Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Dec 15;18(12):e06349.
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6349. eCollection 2020 Dec.

Annual Report on surveillance for Avian Influenza in poultry and wild birds in Member States of the European Union in 2019

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA); Francesca Baldinelli, Aleksandra Papanikolaou, Anca Stoicescu, Yves Van der Stede, Inma Aznar

Annual Report on surveillance for Avian Influenza in poultry and wild birds in Member States of the European Union in 2019

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) et al. EFSA J. .

Abstract

Context. Avian influenza (AI) is an infectious viral disease that affects all species of domestic and wild birds. The viruses causing this disease can be of high (HPAI) or low (LPAI) pathogenicity and represent a continuous threat to poultry in Europe. Council Directive 2005/94/EC requires EU Member States (MSs) to carry out surveillance in poultry and wild birds and notify the results to the responsible authority. Therefore, MSs, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have implemented ongoing surveillance programmes to monitor incursions of AI viruses in poultry and wild birds. EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to collate, validate, analyse and summarise the data resulting from the avian influenza surveillance programmes in an annual report. Poultry. Overall 24,419 poultry establishments (PEs) were sampled, of which 87 were seropositive for H5 virus strains and 22 for H7 strains. Seropositive PEs were found in eight MSs (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain) and the United Kingdom (also a MS at the time of collection). The highest percentage of seropositive PEs was found in establishments raising waterfowl game birds and breeding geese. Out of the 109 PEs with positive serological tests for H5/H7, only two tested positive in PCR and virology for H5/H7 virus strains, both of which were LPAI strains (H5N1 and H7N7, respectively) and were reported by Denmark. In addition, 12 countries also reported PCR results from 653 PEs carried out either as a screening test or subsequent to a negative serological test result. Five of these PEs were found positive for AI viral RNA: four H5N8 HPAI in Bulgaria and one H7N3 LPAI in Italy. Wild birds. A total of 19,661 dead/moribund wild birds were sampled, with one bird testing positive to HPAI virus H5N6, which was reported by Denmark. In addition, there were 84 birds testing positive for LPAI H5 or H7 virus and 848 birds testing positive for non-H5/H7 AI virus, reported by 30 countries. The surveillance findings for poultry and wild birds for 2019 are discussed in relation to findings from previous years and current knowledge of the epidemiology of AI in Europe.

