and serological findings by country


Senegal

Farmers’ perceptions (see 5.2.1.1)

Ranking of BTB among 5 most

important diseases

Not mentioned

Ranking of BTB among chronic

infections

Not mentioned

Farmers observation on BTB (see 5.3.1.1 )


symptoms 7/35 a 20/40 b 15/20 b 6/40 a


preventive measures 2/35 a 1/40 a 15/20 b 4/40 a

VH authorities’ perceptions (see 5.6.2.2)

Ranking of BTB among 5 most

important diseases Not mentioned

PH authorities perception (see 5.6.3.3)

Isolation of M. bovis applied Not applied regularly Not applied

Reports in man No knowledge

Previous surveys – tuberculinization & meat inspection - (see Annex 2, Table 2)

Mean animal prevalence 0 0 0 0

a:b (p< 0.05)

75

Summary:

• Differences observed in perception of farmers and other risk groups concerning

brucellosis (i.e. knowledge and results of disease importance ranking) were in

agreement with serological results for brucellosis in cattle. Brucellosis was

ranked high by farmers and veterinarians in the high risk areas for cattle.

• The absence of BTB infection in cattle was confirmed by a general low perception

of farmers and veterinary health authorities related to this diseases (i.e. not

considered as an important disease in disease ranking)

6 DISCUSSION

This study was the first attempt in each of the four countries to get information on the

impact of zoonoses by obtaining and comparing information from different

stakeholder groups: farmers, milk vendors, butchers, veterinarians, public health

authorities. Information was collected using group discussions and interviews. The

results obtained were compared to previous prevalence studies for selected zoonoses.

Discussion of methodology

The study chose a step-wise approach, starting with group discussions in form of

PRAs with groups of up to 15 people, composed of the key persons dealing with the

animals either directly (farmers and herders) or indirectly (milk vendors). A local

veterinary person (veterinarian or livestock assistant) was also invited to verify

observations and to assist in clarifying local descriptions for ultimate definition of the

most important diseases. It showed that “unspecific symptoms” were difficult to

allocate to individual diseases. We therefore gave specific disease descriptions as

guidelines for the discussion. With this assistance, the PRA group discussions were

able to reach a consensus as to which were the most important diseases, although

some groups of symptoms were retained as such in the ranking (foot problems and

diarrhoea).

76

As would be expected, participants tended to remember recent outbreaks more easily

than events in the past, so questions covered the last 12 months. Replies may also

have been influenced by the lack of knowledge of specific diseases and better

knowledge of disease syndromes such as diarrhoea, constipation, foot problem,

abortions, respiratory problems. It was observed that farmers were not clear about

the difference between anthrax and BQ, particularly in the francophone countries

where their French names are similar (charbon bacterienne and charbon

symptomatique).

The moderators of the PRAs attempted to clarify some of the uncertain answers by

additional questioning and further discussions. This led to allocation of some of these

descriptions to groups of diseases, e.g. respiratory disease allocated to PPR and

pasteurellosis.

The main objective of this study, the importance of zoonoses, was not directly

communicated to the farmers while carrying out the exercise of definition of most

important diseases, in order to assess their appreciation by farmers amongst all other

diseases. One of the PRA discussion points was the knowledge of chronic diseases.

This question was asked with a view to bringing out the mention of brucellosis and

tuberculosis-like disease occurrences. Answers were clearly referring to brucellosis

in Guinea and Guinea Bissau, whereas no reference was made in Gambia and

Senegal. No reference was made to tuberculosis in any of the four countries. In

general, chronic diseases were even less specifically described by farmers than acute

diseases and were difficult to allocate.

Thereafter questions were directed more specifically to zoonotic diseases also in a

step-wise approach: “name up to three zoonotic diseases”; “discuss the top zoonotic

diseases”; “specify your knowledge of these diseases”. It was particularly noticeable

in this discussion that some participants easily dominated others, which could be

explained by the general lack of awareness of what zoonosis, as a concept of a

disease, which people could get from animals, means.

77

Thereafter five farmers from the PRA group were invited to look at the list of

important diseases, including the identified zoonoses and were asked to select the top

five diseases and to rank them (separately for cattle and small ruminants).

In a second step the group of informants was expanded to include selected

farmers/herders, veterinarians, butchers and medical health authorities. The method

used was semi-structured questionnaires. It was observed that willingness of

farmers/herders to go into exhaustive discussions particularly on disease reporting

over the last 12 months was less than during group discussions (PRA), which made it

more difficult e.g. to reach at disease ranking. On the other hand, answers to specific

questions, e.g. on symptoms, mode of transmission of zoonotic diseases, were more

differentiated and more quantitative. The use of questionnaires with the group of

veterinary and medical health personnel posed no problems and revealed clear

results. Interviewing butchers revealed that their record keeping was poor, therefore

answers could not be confirmed by documentation.

