Overfishing and other human pressures are severely harming marine protected areas worldwide

by Tel Aviv University

Credit: CC0 Public Domain

A new study by Tel Aviv University reveals significant ecological damage to many MPAs around the world. The study findings point to a strong "edge effect" in MPAs, i.e. a sharp 60% reduction in the fish population living at the edges of the MPA (up to a distance of 1-1.5 km within the MPA) compared to core areas. The "edge effect" significantly diminishes the effective size of the MPA, and largely stems from human pressures, first and foremost overfishing at the borders of the MPA.

The study was conducted by Sarah Ohayon, a doctoral student at the laboratory of Prof. Yoni Belmaker, School of Zoology, George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences, and the Steinhardt Museum of Natural History at Tel Aviv University. The study was recently published in the Nature Ecology & Evolution journal.

MPAs were designed to protect marine ecosystems, and help to conserve and restore fish populations and marine invertebrates whose numbers are increasingly dwindling due to overfishing. The effectiveness of MPAs has been proven in thousands of studies conducted worldwide. At the same time, most studies sample only the "inside" and "outside" of the MPAs, and there still is a knowledge gap about what happens in the space between the core of the MPAs and areas open for fishing around them.

Ohayon explains that when an MPA functions properly, the expectation is that the recovery of the marine populations in the MPAs will result in a spillover, a process where fish and marine invertebrates migrate outside the borders of the MPA. In this way, the MPA can contribute not only to the conservation of marine nature, but also to the renewal of fish populations outside the MPA that have dwindled due to overfishing.

To answer the question about what is the dominant spatial pattern of marine populations from within MPAs to areas open for fishing around them, the researchers conducted a meta-analysis that included spatial data of marine populations from dozens of MPAs located in different parts of the oceans.

"When I saw the results, I immediately understood that we are looking at a pattern of edge effect," emphasizes Ohayon. "The edge effect is a well-studied phenomenon in terrestrial protected areas, but surprisingly has not yet been studied empirically in MPAs. "This phenomenon occurs when there are human disturbances and pressures around the MPA, such as hunting/fishing, noise or light pollution that reduce the size of natural populations within the MPAs near their borders."

The researchers found that 40% of the no-take MPAs around the world (areas where fishing activity is completed prohibited) are less than 1 km2, which means that entire area is likely to experience an edge effect. In total, 64% of all no-take MPAs in the world are smaller than 10 km2 and may hold only about half (45-56%) of the expected population size in their area compared to a situation without an edge effect. These findings indicate that the global effectiveness of existing no-take MPAs is far less than previously thought.

It should be emphasized that the edge effect pattern does not eliminate the possibility of fish spillover, and it is quite plausible that fishers still enjoy large fish coming from within the MPAs. This is evidenced by the concentration of fishing activity at the borders of MPAs. At the same time, the edge effect makes it clear to us that marine populations near the border of MPAs are declining at a faster rate than the recovery of the populations around the MPA.

The study findings also show that in those MPAs with buffer zones around them, no edge effect patterns were recorded, but rather a pattern consistent with fish spillover outside the MPA. Additionally, a smaller edge effect was observed in well-enforced MPAs than those where illegal fishing was reported.

"These findings are encouraging, as they signify that by putting buffer zones in place, managing fishing activity around MPAs and improving enforcement, we can increase the effectiveness of the existing MPAs and most probably also increase the benefits they can provide through fish spillover," adds Ohayon. "When planning new MPAs, apart from the implementation of regulated buffer zones, we recommend that the no-take MPAs targeted for protection be at least 10 km2 and as round as possible. These measures will reduce the edge effect in MPAs. Our research findings provide practical guidelines for improving the planning and management of MPAs, so that we can do a better job of protecting our oceans."

Expanding marine protected areas by 5% could boost fish yields by 20%, but there's a catch

---

More information: Sarah Ohayon et al, A meta-analysis reveals edge effects within marine protected areas, Nature Ecology & Evolution (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41559-021-01502-3

Journal information: Nature Ecology & Evolution 

Provided by Tel Aviv University 

Food safety crises at smaller restaurant chains can hurt giants

Peer-Reviewed Publication

WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY

EVERETT, Wash. –  When it comes to a food safety crisis like an E.coli outbreak, little restaurant brands have an outsized influence.  

A recent study published in the International Journal of Hospitality Management found that a theoretical crisis at one restaurant made people hesitant to eat at other restaurants even though they were not directly involved in the event.

The negative spillover effect was also greater from the bottom up than the top down, meaning a crisis at a small restaurant chain hurt the big-name brands more.

“This finding shows the power of small apples to spoil the whole barrel,” said Soobin Seo, an assistant professor at Washington State University’s Carson College of Business and lead author on the study. “This is a warning sign. It is not good news for restaurants overall when somebody else is in crisis.”

The findings underscore the need for restaurants to be prepared to respond to a crisis, Seo added, whether it is their own or a competitor’s. The restaurant industry is particularly vulnerable to spillover from crises, the authors note, partly because of the perception that restaurants get their ingredients from the same places.

“When people hear about bad news about one automobile company, they can easily buy from another,” Seo said. “But in the restaurant industry, even though the other brands did nothing wrong, customers feel hesitant after an outbreak, and it doesn't hurt them if they do not go to out to eat for a few days. Crises are psychologically much more influential when it comes to restaurants, and that is why there are more financial impacts.”

For the study, Seo and co-author SooCheong Jang from Purdue University presented 380 participants with different crisis scenarios. They first read a theoretical news story about an outbreak of a food-borne illness that occurred at either a “high-equity” fast food brand such as McDonald’s or Wendy’s, or a smaller “low-equity” brand such as Carl’s Jr. or Hardee’s. The study used brand names of real restaurants so they would be easily recognizable, but the outbreaks were fictional. The participants were then asked their intention to visit other restaurants that were not involved in the incident.

The researchers found that knowledge of an outbreak at a high-equity, fast food restaurant caused people to be reluctant to go to its direct competitor, so an outbreak at McDonald’s, for example, would cause people to hesitate to visit Wendy’s. However, it did not have much effect on the less well-known restaurants like Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s.

Yet, in the scenarios where a low-equity brand had the outbreak, reaction spilled over to its low- and high-equity competitors. The low-equity brand crisis even impacted those outside their fast food establishment style, such as the casual dining restaurant Outback Steakhouse.

Given the extent of the spillover, Seo advised restaurants to plan their response well ahead of any incident.

“No matter what level of crisis, your responsibility or credibility, it's always better to act immediately and honestly with the public: to have a proactive strategy to assure the safety of food,” she said.  

---

JOURNAL

International Journal of Hospitality Management

DOI

10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103047 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Experimental study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

ARTICLE TITLE

Who spoils the barrel? Negative spillover effect on competitor brands during food crises

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

13-Aug-2021

ZOONOSIS

Lust for giraffe meat, organs in Tanzania leading to extinction of tallest animal

Experts urge awareness campaigns to dispel superstitious beliefs that giraffe organs help treat chronic diseases

Kizito Makoye |10.07.2022

FILE PHOTO

MANYARA, Tanzania

The world’s tallest animal, the giraffe, may be on the brink of extinction in the East African country of Tanzania, as they are being poached to meet the demand for bushmeat and superstitious beliefs that their organs ward off misfortune and treat diseases like HIV/AIDS.

“This is a very serious problem here. Giraffes are innocently being killed by poachers. I urge relevant authorities to stop this madness,” said Kulwa Herman, a resident of the northern Manyara Region, known for the world-famous Tarangire National Park and Lake Manyara National Park.

He blamed the large-scale poaching on beliefs that the brain and bone marrow of giraffes can cure chronic diseases, including HIV/AIDS, and also boost men’s libido.

“People are being deceived by witch doctors to believe that giraffe body parts have magical powers. It’s absolute nonsense,” Herman told Anadolu Agency.

The giraffe's chief distinguishing characteristics are its extremely long neck and legs, the conical skin-covered bone structures on their heads, and its spotted coat patterns.

According to the international Giraffe Conservation Foundation (GCF), Masai or Tanzanian giraffe have been already declared an endangered species by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

The most populous giraffe three decades ago with an estimated 71,000 individuals, only 45,400 Masai giraffes remain in the wild today, according to the foundation.

But the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TAWRI) claims that their aerial survey data recently found a mere 28,850 giraffes in the region.

Despite the giraffe being a national symbol protected under the country's conservation laws, independent researchers believe that almost 2,246 giraffes are illegally poached every year.

Alleged poacher, officer collusion

Herman said that gun-wielding poachers from the northern Arusha region often collude with local ward officers to trap and kill giraffes. They then extract their hair, tail, brains, and fats, which are highly valued on the black market, before escaping into the darkness.

“It’s very easy to kill a giraffe, that’s why many people are attracted to doing so. A single gunshot is more than enough to take down the big animal,” he said.

Benjamin Kuzaga, Manyara regional commander of the police force, said that in the past three months they have seized 560 kilograms (1,235 pounds) of poached giraffe meat.

“This is a serious problem here in Manyara,” said Jeremia Kizinga, a resident of Vilima Viwili village. “The police force should intervene, otherwise these animals will be finished.”

William Mwakilema, commissioner of conservation at Tanzania National Parks Authority, said growing human activity and settlements coming up near the wildlife corridors in the region have also increased the killing of giraffes.

Need to create awareness

“We’re working hard along with other security organs to identify and dismantle a vicious network of criminals involved in this illegal business,” he said. “We will leave no stone unturned until all the perpetrators are arrested and punished under the law.”

Selemani Juma, a local leader at Vilima Vitatu village in Manyara, said there was an urgent need to create awareness to stamp our superstitious beliefs.

He said the illegal trade is fueled by mistaken beliefs that giraffes’ fats and bone marrow and other organs help to treat chronic diseases and increase male sexual prowess.

“These claims are not true. We’re trying to educate the people to ignore these false claims and understand the importance of conserving wildlife, including giraffes, whose population is decreasing at an alarming rate,” he said.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BUSHMEAT 

Spillover (book) - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Spillover_(book)

Spillover: Animal Infections and the Next Human Pandemic is a book written in 2012 by American writer David Quammen. ... Upon its release, Spillover received ...

Author: David Quammen

Publisher: W.W. Norton & Company

Published: 2012

Pages: 592 p

‎Synopsis · ‎Viruses and pathogens... · ‎Reception

Human pressure on wildlife increases risk of diseases like Covid-19, study finds

Hunting, wildlife trade and threats to habitat key factors in viral spillover

Research adds to growing evidence about the role of humans in the emergence of new infections


Simone McCarthy Published: 10 Apr, 2020

The spillover of viruses from animals to humans is a direct result of our actions involving wildlife and their habitat, according to the lead author of a new study. Photo: AFP

The exploitation of wildlife increases the risk of animal viruses infecting people, potentially sparking outbreaks like the Covid-19 pandemic, caused by the
new coronavirus.

That was the key finding of a study published on Wednesday by a group of researchers at the University of California, Davis which looked for trends among the animal species known to host viruses that have infected humans.

While genetics and chance are among the factors that determine whether a virus can spill over from animals to people, the study highlights the human role driving the risk of the phenomenon behind the current pandemic, which so far has sickened more than 1.5 million people.

Animals threatened with extinction by human degradation of their habitat, or through hunting and the wildlife trade, hosted twice as many viruses known to infect people, compared with species threatened for other reasons, the researchers found.

“Spillover of viruses from animals is a direct result of our actions involving wildlife and their habitat,” said lead author Christine Kreuder Johnson, director of the EpiCentre for Disease Dynamics at the One Health Institute, a UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine programme.

“The consequence is they’re sharing their viruses with us. These actions simultaneously threaten species’ survival and increase the risk of spillover. In an unfortunate convergence of many factors, this brings about the kind of mess we’re in now.”

The research examined around 140 zoonotic viruses that infect humans and had been found in specific animal species before 2014. It looked for trends among those species, using data from the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources’ Red List of Threatened Species.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence about the role of humans in the increasingly frequent emergence of infectious diseases in recent decades.

Scientists and public health organisations have long been calling for more attention to be paid to the role of increased encroachment on animal habitats in the emergence of infectious disease outbreaks.

Deforestation, urbanisation and the expansion of agriculture have all brought more contact with these species as the human population has more than doubled since 1960, they have warned.

The research, published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, found that, historically, domesticated animals were the largest mammalian contributors of infectious viruses, because of their regular close contact with people.

Domesticated animals, including livestock, shared eight times more zoonotic viruses with people than wild mammals, such as H1N1 flu, hantaviruses and rabies.

The researchers pointed out that sprawling human populations had created more opportunities for people to live in proximity with wild animals. Rodents, bats and primate species living near homes or farms – in some cases expanding their populations near settlements – presented a high risk for ongoing transmission of viruses to people.

Rodents, bats and primates – representing more than 70 per cent of all terrestrial mammal species – were together implicated as hosts for three-quarters of zoonotic viruses, they found. Bats are thought to be the originators of a number of viruses which cause diseases in humans, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars), Nipah virus infection – and Covid-19.

That the greater levels of human and animal interaction would lead to more spillovers of disease from animals to humans was no surprise, according to veterinary epidemiologist Dirk Pfeiffer, a professor of One Health at Hong Kong’s City University, who was not involved in the research.

“If you have these human animal contacts more often, because of population density and people doing things where that contact occurs more frequently, eventually it will go wrong,” he said.

What next for China’s wildlife ban?
8 Apr 2020


Improving coordination between doctors, veterinary surgeons and ecologists, under the One Health model, upping biosecurity on farms, and surveillance of disease in animals and humans were all important steps to cut down on risk and prevent the next pandemic, said study co-author Peta Hitchens, a senior research fellow and veterinary epidemiologist at the University of Melbourne.

“There will be more viruses that jump from animals to humans in the future, and our ability to react to that will get better, including controlling infections before they can get out of control and producing vaccines in a more efficient manner. We’ll get there – we can only learn from this experience,” she said.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Wildlife proximity raises virus risk, study finds

Simone McCarthy  joined the Post in 2018. She previously wrote about China tech, business and society for SupChina and has a bachelor's in literature from Yale University and a master's from Columbia Journalism School.

Climate change increasing pandemics

Now is the time to address climate change for the health of society.

By

 Jane Marsh

 -

March 23, 2022

SOURCENationofChange

Pandemics and endemics have emerged and reemerged throughout the centuries, with humans finding ways to survive and adapt. COVID-19 has swept through nations worldwide in recent years, causing high mortality rates and health and socioeconomic distress.

However, as scientists scramble to understand the origins of the coronavirus and how new strains form over time, the question remains whether climate change will increase the likelihood of future pandemics and the spread of pathogens.

The emergence of new diseases

Climate change has become a contentious and politicized topic worldwide. A portion of the population believes the world faces little impact from climate change, while others remain adamant the risks are a grave concern.

According to a Pew Research Center study that surveyed people from 14 countries, 7 in 10 people believe climate change is the biggest threat we’re facing. Another 69% of those surveyed felt infectious diseases are the biggest threat. But do climate change and infectious diseases go hand in hand?

Climate change creates the right conditions for a virus’s development and survival and influences the way it circulates. When weather events and rising temperatures alter ecosystems, the health effects are significant.

For example, the African Rift Valley fever (RVF) is closely associated with increased rainfall and has led to explosive transmission rates from animals to humans. Meanwhile, warmer weather drives higher cases of bluetongue, hantavirus, and Lyme disease.

This emergence of climate-related disease will put epicenters at risk of economic and environmental despair. The wide range of vector-borne pathogens carries dire consequences for clean water and food accessibility, leading to 700,000 deaths from parasites, bacteria, or viruses each year.

The impact of climate on transmission

When we consider zoological diseases, it’s apparent that climate has played a role in rapid transmission and spillover. A spillover event occurs when a virus can overcome specific barriers to spread more easily from species to species.

For example, mosquitoes use temperature-sensing receptors on their antennae to detect heat and latch onto their prey. As the planet warms, dangerous mosquito populations will migrate northwards, infecting more people.

The World Health Organization (WHO) states that the dengue epidemic affected nine countries before 1970. Today, 129 countries have local mosquito populations that carry dengue, with 4.2 million cases reported in 2019.

Climate change creates the perfect conditions for pests to populate, as well. An increase in pests can cause severe allergies and respiratory diseases. With the rapid reproduction of pests, ticks, fleas, and mosquitoes in hotter environments, more humans and animals face more significant infection risks.

Tropical regions have a much higher transmissibility and spillover risk than others due to having the largest animal diversity globally that carries vector-borne pathogens. Because food markets are common in these areas, a significant spread of disease will likely occur between animals and humans.

The future of pandemics

While scientists have yet to figure out if climate change has directly influenced the spread of the coronavirus, several factors should be considered for future pandemics.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), agricultural expansion accounted for 33-40% of tropical deforestation between 2000 and 2010. Additionally, nearly 198 million acres of the world’s forests have been lost since 1990.

The degradation of habitats has led to animal migrations, putting humans at a higher risk of contact with germs. Large livestock farms are also a source of spillover from animals to humans. By decreasing the demand for meat and promoting sustainable farming, society can lessen the emergence of infectious diseases.

A recent study also suggests people were more likely to die from COVID-19 if they lived in a poorer area with heavy air pollution. If air pollution influences higher mortality in vulnerable people with less access to health care, then more significant air pollution mitigation is required to assist these populations during future pandemics.

COVID-19: Not the first or the last

Scientists have learned a lot about the novel coronavirus over the last two years. However, as climate change impacts the emergence and spread of new diseases, the human race needs to be prepared for future pandemics. Now is the time to address climate change for the health of society

Jane Marsh

Jane Marsh is an environmental and sustainability writer. You can keep up with her work on her site Environment.co.

Unfavourable attitudes toward genetically modified food predict negative feelings about other food technologies

by Nanyang Technological University

Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Scientists at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) and the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH) have found that people who hold negative opinions of genetically-modified (GM) food are likely to feel the same about nano-enabled food—food with nano-additives to enhance flavour, nutrition or prolong shelf life.

In a survey of 1,000 respondents led by NTU comprising adult Singaporeans and permanent residents, close to a third found GM food unappealing, and their negative feelings influenced how they viewed nano-enabled food. Over a third felt neutral about GM food, while the remaining respondents welcomed it.

While the study focused specifically on reactions towards nano-enabled foods, lead investigator and NTU Associate Professor Shirley Ho said that the "spillover effect" they observed from GM food to nano-enabled food could possibly extend to other novel food technologies as well, given that mental associations that people make between similar technologies have shown to influence their behaviour towards a newer technology. This represents a cause for concern for policy makers as Singapore invests in food science and technology as one of its strategies to bolster food security.

With the COVID-19 outbreak extending into the second quarter of the year, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations has warned of global disruption in food supply brought about by movement restrictions and border controls in a protracted crisis.

The global pandemic has thrust the issue of food security and the necessity to explore cutting edge research in novel food technologies into the spotlight, said Assoc Prof Ho of NTU's Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information.

"The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of food security for a small country like Singapore, which imports more than 90 percent of its food consumed in the country. We don't have the problem of disrupted food supply yet, but we have to anticipate the possibility," said Assoc Prof Ho.

"Our study is a timely examination of the public's reactions towards novel food technologies. We may soon be able to make food last longer with the help of science, or dine on lab-cultured meat, but all these would be futile if a sizeable group of people reject these new food innovations."

"This study highlights the challenge in communicating safety of new food technologies as innovations advance to meet global food needs for a growing world population," added Dr. K. Viswanath, Lee Kum Kee Professor of Health Communication at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and a co-author on the paper.

The study was published in the Journal of Communication on 5 June.

Tech-enabled food doesn't go down well with some Singaporeans

To study public opinion on engineered food, the NTU-Harvard team first surveyed 1,000 Singapore citizens and permanent residents on their thoughts on GM food—for example, asking whether they consider it to be delightful, nutritious, fresh and appealing.

Close to a third, or 305 respondents, showed unfavourable attitudes towards GM food.

The team then investigated how the respondents' pre-existing attitudes towards GM food affected their feelings about nano-enabled food, and found that those who had unfavourable attitudes towards GM food were also unfavourable about nano-enabled food—what the scientists called a spillover effect.

The scientists also found that participants who were unfavourable towards technology-enabled food may not be swayed to do the same after watching others eat this food.

Assoc Prof Ho, who is also NTU's Research Director for Arts, Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, explained: "This spillover effect could potentially be due to a general rejection of technology-enabled food and other notions associated with it. The mental associations that people make between similar technologies may influence their behaviours toward a newer technology. This is especially so in cases where the technology from which people draw cues is socially contestable."

Coronavirus pandemic worsens food insecurity for low-income adults

---

More information: Past debates, fresh impact on nano-enabled food: A multi-group comparison of presumed media influence model based on spillover effects of attitude toward genetically-modified food, Journal of Communication. Publisher: Oxford University Press, DOI: 10.1093/joc/jqaa019

Journal information: Journal of Communication 

Provided by Nanyang Technological University 

 

New study confirms mammal-to-mammal avian flu spread

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

ITHACA, N.Y. – A new Cornell University study provides evidence that a spillover of avian influenza from birds to dairy cattle across several U.S. states has now led to mammal-to-mammal transmission – between cows and from cows to cats and a raccoon.

“This is one of the first times that we are seeing evidence of efficient and sustained mammalian-to-mammalian transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1,” said Diego Diel, associate professor of virology and director of the Virology Laboratory at the Animal Health Diagnostic Center in the College of Veterinary Medicine.

Diel is co-corresponding author of the study, “Spillover of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Virus to Dairy Cattle” published in Nature.

Whole genome sequencing of the virus did not reveal any mutations in the virus that would lead to enhanced transmissibility of H5N1 in humans, although the data clearly shows mammal-to-mammal transmission, which is concerning as the virus may adapt in mammals, Diel said.

So far, 11 human cases have been reported in the U.S., with the first dating back to April 2022, each with mild symptoms: four were linked to cattle farms and seven have been linked to poultry farms, including an outbreak of four cases reported in the last few weeks in Colorado. These recent patients fell ill with the same strain identified in the study as circulating in dairy cows, leading the researchers to suspect that the virus likely originated from dairy farms in the same county.

While the virus does have the ability to infect and replicate in people, the efficiency of those infections is low. “The concern is that potential mutations could arise that could lead adaptation to mammals, spillover into humans and potential efficient transmission in humans in the future,” Diel said.

It is therefore critical to continue to monitor the virus in affected animals and also in any potential infected humans, Diel said. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has funded programs for H5N1 testing, at no cost to producers. Early testing, enhanced biosecurity and quarantines in the event of positive results, would be necessary to contain any further spread of the virus, according to Diel.

Infections from H5N1 were first detected in January 2022, and have resulted in the deaths of more than 100 million domestic birds and thousands of wild birds in the U.S. The Cornell AHDC's and Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory scientists were among the first to report detection of the virus to dairy cattle herds. The cows were likely infected by wild birds, leading to symptoms of reduced appetite, changes in fecal matter consistency, respiratory distress and abnormal milk with pronounced decrease in milk production.

The study shows a high tropism of the virus (capability to infect particular cells) for the mammary gland and high infectious viral loads shed in milk from affected animals.

Using whole genome sequencing of characterized viral strains, modeling and epidemiological information, the researchers’ determined cases of cow to cow transmission when infected cows from Texas were moved to a farm with healthy cows in Ohio. Sequencing also showed that the virus was transmitted to cats, a raccoon and wild birds that were found dead on affected farms. The cats and raccoon most likely became ill from drinking raw milk from infected cows. Though it isn’t known how the wild birds became infected, the researchers suspect it may have resulted from environmental contamination or aerosols kicked up during milking or cleaning of the milking parlors.

Kiril Dimitrov, assistant agency director for microbiology and research and development at the Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory, is also a co-corresponding author.

Co-first authors include Leonardo Caserta, assistant research professor and interim associate director of the Virology Laboratory at AHDC, and Elisha Frye, DVM ‘10, assistant professor of practice, both in the Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences; and Salman Butt, a postdoctoral researcher in Diel’s lab. Cornell co-authors include Melissa Laverack, Mohammed Nooruzzaman, Lina Covaleda, Brittany Cronk, Gavin Hitchener, John Beeby, Manigandan Lejeune and Francois Elvinger.

The study was funded by the AHDC, the Ohio Animal Disease and Diagnostic Laboratory, the Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory and the USDA.

-30-

---

JOURNAL

Nature

DOI

10.1038/s41586-024-07849-4 

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

Not applicable

ARTICLE TITLE

Spillover of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Virus to Dairy Cattle

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

25-Jul-2024

Trump administration shuttered pandemic monitoring program, then scrambled to extend it

By Zachary Cohen, CNN, Fri April 10, 2020

(CNN)As early indications of China's coronavirus outbreak emerged in late December, the Trump administration notified Congress it would still follow through with its plan to shutter a US Agency for International Development surveillance program tasked with detecting new, potentially dangerous infectious diseases and helping foreign labs stop emerging pandemic threats around the world.

The administration ultimately backtracked nearly three months later, granting an emergency six-month extension for the program known as PREDICT on April 1. The extension allowed the US to provide "emergency support to other countries for outbreak response including technical support for early detection" of the virus that causes the disease Covid-19, according to a notice posted by University of California-Davis, one of the project's implementing partners.

But by that time, the coronavirus outbreak had already been declared as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization and had claimed the lives of more than 4,300 people in the US.

Spillover

The administration planned to launch a successor project for PREDICT sometime in 2020 but did not appear to have an interim plan until that happened.

The PREDICT program's cancellation and the subsequent scramble to secure an emergency extension reflects the Trump administration's broader pattern of dismantling or downsizing key offices and programs focused on protecting the US from a pandemic, despite multiple warnings in recent years about the need to prepare for such an event.
It is also indicative of the Trump administration's seeming lack of urgency in the months leading up to the coronavirus outbreak in the US, even as the disease was beginning to ravage countries overseas.

The PREDICT program was launched in 2009 and is tasked with monitoring zoonotic infectious diseases -- those that normally exist in animals but can jump to humans -- in an effort to help stop pandemics before they emerge. Nearly 75% of all new, emerging or re-emerging diseases affecting humans at the beginning of the 21st Century are zoonotic, according to USAID.

While there is still some disagreement among scientists regarding the exact origins of coronavirus, researchers agree that it was the result of "zoonotic spillover," exactly the type of virus the PREDICT program was tasked with monitoring.

Sen. Angus King, an Independent from Maine, wrote to USAID in late November to express concerns over the plan to end the PREDICT surveillance program, which was written before the US had clear information related to the emerging coronavirus outbreak in China.

"The work that these projects do may help our country and our world to avoid future catastrophic epidemic and pandemic events akin to Ebola and HIV," King said in the letter.
USAID officials responded on December 31 to inform King that PREDICT would not be renewed after it expired in March 2020, despite concerns raised by the Maine Independent that canceling it before a replacement program was up and running could hinder the US ability to track possible pandemics.

"As planned, PREDICT is scheduled to end in March 2020 following the expiration of its second, five-year period of performance. While PREDICT is closing, the Bureau for Global Health at USAID is planning a successor project, which we intend to award through a competitive procurement process in 2020," wrote Richard Parker, assistant administrator for the Bureau of Legislative and Public Affairs, according to a copy of the letter obtained by CNN.

"The new program will seek to continue our investments in this critical area, by focusing on mitigating risks associated with the spillover of emerging viruses from animals, based on a more-informed understanding of what is needed at the country level to address these risks," he added.

The letter is dated on the same day that China reported its first cases of an unknown virus to the World Health Organization, marking the first public acknowledgment of the coronavirus outbreak in the Wuhan region.

'Great ironies'

In an interview on Tuesday, King called the administration's December response "one of the great ironies," given how rapidly the outbreak has spread in the months since and President Donald Trump's initial comments downplaying the situation in China earlier this year.
CNN previously reported that two top administration officials last year listed the threat of a pandemic as an issue that greatly worried them, undercutting Trump's repeated claims that the pandemic was an unforeseen problem.

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and Tim Morrison, then a special assistant to the President and senior director for weapons of mass destruction and biodefense on the National Security Council, made the comments at the BioDefense Summit in April 2019.
"Of course, the thing that people ask: 'What keeps you most up at night in the biodefense world?' Pandemic flu, of course. I think everyone in this room probably shares that concern," Azar said, before listing efforts to mitigate the impact of flu outbreaks.

Technically, PREDICT ended in September, two months prior to King's letter to USAID after its second, five-year contract expired, but was given a "no cost extension" so implementing partners could allow some core staff to finish work that was still in progress, according to Christine Kreuder Johnson of UC Davis One Health Institute.

"We just had a few things that were remaining to do both on the in country side as well as on the global side. That's what carried us through this whole year," she said, referring to the initial no-cost extension.

But the situation changed in January once the scale of the outbreak became clearer.

USAID administrator makes long-planned departure as coronavirus crisis rages

PREDICT staff were deployed to several countries almost immediately to provide technical assistance with testing and additional supplies as needed.

For months, those efforts were funded by a limited pool of funds the program had left over from the previous year, as USAID worked to secure an emergency extension, Johnson told CNN.

That extension came more than two months after the first case of coronavirus was confirmed on US soil. USAID announced on March 31 that a $2.26 million extension had been granted for the program and would take effect on April 1.

"With the $2.26 million extension, the PREDICT project will continue to provide technical expertise to support detection of SARS CoV-2 cases in Africa, Asia and the Middle East to inform the public health response. The project will also investigate the animal source or sources of SARS CoV-2 using data and samples collected over the past 10 years in Asia and Southeast Asia," the UC Davis notice posted on March 31 said.

'All hands on deck'

Still, the future of the program remains unclear once the six-month extension expires. While Johnson says PREDICT implementing partners plan to apply for the new contract award when the competition opens this spring, details about the new program remain murky. A USAID spokesperson emphasized that it will "build on the lessons learned and data gathered" during PREDICT's 10-year run.

"USAID is currently developing the STOP Spillover Project that will focus on strengthening national capacity to develop, test and implement interventions to reduce the risk of the