Cargando…

Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015

Culling badgers to control the transmission of bovine tuberculosis (TB) between this wildlife reservoir and cattle has been widely debated. Industry‐led culling began in Somerset and Gloucestershire between August and November 2013 to reduce local badger populations. Industry‐led culling is not desi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brunton, Lucy A., Donnelly, Christl A., O'Connor, Heather, Prosser, Alison, Ashfield, Stuart, Ashton, Adam, Upton, Paul, Mitchell, Andrew, Goodchild, Anthony V., Parry, Jessica E., Downs, Sara H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28944012
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3254
_version_ 1783265205270085632
author Brunton, Lucy A.
Donnelly, Christl A.
O'Connor, Heather
Prosser, Alison
Ashfield, Stuart
Ashton, Adam
Upton, Paul
Mitchell, Andrew
Goodchild, Anthony V.
Parry, Jessica E.
Downs, Sara H.
author_facet Brunton, Lucy A.
Donnelly, Christl A.
O'Connor, Heather
Prosser, Alison
Ashfield, Stuart
Ashton, Adam
Upton, Paul
Mitchell, Andrew
Goodchild, Anthony V.
Parry, Jessica E.
Downs, Sara H.
author_sort Brunton, Lucy A.
collection PubMed
description Culling badgers to control the transmission of bovine tuberculosis (TB) between this wildlife reservoir and cattle has been widely debated. Industry‐led culling began in Somerset and Gloucestershire between August and November 2013 to reduce local badger populations. Industry‐led culling is not designed to be a randomized and controlled trial of the impact of culling on cattle incidence. Nevertheless, it is important to monitor the effects of the culling and, taking the study limitations into account, perform a cautious evaluation of the impacts. A standardized method for selecting areas matched to culling areas in factors found to affect cattle TB risk has been developed to evaluate the impact of badger culling on cattle TB incidence. The association between cattle TB incidence and badger culling in the first 2 years has been assessed. Descriptive analyses without controlling for confounding showed no association between culling and TB incidence for Somerset, or for either of the buffer areas for the first 2 years since culling began. A weak association was observed in Gloucestershire for Year 1 only. Multivariable analysis adjusting for confounding factors showed that reductions in TB incidence were associated with culling in the first 2 years in both the Somerset and Gloucestershire intervention areas when compared to areas with no culling (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72–0.87, p < .001 and IRR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.34–0.51, p < .001, respectively). An increase in incidence was associated with culling in the 2‐km buffer surrounding the Somerset intervention area (IRR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.09–1.75, p = .008), but not in Gloucestershire (IRR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77–1.07, p = .243). As only 2 intervention areas with 2 years of data are available for analysis, and the biological cause–effect relationship behind the statistical associations is difficult to determine, it would be unwise to use these findings to develop generalizable inferences about the effectiveness of the policy at present.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5606900
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56069002017-09-24 Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015 Brunton, Lucy A. Donnelly, Christl A. O'Connor, Heather Prosser, Alison Ashfield, Stuart Ashton, Adam Upton, Paul Mitchell, Andrew Goodchild, Anthony V. Parry, Jessica E. Downs, Sara H. Ecol Evol Original Research Culling badgers to control the transmission of bovine tuberculosis (TB) between this wildlife reservoir and cattle has been widely debated. Industry‐led culling began in Somerset and Gloucestershire between August and November 2013 to reduce local badger populations. Industry‐led culling is not designed to be a randomized and controlled trial of the impact of culling on cattle incidence. Nevertheless, it is important to monitor the effects of the culling and, taking the study limitations into account, perform a cautious evaluation of the impacts. A standardized method for selecting areas matched to culling areas in factors found to affect cattle TB risk has been developed to evaluate the impact of badger culling on cattle TB incidence. The association between cattle TB incidence and badger culling in the first 2 years has been assessed. Descriptive analyses without controlling for confounding showed no association between culling and TB incidence for Somerset, or for either of the buffer areas for the first 2 years since culling began. A weak association was observed in Gloucestershire for Year 1 only. Multivariable analysis adjusting for confounding factors showed that reductions in TB incidence were associated with culling in the first 2 years in both the Somerset and Gloucestershire intervention areas when compared to areas with no culling (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72–0.87, p < .001 and IRR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.34–0.51, p < .001, respectively). An increase in incidence was associated with culling in the 2‐km buffer surrounding the Somerset intervention area (IRR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.09–1.75, p = .008), but not in Gloucestershire (IRR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77–1.07, p = .243). As only 2 intervention areas with 2 years of data are available for analysis, and the biological cause–effect relationship behind the statistical associations is difficult to determine, it would be unwise to use these findings to develop generalizable inferences about the effectiveness of the policy at present. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5606900/ /pubmed/28944012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3254 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Brunton, Lucy A.
Donnelly, Christl A.
O'Connor, Heather
Prosser, Alison
Ashfield, Stuart
Ashton, Adam
Upton, Paul
Mitchell, Andrew
Goodchild, Anthony V.
Parry, Jessica E.
Downs, Sara H.
Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title_full Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title_fullStr Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title_short Assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in England on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
title_sort assessing the effects of the first 2 years of industry‐led badger culling in england on the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle in 2013–2015
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28944012
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3254
work_keys_str_mv AT bruntonlucya assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT donnellychristla assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT oconnorheather assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT prosseralison assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT ashfieldstuart assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT ashtonadam assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT uptonpaul assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT mitchellandrew assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT goodchildanthonyv assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT parryjessicae assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015
AT downssarah assessingtheeffectsofthefirst2yearsofindustryledbadgercullinginenglandontheincidenceofbovinetuberculosisincattlein20132015