In conclusion, this study tried to make use of different approaches so as to

compensate for deficits that may be inbuilt in one method by using additional

methods. However, a certain degree of interpretation by the moderators (PRA) and

interviewers (questionnaires) influenced the final presentation of results. This aspect

has been offset by a multi-facetted presentation of the results that span all approaches

and questions asked. This shows particularly when comparing results of PRA and

individual interviews on brucellosis or farmers’ knowledge of zoonotic diseases in

different countries, where similar results were obtained by both methods.

Zoonoses

This discussion does not attempt to repeat the results reported in each chapter.

Farmers’ perception of zoonoses clearly differed between the countries, with a better

level of knowledge in Guinea Bissau. This observation was initially made during

group discussions and later confirmed in the interviews. The greater knowledge

covered symptoms in animals, mode of transmission and preventive measures, the

78

latter two only for certain zoonoses. Moreover, changes in meat quality due to animal

disease were also better known in Guinea Bissau than in the other three countries.

The differing levels of knowledge seem to be related to how common the disease is

within a country (e.g. prevalence of brucellosis highest in Guinea Bissau, followed by

Guinea). However, this does not fully explain the varying levels of knowledge of

rabies or BTB as the distribution of these diseases is similar in the four countries.

With the exceptions mentioned above for Guinea Bissau, the PRA has clearly

demonstrated that farmers are not aware of the potential risks of consuming meat

from animals suffering from acute or chronic diseases such as anthrax or BTB. In

particular, their knowledge of the public health risk of anthrax was poor. The

majority of respondents in group discussions in The Gambia, Senegal and Guinea

indicated that meat of such animals is consumed after proper cooking or traditional

treatment.

Milk in the region is consumed as fresh and or sour milk. SOMDA et al. (2003) have

shown in a recent survey on the consumption pattern of milk in The Gambia that

local fresh milk is the most preferred (35%) followed by sour milk (33%). Moreover

81% of respondents preferred local dairy products to imported ones Results have

clearly shown that processing of raw milk differs between countries. Milk, if

consumed fresh on farm, was boiled by the majority of farmers in Guinea Bissau,

while in all other countries this is the exception. Although this is applied traditionally

in Guinea Bissau it might be also related to the high prevalence of brucellosis, which

is locally known as “bakale” and related by some farmers to malaria-like symptoms

in man. Conversely a good number of farmers in The Gambia and Senegal still

believe that heating of milk may significantly reduce the yield of the producing cow.

This traditional belief might limit the willingness of these farmers to accept

pasteurisation as measure to prevent the transmission of zoonoses. However, because

of customer preferences, milk is often sold fermented and therefore never boiled.

Farmers and milk vendors clearly believe that milk, if boiled once, will not ferment.

The use of starter cultures for fermentation after heating, was not known to the milk

vendors. Some vendors related faster fermentation to improved quality of milk, an

observation, which might reflect their interest in selling as much as possible sour

79

milk. The same observation was made by HEMPEN (2003). These vendors were thus

not aware of the fact that faster fermentation indicates higher bacterial contamination.

Bovine brucellosis

The key symptoms of bovine brucellosis such as the occurrence of abortions,

hygromas and infertility in cows were more frequently observed in Guinea and

Guinea Bissau. In addition, farmers’ knowledge was better in these two countries.

However, there are important public health implications attached to the observations

made, particularly during group discussions in Guinea, that farmers do not consider

cows with hygroma as sick and their milk is still consumed.

It is well known for brucellosis that seropositivity is strongly related to the

occurrence of this clinical symptom (AKAKPO et al., 1987, OLOFFS 1996,

OLOFFS et al. 1998, UNGER et al, 2003). Therefore it was expected that these

differences in reports of clinical observations may coincide with previous results

from serological surveys. When comparing PRA results and serological findings this

assumption was confirmed. Significantly higher prevalences for bovine brucellosis

based on serology in serum (previous surveys) and herd bulk milk (see 5.8.1) were

found in Guinea Bissau and Guinea as compared to The Gambia and Senegal.

The high prevalences in reported herd bulk milk samples in Guinea and Guinea

Bissau and the volunteers testing serologically positive in Dubréka in Guinea are also

indicative of a high public health risk. However, this high risk was not at all reflected

in any awareness of this disease by the public health authorities. The majority of

public health persons interviewed were not aware of brucellosis as a zoonosis.

Moreover, the capacity to diagnose infections in man was not available in any of the

health centres visited. As confirmed in our investigations in volunteers and also

reported by PERRY et al. (2002) prevalences for brucellosis in risk groups in high

prevalence areas for cattle are likely to be high.

80

It has to be noted that a moderate number of abortions in cattle was also reported by

farmers in The Gambia and Senegal. This indicates that there are other causes than

brucellosis for abortions. In contrast to cattle the occurrence of abortions in small

ruminants did not differ significantly between the countries.

BTB

In contrast to bovine brucellosis, farmers’ awareness of this zoonosis was generally

low in all countries surveyed. This was also confirmed by the veterinary and public

health authorities. The results of group discussions and interviews are in agreement

with previous findings of ITC studies. As no confirmed case of M. bovis was found in

the cattle population in large scale abattoir and on-farm surveys it was concluded that

the risk posed by this zoonosis to the consumer is very low (UNGER et al. 2003).

Although the interviews in hospitals and health centres have shown that M.

tuberculosis is widespread in the region the diagnostic capacity to isolate M. bovis in

human sputum samples is restricted to the National Reference Laboratories (Senegal

and Guinea) and the Medical Research Council (The Gambia). However, the standard

procedure for investigating cases of suspected tuberculosis usually stops after the

Ziehl Neelsen stain without further culturing and can only confirm Mycobacteria spp.

Production system

Results from interviews and group discussions indicated that farmers’ knowledge of

zoonoses was not related to production systems. A possible explanation for this

unexpected result might be that the introduction of the MOPS in the GBA of The

Gambia and the Bassin Arachidier of Senegal is not yet fully established and is an

on-going process. It is better characterised as a transitional phase from LIPS to

MOPS. Therefore, farmers’ knowledge might not yet be significantly different

between the two systems.

81

Results show the urgent need for an improvement of knowledge of farmers

representing the MOPS, as it is well known that the incidence of certain zoonoses

(diseases of intensification) might increase drastically with intensification.

However, some differences in disease ranking were observed between the production

systems for The Gambia. The ecological and endemic situation differs between the

GBA and CRDsouth. Therefore the level of challenge from certain diseases (e.g. tick-

borne diseases or trypanosomosis) varies and could explain the different rankings.

7 CONCLUSIONS

Comparing results obtained from various groups of respondents (farmers, herders,

butchers, milk vendors, veterinarians and public health facilities) and using different

methods of collection of information (interviews and group discussions) this scoping

study was able to collect a significant amount of information on all aspects of

zoonoses. All the potential risk groups (farmers, herders, butchers, milk vendors,

butchers and veterinarians) and health authorities (veterinary and public health) were

involved in the study. This broad-spectrum approach has not been applied before and

can be considered unique.

Furthermore, this scoping study linked results from questionnaires and group

discussions obtained from different groups of respondents with data from

epidemiological studies on the distribution and prevalence of selected zoonoses. It

was clearly shown that serological prevalences of selected zoonoses (bovine

brucellosis and BTB) were reflected in farmers’ perceptions.

For brucellosis, it was shown for two countries of the study region (Guinea and

Guinea Bissau) that the perception of interviewed groups did correspond well with

the prevalence of this zoonosis in cattle, but it did not correlate to the potential

impact in man. Based on results of herd screenings and clinical observations,

brucellosis is considered to be a serious human health hazard in the surveyed districts

in those countries. Although the symptoms of brucellosis in cattle and the possible

modes of transmission to man, were best known by farmers in the high cattle

prevalence area of Guinea Bissau, this improved knowledge did not result in the

82

application of any meaningful control measures, thus it may not contribute to reduced

prevalences in cattle and consequently in man.

In particular the perception of the public health authorities was exceptionally low in

areas with high prevalence in cattle, and equally so in the low prevalence areas of

Guinea and Guinea Bissau.

Livestock offers both a major contribution to the livelihood of producers but also a

risk to consumers´ health and performance. The control of zoonotic diseases such as

brucellosis will require a coordinated effort of medical and veterinary research, the

provision of veterinary services and the reinforcement of disease control regulations.

8 RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 Recommendations for the control of Bovine Brucellosis in the countries

of this survey

Based on the results of the prevalence studies and perceptions of farmers, the

approach in the fours countries to control of bovine brucellosis differs.

Recommendations are made by country and include the technical options as well as

human resource development options.

8.1.1 Guinea

The scoping study together with the animal prevalence studies revealed the existence

of areas of high within-herd prevalence (up to 13.2, CI: 10.8, 15.6), well above the

limit of 10% recommended by OIE for vaccination. However, areas where no

brucellosis was found were also detected (e.g. Labe) during the prevalence studies.

Given the infrastructure and poor financial situation of public services in Guinea, a

country wide serological survey, though appropriate, can not be recommended.

However, our results give enough evidence to justify intervention. We therefore

recommend that Guinea seeks external donor funding support to carry out surveys in

other Provinces with high cattle densities in form of bulk milk sample testing. Herds

found positive in bulk milk sample tests should then be retested serologically. This

approach is fast, easy to apply and cheaper than large scale serological surveys.

83

Based on the results already available from our studies and the recommended

additional study, the appropriate application of the control option vaccination and test

and slaughter can be made. We recommend for the areas covered by our studies,

vaccination of herds with an within-herd prevalence >10% following OIE procedures

to reduce prevalence to levels that are appropriate for test and slaughter policy.

Similar control attempts in other developing countries (e.g.Malaysia) have not fully

succeeded because between herd movement in high prevalence areas could not be

controlled (Palamisany et al. 2003). An individual animal registration system exists

in Guinea, that could be used to enhance this type of movement control.

Additional measures to break the chain of infection within and between herds are an

increased level of hygienic handling of infectious material (aborted foetus, milk of

positive animals). Our studies showed that these measures are usually not known and

are not applied.

8.1.2 Guinea Bissau

The areas covered in Guinea Bissau by the scoping study and the animal prevalence

study cover more than 50% of the National herd. In all areas surveyed brucellosis

was found to exist with maximum within-herd prevalence of 19.4% (CI: 16.1, 22.7).

It can therefore be concluded that a countrywide effort to control brucellosis is

indicated without necessity for further herd testing.

Given the limited number of the national herd (~ 300.000 cattle) a nationwide

vaccination campaign can be recommended to reduce prevalence to levels

appropriate for test and slaughter. Application of hygienic measures and animal

movement control as described for Guinea apply. However, our study found a

significantly higher knowledge by farmers on possible preventive measure (e.g.

discarding of milk from animals with hygroma or abortion history; destruction of

aborted foetus).

Technical control options recommended for both countries include the test and

slaughter option as per recommendation by OIE.

In both countries cattle represent living capital for herd owners and their agreement

to slaughter animals in case of detected brucellosis may be difficult to obtain unless

84

compensation is offered. This attitude is the major obstacle to implementation of this

control option and Governments should consider to request external financial

assistance not only for the vaccination campaign but also for the creation of a

compensation fund.

8.1.3 Gambia and Senegal

Compared to the findings in Guinea and Guinea Bissau the within-herd prevalence in

the areas surveyed were well below 10% (Senegal: 0.9%; CI: 0; 1.1; Gambia: 0.8; CI:

0;2.)

Gambia: though our study surveyed the District with the highest animal density (40%

of the national herd) we recommend extending the survey to include the other

districts to consolidate our findings using the approach as described above (screening

of bulk milk samples followed by serological tests of positive herds),

Given the low animal prevalence (5 animals out of 465) the test and slaughter

policy is recommended and Government authorities should be encouraged to

reinforce this policy, bearing in mind the necessity to compensate farmers.

Senegal: Contrary to the other countries, the area surveyed in Senegal is not

representative in terms of highest cattle numbers, but represents an area in transition

from traditional to intensified cattle husbandry, where cross bred dairy animals have

been introduced since the 1990s. As brucellosis has often been described as a disease

of intensification, it was seen important to characterise the disease situation in this

region. Other areas with high local cattle densities and small numbers of crossbreds,

e.g.. Casamance, have not been covered by our study and herd testing using bulk milk

samples is recommended.

The same recommendation concerning the test and slaughter policy as described for

Gambia applies.

85

In addition to the above technical control policy option, the study revealed different,

but generally very poor levels of knowledge on zoonoses, their spread, symptoms and

control by the investigated risk groups (farmers, butcher, milk vendors, herders,

public health authorities).

We recommend sensitisation and awareness campaigns and training targeted at the

different groups.

Farmers and herders in Guinea Bissau had the highest level of knowledge. Practical

training in disease control and prevention appears appropriate, whereas for all other

countries sensitisation and awareness campaigns have to precede training.

The group of butchers had the same low level of knowledge in all countries; training

on diseases that affect quality of meat is recommended.

People handling milk (herders, milk vendors) would benefit from training on milk

hygiene and awareness on risk associated with consumption of raw milk.

Public health authorities in all countries had a very low awareness of the importance

of zoonotic diseases, with the exception of rabies. The link between Veterinary health

and Public Health authorities is generally weak, better communication and exchange

of health statistics is recommended.

The recommendations for sensitisation and training should be supported by the

production of leaflets for distribution to livestock assistants and other veterinary and

public health personnel, training manuals to be used for training of farmers and

multimedia campaigns.

8.2 Recommendations for future research

The most surprising finding in the prevalence studies was the apparent non-existence

of BTB in the four countries under investigation. This finding was well reflected in

the perception of livestock stakeholders, who did not attribute any major importance

to BTB. As much as human tuberculosis is on the increase, also in the context of the

AIDS pandemic, there is no apparent zoonotic link to cattle.

During the tuberculinisation tests in Guinea, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau and

Senegal, more than 50% of cattle reacted positive for PPD M. avium. Recent findings

86

have shown that environmental infections with other mycobacteria can influence the

immune response to M. bovis to an unknown extend (BUDDLE et al., 2002;

VORDERMEIER et al., 2001). It is therefore assumed, that the unexpected absence

of M. bovis in the study population may not reflect the true epidemiological picture.

The phenomenon of interference of environmental infections with the classical

infection pathway, explained by cross-immunity mechanism, has been reported in

humans (BLACK et al., 2002). The observed variation in immuno-response to M.

tuberculosis in man may reflect geographic variations in the exposure to

environmental mycobacteria, as it was reported recently by BLACK et al. (2002)

comparing vaccinated populations in Malawi and UK. When tested with the specific

antigen for M. tuberculosis (ESAT -6) in comparison with the PDD, a larger

proportion of patients reacted positively to the PDD, a clear indication for exposure

to environmental mycobacteria. The role of the unspecific, non-pathogenic

mycobacterial infections in the epidemiology of M. bovis is not known and may be

very specific for West Africa. As described for M. tuberculosis (BLACK et al., 2002)

and in consideration of the very close genetic similarity between M. bovis and M.

tuberculosis, potential candidates for protective cross-immunity for M .bovis could be

M. avium. M. intracellulare and M. marinum.

Further investigations using more sensitive diagnostic methods to clarify the role of

possible cross-immunity induced by environmental mycobacteria in the

epidemiology of BTB as well as human tuberculosis are recommended. Results could

provide more differentiated information on the role of mycobacteria infections in

cattle and the role of environmental versus pathogen mycobacteria.

9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank all the people who actively participated in the

implementation of this study, too many to be named here. Particular thanks go to Dr

Boye Diallo and Dr Alphonse Goumou of Guinea (DNE), Dr Mamadou Diop and Mr

Douda Deh of Senegal (ISRA), Dr Hipolito Djata and Dr Ivo Mendez of Guinea

Bissau (DGP) and Mr Jabel Sowe and Dr Demba Jallow of The Gambia (DLS), who

assisted in the identification of experienced PRA staff, suitable areas to carry out the

87

study and general organisation of this study. The PRA experts, namely Omar Ngom,

Louis Beavogui, Filomeno Barbosa deserve our sincere thanks for their devotion to

this work, even under difficult local circumstances and working conditions.

Support with sample size determination and choice of statistical methods was given

by Dr Moses Kyule, FU Berlin, Germany and Dr Mulumba Kamuanga of

ILRI/CIRDES.

No results could have been presented here without the wholehearted support and

willingness to participate of the farmers that shared their opinions, time and

enthusiasm about livestock keeping with us.

The International Trypanotolerance Centre provided its facilities, infrastructure and

the support by the Director General to this study is acknowledged.

Our colleagues Michaela Hempen and Penda Kane need to be thanked for their

assistance in the milk sample testing. The assistance of Dr Karsten Nöckler

(Reference Laboratory for brucellosis at the Institute for Risk Assessment, BfR,

Berlin, Germany) and Dr Jakob Zinsstag, (Swiss Tropical Institute, Basel,

Swizerland) in providing the antigen and reagents for the serological tests for

brucellosis is greatly appreciated.

We gratefully acknowledge the funding of this study by DFID’s Animal Health

Programme.

88

10 REFERENCES ADAMS & MAEGRAITH (1984):

Clinical Tropical Diseases. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.

AKAKPO, A. J., BORNAREL, P. (1987):

Epidemiology of animal brucellosis in Tropical Africa:

Clinical, serological, and bacteriological surveys.

Res. Sci. Tech. 6, 981-1027.

AKINBAMIJO, O.O. (2003):

Peri-urban/market oriented agriculture: an introduction

Proceedings, of the Procordel National Conference, 13-14 November 2003,

The Gambia. International Trypanotolerance Centre, Banjul, The Gambia,

ISBN 9983 9910 39, 104 pp.

BATHKE, W.(1987):

Brucellose. In: BEER, J.: Infektionskrankheiten der Haustiere.

Gustav Fischer Jena, 3rd, 1987, 654-655.

BUDDLE, B.M., WARDS, B.J., ALDWELL, F.E:, COLLINS, D.M., De

LISLE,G.W. (2002):

Influence of sensitisation to environmental mycobacteria on subsequent

vaccination against bovine tuberculosis.

Vaccine. 2002, 20: 7-8, 1126-1133; 25 ref.

BLACK, G.F., WEIR, R.E., FLOYD, S., BLISS, L., WARNDORFF, D.K.,

CRAMPIN, A.C., NIGWIRA, B., SICHALI, L., NAZARETH, B., BLACKWELL,

89

J.M., BRANSON, D., CHAGULUKA, S.D., DONOVAN, L., JARME

N, E., KING, E., FINE, P.E.M., DOCKRELL, H.M. (2002):

BCG induced increase in interferon-gamma response to mycobacgterial

antigens and efficacy of BCG vaccination in Malawi and the UK: two

randomised controlled studies.

The Lancet. Vol 359. April 20, 2002.

DABORN, C.J., GRANGE, J.M., KAZWALA, R.R. (1996):

The bovine tuberculosis cycle – an African perspective.

Soc Appl Bacteriol Symp. 1996, 25, 27-32.

DJORDJEVIC, M., LAKO, B., RISTANOVIC, E. (2003):

The significance of serological tests in diagnosis and following up of

neurobrucellosis: case report.

Poster, Brucellosis 2003 International Research Conference.

Sept 15-17, 2003, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.

DRESCHEL, P., QUANSAH, C. AND PENNING DE VRIES, F. (1998):

Stimulation of urban and peri-urban agriculture in West Africa -

Characteristics, challenges, and need for action. Paper delivered at IDRC

workshop on Urban Agriculture, 15-18 June 1998, Ouagadougou,

International Board for Soil Research and Management and University of

Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana, and Bangkok, Thailand, 21 pp.

(June)

FAO (1980) :

Le bétail trypanotolerant en Afrique Occidentale et Centrale, Volume I, Etude

Générale. Etude FAO : Production et Santé Animales 20/1, Rome.

FALL, A. (2003):

Low input livestock agriculture: an introduction

90

Proceedings, of the Procordel National Conference, 13-14 November 2003,

The Gambia. International Trypanotolerance Centre, Banjul, The Gambia

.ISBN 9983 9910 39, 104 pp.

GONÇALVES, V.S.P. (1995).

Livestock production in Guinea Bissau: Development potentials and

constraints. PhD dissertation. Department of Agriculture, University of

Reading.

HEMPEN, M., UNGER, F., MUENSTERMANN, S., ZESSIN, K.-H. (2002):

First results of the hygienic status of raw and sour milk from smallholder

dairy farms and local markets and potential risk for public health in The

Gambia, Senegal and Guinea Conakry.

26th International Dairy Foundation World Dairy Congress (Congrilait), Paris,

24 –27.9.2002.

HEMPEN, M. (2003): Personal communications.

MASOURIDOU, S., ANDRIOPOULOS, P., FOKAS, S., KALKANI, M.,

DINOSOPOULOU, M., ASIMAKOPOULOS, G.. TSIRONI, M. (2003):

Presentation of acute brucellosis: A review of 144 cases.

Brucellosis 2003 International Research Conference.

Sep 15-17, 2003, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.

MBOGOH, S.G. (1984):

Dairy development and internal dairy marketing in sub-Saharan Africa:

performance, policies and options. LPU Working Paper No. 5. Addis

Ababa: ILCA.

MDRA/DGP (1991):

91

Inquerito sobre os efectivos de gado nas regiões de Oio, Bafata et Gabu.

Direcção Geral da Pecuaria, Ministério do Desenvolvimento Rural e

Agricultura, Bissau.

NICHOLSON, C.F., RUTHERFORD, A.S., STAAL, S.J., THORPE, W.,

THORTHON, P., KRUSKA, R. (1999):

The impact of income growth and urbanisation on dairy consumption in

developing countries. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi,

Kenya.

OLOFFS, A. (1996):

Bovine brucellosis investigations on selected dairy farms in Rukungiri

District and Mukono Country, Uganda.

Diploma Thesis, Freie Universität Berlin, Fachbereich Veterinärmedizin,

Berlin, Germany

OLOFFS, A., BAUMANN, M.P.O., AFEMA, J., NAKAVUMA, J. (1998)

Experiences with a strategy to investigate bovine brucellosis in a rural area in

Southwest Uganda.

Revue Èlev. Méd. Vét. Pays trop., 51 (2), 101-105

PALAMISANY, K., MAHENDRAN, R., IDRIS, K. (2003):

A serious threat to cattle production in Malaysia.

Brucellosis 2003 International Research Conference.

Sep 15-17, 2003, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.

PERRY, B.D., RANDOLPH, T.F., MCDERMOTT, J.J., SONES, K.R.,

THORNTON, P.K. (2002):

Investing in animal health research to alleviate poverty.

ILRI, Nairobi, Kenya, 148 pp.

SEWELL, M.M.H., BROCKLESBY, D.W. (1990):

Handbook of animal diseases in the tropics.

92

Baillière Tindall, 4th ed., 1990, 44..

SNOW, B. (2001):

In: BOURN, D., REID, R., ROGERS, D., SNOW, B., WINT, W.:

Environmental Change and the Autonomous Control of Tsetse and

TrypanososMOPSis in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Gambia

Environmental Research Group Oxford, Limited, 2001. ISBN 1- 898028052

SOMDA, J., KAMUANGA, M., MÜNSTERMANN, S., BITTAYE, A. (2003):

Socio-economic characterization of smallholder dairy systems in The

Gambia: Milk production, marketing and consumption.

Socio-economic Research Paper No 1. ITC (International Trypanotolerance

Centre), Banjul, The Gambia, 61 pp. ISBN 99839910004

SOMDA, J., KAMUANGA, M., MÜNSTERMANN, S., KEITA, K., MENDES, A..

(2004):

Characteristics of the smallholder dairying farmers in West African

countries: Economic viability and paths for improvement

Socio-economic Research Paper No 2. ITC (International Trypanotolerance


SOW, F., DIOP,M., CISSE, W., MAAL, I., NDIAYE, S. (2003):

Caracterisation socioeconomique de la filiere laitiere dans les systemes

mixtes intensifies ou semi-intensifies du centre bassin arachidier du

Senegal

Rapport scientifique, International Trypanotolerance Centre, Banjul, 50 pp.

THE COURIER, No 196, January-February 2003, Country report Senegal

UNGER, F., MÜNSTERMANN, S., GOUMOU, A., APIA, C.N., KONTE, M.,

HEMPEN A. (2003):

Risk associated with bovine brucellosis in selected study herds and market

places in 4 countries of West Africa.

93

Animal Health Working Paper 2. ISBN 9983-9910-2-0. ITC (International

Trypanotolerance Centre), Banjul, The Gambia, 37 pp. ISBN 9983991020

UNGER, F., MÜNSTERMANN, S., GOUMOU, A., APIA, C.N., KONTE, M.,

HEMPEN A. (2003):

Risk associated with Mycobacterium bovis infections detected in selected

study herds and slaughter cattle in 4 countries of West Africa.

Animal Health Working Paper 1. ITC (International Trypanotolerance


VORDERMEIER, H.M., WHELAN, A., COCKLE, P.J., PALMER, N.,

HEWINSON, R.G. (2001):

Use of synthetic peptides derived from the antigens ESAT-6 and CFP-10 for

differential diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in cattle.

Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology. 2001. 8: 3, 571-578; 57 ref.

94

11 ANNEX 11.1 Results of this survey

11.1.1 Annex 1a: Guidelines for PRA sessions 1. General information’s (Table)

Village/District/Division

Number of participants (male/female and list where they are from)

Which livestock management do they undertake?

What are the different types of livestock rearing?

2. Which kind of animal health services is available in the area?

How does the service response to your requests (timely, delayed, no

response)?

3. Clinical signs/diseases

• What kind of clinical signs do you observe in your cattle?

Briefly list and describe them

• What kind of livestock diseases do you know?

Briefly list and describe them

• Has there been any outbreak of livestock diseases in the area? (last 3

years)

Cattle/small ruminants and number affected?

Which disease did you assume or describe symptoms if you do not

know the disease?

At what time of the year was it?

4. Long lasting (chronic) diseases

• Do you had/have any cattle in your herd, which suffered for a long time

(more than one month) of any disease?

Cattle/small ruminants and number affected?

Which disease did you assume or describe symptoms?

What do you do with the milk of such an animal?

What do you do if such an animal dies?

95

5. Do you have any animal, which aborted?

What do you do with the aborted foetus?

6. Zoonotic aspects • Do you know any of diseases, which could be transmitted to human

beings?

If yes how is it transmitted and do you know how to avoid

transmission?

• Do you know in your family or on your farm any case of disease, which

could be originated in animals of your farm?

• How do you consume the milk produced at your farm??

How do you sell the milk?

Do you know that some infections are transmitted by milk?

• Do you know that some animal diseases can affect the quality of meat?

If yes which and what did you observe?

What do you think is it possible, that animal diseases can be

transmitted via the meat through man?

If yes, do you now any disease or symptom of such disease?

• Do you visit a doctor when you feel sick or do you use your own

treatment?

7. Selling/buying animals and slaughter management

• Where do you sell or buy your animals?

• What do you do if you slaughter an animal?

Where and how do you slaughter these animals?

Which kind of veterinary services do you use

8. Disease importance ranking:

Depending on the group discussion:

- Information on disease (including wasting diseases)

96

11.1.2 Annex 1b: Tables 1 - 2 and Graphs 1 - 8 Graph 1: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in The

Gambia in terms of importance

Graph 2: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in cattle as ranked by farmers´ in

Guinea in terms of importance

2,8

1,8

1,4

1,1 1,00,8

0,7 0,7

0,30,2

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

Diarrho

ea

Trypan

o-som

osis

H.S.BQ

FMD

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Lumpy

skin

Consti

patio

n

Foot p

roblem

s

Nerveo

us sym

ptoms

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

1,9

1,6 1,51,3

1,1 1,1 1,1

0,80,7

0,5

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

Diarrho

ea

Lumpy

skin

Foot p

roblem

s

Abortio

n

Hygrom

aH.S.

Anthrax

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re BQW

oula

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

97


Guinea Bissau in terms of importance


Senegal in terms of importance

2,7

1,9

1,61,4 1,4 1,3

1,1

0,80,6

0,4

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

BQ

Anthrax

Diarrho

ea

Abortio

nH.S.

Hygrom

a

Mange

Trypan

o-som

osis

Lumpy

skin

Endop

arasit

es

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

2,6

2,3

1,6

1,3

0,90,8 0,8 0,8

0,5 0,5

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

H.S.

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Trypan

o-som

osis

BQ

Diarrho

ea

Emaciati

onFMD

Intox

icatio

n

Mastitis

Abortio

n

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

98

Graph 5: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in The

Gambia in terms of importance

Graph 6: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in Guinea

in terms of importance

2,7

1,2 1,11,0

0,5 0,4 0,3 0,3 0,3 0,3

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

Diarrho

ea PPR

Pastore

llosis

Abortio

n

Trypan

o-som

osis

Tympa

nie

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Food r

oot

Mange

Skin in

fectio

n

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

3,7

0,9 0,80,6

0,4 0,3 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,10

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

PPR

Abortio

n

Foot p

roblem

s

Diarrho

ea

Nerveo

us sym

ptoms

Pastore

llosis

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Endop

arasit

es

Reduc

ed m

ilk

Intox

icatio

n

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

99

Graph 7: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in Guinea

Bissau in terms of importance

Graph 8: Top-ten diseases or symptoms in SR as ranked by farmers´ in Senegal

in terms of importance

4,3

2,3

1,31,0

0,8 0,7 0,6 0,6 0,4 0,3

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

PPR

Anthrax

Mange BQ

Trypan

o-som

osis

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Diarrho

ea

Pastore

llosis

Abortio

n

Tympa

nie

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

2,6

2,0

1,4 1,3

0,80,5 0,5 0,4

0,2 0,10

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

PPR

Abortio

n

Pastore

llosis

Tick da

mage/

fly so

re

Foot p

roblem

s

Diarrho

ea

Skin in

fectio

n

Nerveo

us sym

ptoms

Orf

Mange

Wei

ghte

d av

erag

e

100

Table 1: Reports by farmers during group discussions of chronic (long lasting)

diseases in SR

Disease suspected Overall Gambia Guinea Guinea

Bissau

Senegal

Total no of farmers

No. of farmers with SR

suffering from chronic diseases

22 5 8 4 5

Arthritis 1 1

BQ 1 1

Heart water 1 1

Lumpy skin 1 1

Mange 3 1 2

Metritis 1 1

Orf 1 1

Unknown (unspecific symptoms) 13 3 6 - 4

Table 2a: Specific knowledge of rabies and clinical observations in animals

during the last three years by production system and country (% of

farmers)

Rabies Gambia Senegal

F1 local F1 local


Disease & symptoms in animals 67 70 90 95

Modes of transmission 67 45 85 95

Preventive measures 53 35 85 80


* dogs

101

Table 2b: Specific knowledge of anthrax and clinical observations in animals


farmers)

Anthrax Gambia Senegal

F1 local F1 local






* cattle Table 2c: Specific knowledge of BTB and clinical observations in animals


farmers)

BTB Gambia Senegal

F1 local F1 local






Table 2d: Specific knowledge of bovine brucellosis and clinical observations in

animals during the last three years by production system and country

(% of farmers)

Brucellosis Gambia Senegal

F1 local F1 local





Observed in cattle 0 5 0 0

102

11.2 Results of previous ITC studies on bovine brucellosis and BTB

Table 1: Results of previous serological studies of ITC on bovine brucellosis

carried out in the region

Region Area Cattle sampled

Individual +ve reactors

Individual animal

prevalence in % (CI)

Herds sampled

Herds +ve

Herd prevalence rate in %

(CI) Guinea

Dubréka 749 95/749 12.7 a (10.2,15.2)

17 16 94.1 a (82.9,100)

Coyah 810 48/810 5.9 b (4.3,7.5)

18 15 83.3 a (62.6,100)

Guinea

Bissau

Bafata 539 100/539 18.6 c (15.3,21.9)

15 15 100 a

The Gambia

CRD south 465 5 1.1d

(0.2,2.0) 20 3 15 b

(0,30.6) Senegal

Bassin Arachidier

479 3 0.6 d

(0,1.3) 30 3 10 b

(0,20.7) Superscript letters: Significantly differences between districts

103

Table 2: Results of previous serological studies of ITC on bovine tuberculosis

carried out in the region Results for

M. bovis

The Gambia Guinea Guinea Bissau Senegal

Single meat

inspection

1595 cattle in the GBA

Not applied Not applied Not applied

Suspected positive cases in meat inspection

1 Not applied Not applied Not applied

Confirmed cases of infection*

0 0 0 Not applied

CIDT/meat inspection*

Not applied 933 cattle in Kankan

450 cattle in Bissau

Not applied

Total suspected positive cattle in CIDT**

Not applied 0 2 Not applied

Confirmed in meat inspection

Not applied 0 0 Not applied

CIDT on-farm screening

465 cattle from 20 farms in

the CRD

Not applied Not applied 479 F1 and local cattle from 30 farms in Bassin Arachidier

Herds with suspected positive cattle in CIDT***

3 Not applied Not applied 3

Total suspected positive cattle in CIDT***


Confirmed positive reactor in CIDT (after retest)


* Positive in Ziehl Nelson and specific culturing for M. bovis ** Meat inspection of suspected positive reactors to PPD-M. bovis in the CIDT *** Doubtful reaction in skin test

Documents

Assessment of the impact of zoonotic infections (bovine