Keywords: Avian Influenza; HPAI; LPAI; poultry; surveillance; wild birds.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Total number of PEs sampled, presented by RC and poultry category, according to 16 poultry categories. A scale of blue (going from darker to lighter blue colours) is used to highlight poultry categories with the largest number of PEs sampled per RC
Figure 2
Figure 2
Number of PEs sampled by RCs in 2019 according to the type of surveillance programme and for which results were reported to EFSA
Figure 3
Figure 3
Monthly number of PEs sampled in 2019, presented by RC. Note that the scale of the vertical axes is specific to each country
Figure 4
Figure 4
(A) Total number of PEs sampled per year, (n = 24,419), and (B) line graph of the percentage of the AI seropositive PEs of the H5 and H7 subtypes, with the number of seropositive PEs shown per year as labels (n = 109)
Figure 5
Figure 5
(A) Total number of PEs sampled in 2019 per RC shown in descending order (n = 24,419), and (B) total number of serologically positive PEs found by H subtype (n = 109)
Figure 6
Figure 6
Sampling density expressed as the number of PEs sampled per 100 km2 (upper map) and geographical distribution of AI H5 and H7 seropositive PEs (lower map) by administrative unit. Non‐reporting countries are shown in white
Figure 7
Figure 7
(A) Total number of PEs sampled by month with values above the bars referring to the number of PEs sampled, (n = 24,419). (B) percentage (y‐axis) and number (above bars) of PEs sampled that tested serologically positive to H5 or H7 AI virus by month (n = 109)
Figure 8
Figure 8
Monthly number of PEs sampled and positive in serology (H5 or H7 only) in 2019, presented for RCs with at least one H5‐ or H7‐positive PE only. Note that the scale of the vertical axes is specific to each country
Figure 9
Figure 9
(A) Total number of PEs sampled by poultry category with values above the bars referring to the number of PEs sampled (n = 24,419); (B) percentage (y‐axis) and number (above bars) of PEs sampled that tested serologically positive to H5 or H7 AI virus by poultry category (n = 109)
Figure 10
Figure 10
Monthly number of PEs sampled and positive in serology (H5 or H7 only) in 2019, presented by poultry category. Note that the scale of the vertical axes is specific to each category
Figure 11
Figure 11
Number of H5‐positive PEs by RC and poultry category in 2019, presented for RCs and categories with at least one H5‐positive PE only (n = 87)
Figure 12
Figure 12
Number of wild birds sampled by RCs in 2019 according to the type of surveillance programme. The category represented in red (industry/private programme) is barely visible due to small sample size (four birds sampled in Hungary) (n = 19,661)
Figure 13
Figure 13
Quarterly percentage (bars) and total number (values) of wild birds sampled by passive surveillance by RC in 2019, with quarter 1 starting in January 2019 (n = 8,926)
Figure 14
Figure 14
Total number of wild birds of the different orders, sampled by passive surveillance in 2019 (n = 8,926)
Figure 15
Figure 15
Total number of birds sampled for the 40 most sampled wild bird species reported by passive surveillance in 2019 (5,961 birds out of 7,474 fully identified birds). The bar colours refer to the bird orders. English common names for the species shown are provided in Appendix D
Figure 16
Figure 16
Sampling density, expressed as the number of wild birds sampled per area of 100 km2 (upper map), and geographical distribution of all AI‐positive birds (middle map) and H5/H7 positive birds (lower map), by administrative unit. Non‐reporting countries are shown in white
Figure 17
Figure 17
(A) Number of wild birds tested by both passive and active surveillance by species. (B and C) Number and proportion of AI‐positive (all types) wild birds detected. Bars are colour coded to identify the order to which these species belong to. English common names are provided in Appendix D. In the panels (A) and (B), the height of the bars for Anas platyrhynchos L. was truncated as the numbers in this species were much higher than in other species
Figure 18
Figure 18
Number of LPAI‐positive wild birds by AI virus haemagglutinin (H) type identified (n = 932). Values are provided above the bars. The Y‐axis is presented on a non‐linear scale to improve visibility. Note: birds for which positive samples could not all be typed (for instance, one sample was characterised as H4 and another sample from the same bird as H‐antigen unknown) are classified under the available H type (in this example, H4). There were no birds with more than one H antigen identified
Figure 19
Figure 19
(A) Weekly number of wild birds sampled by both passive and active surveillance, (B) weekly percentage of LPAI‐positive wild birds found and (C) weekly number of LPAI‐positive wild birds by taxonomic order
Figure B.1
Figure B.1
(A) Number of PEs sampled by poultry species; (B) Proportion of PE sampled that tested positive for H5 or H7 AI virus in serology. The numbers above the bars indicate the number of seropositive PEs. Bars are colour coded to identify the order to which these species belong to. The species name was not reported for some PEs, which were only identified at the bird order level. Ostriches, emus and other ratites were classified under the term ‘ratites’ which is not an order, given that species names were not always available
Figure C.1
Figure C.1
Total number of wild birds of the different orders sampled by passive and active surveillance by RCs in 2019. The group ‘Species unknown’ includes all birds for which data on species and order were not available
Figure F.1
Figure F.1
Density of wild bird observations for 2019 by NUTS3 region, as per data provided by the EuroBirdPortal project. The density of observations was estimated as the total number of observations in the NUTS3 region divided by the surface of the area. The upper map shows all bird species, while the lower map is restricted to species from the EFSA target list
Figure F.2
Figure F.2
Number of wild birds from the EFSA list of target wild bird species (n = 50) observed in 2019 and recorded in the EuroBirdPortal project, aggregated by bird order
Figure F.3
Figure F.3
Number of wild birds from the EFSA list of target wild bird species (n = 50) observed in 2019 and recorded in the EuroBirdPortal project, aggregated by bird species
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. APHA , 2017. Annual Report on Surveillance for Avian Influenza in Poultry and Wild Birds in Member States of the European Union in 2016. Animal and Plant Health Agency, UK.
    1. Brouwer A, Huneau A, Kuiken T, Staubach C, Stegeman A, Baldinelli F, Verdonck F and Aznar I, 2018. Reporting Avian Influenza Surveillance. EFSA Journal, 16, e05493. 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5493 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Central Veterinary Institute , Gonzales JL, Elbers ARW and Beerens N, 2017. Risk factors of primary introduction of highly pathogenic and low pathogenic avian influenza virus into european poultry holdings, considering at least material contaminated by wild birds and contact with wild birds. EFSA Supporting Publications 2017;14(10):1282E. 10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.en-1282 - DOI
    1. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2017. Avian Influenza Overview September 2017. EFSA Journal 2017;15(12):5141, 70 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5141 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. EFSA AHAW Panel (EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare), More S, Bicout D, Bøtner A, Butterworth A, Calistri P, Depner K, Edwards S, Garin‐Bastuji B, Good M, Gort Azar Schmidt C, Michel V, Miranda MA, Nielsen SS, Raj M, Sihvonen L, Spoolder H, Thulke H‐H, Velarde A, Willeberg P, Winckler C, Breed A, Brouwer A, Guillemain M, Harder T, Monne I, Roberts H, Baldinelli F, Barrucci F, Fabris C, Martino L, Mosbach‐Schulz O, Verdonck F, Morgado J and Stegeman JA, 2017. Scientific Opinion on Avian Influenza. EFSA Journal 2017;15(8):4991, 233 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4991 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources