AVIAN INFLUENZA ANTIBODIES IN CHICKENS, DOGS, PIGS AND BIOSECURITY PRACTICES IN KADUNA, NIGERIA

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSHEHU, David
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-04T07:40:13Z
dc.date.available2021-06-04T07:40:13Z
dc.date.issued2012-08
dc.descriptionA THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD MASTER OF SCIENCE IN VETERINARY MEDICINE OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERINARY MEDICINE, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA, NIGERIAen_US
dc.description.abstractAvian influenza is zoonotic and dog being a close associate to humans, constitutes a source of human exposure. This study assessed avian influenza awareness and knowledge amongst dog owners and biosecurity practices in live bird markets, pig and dog slaughter areas in Kaduna using structured questionnaires and biosecurity checklists. The prevalence of H5 subtype antibodies in chickens, dogs and pigs was also determined by haemagglutination inhibition test. Sera from 75 chickens, 45 dogs and 104 pigs were tested for H5 subtype antibodies. Dog owners (93.1%) kept poultry with 64.6% keeping local poultry. Though 57.7% prevented direct contact of dogs and poultry, 42.3% allowed contact. About 65.4% of dog owners kept pigs with 84.5% managing pigs semi-intensively; 0.8% sought veterinary attention when pigs were sick and 24.1% permitted contact of pigs with poultry. About 27.7% of dog owners did nothing when dogs were sick. Ninety-six per cent were aware of avian influenza and 85.4% first heard about it from the television. Only 2.3% were aware of the susceptibility of dogs to avian influenza, but 0.8% knew that dogs can transmit the virus to humans, and 3.1% knew avian influenza infection in dogs could result in death. Dog owners (95.4%) handled dead poultry with bare hands, while 32.3% do not wash hands with soap and water after handling dead or live poultry. The H5 subtype antibodies prevalence in dogs was 2.2% with a mean titre of 9.0 ± 0.0 log2, while the prevalence in chicken and mean titre were 6.7% and 8.5 ± 0.04 log2, respectively. All pig sera tested were negative for H5 subtype antibodies. The chicken H5 subtype antibody prevalence in Central Market and Railway Station live bird markets (LBMs) were 4.3% and 13%, respectively. Awareness of avian influenza of dog owners was high but their knowledge was poor. The H5 subtype antibodies were present in dogs and chickens in Kaduna. Biosecurity practices of Central Market LBM were adequate, but poor in Barnawa, Kakuri and Railway Station LBMs, dog and pig slaughter areas. Targeted surveillance of avian influenza in dogs and pigs should be incorporated in the national avian influenza surveillance program.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/12389
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectAVIAN INFLUENZA ANTIBODIES,en_US
dc.subjectCHICKENS,en_US
dc.subjectDOGS,en_US
dc.subjectPIGS,en_US
dc.subjectBIOSECURITY PRACTICES,en_US
dc.subjectKADUNA,en_US
dc.subjectNIGERIA.en_US
dc.titleAVIAN INFLUENZA ANTIBODIES IN CHICKENS, DOGS, PIGS AND BIOSECURITY PRACTICES IN KADUNA, NIGERIAen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
AVIAN INFLUENZA ANTIBODIES IN CHICKENS, DOGS, PIGS AND .pdf
Size:
1.54 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.62 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
VETERINARY MEDICINE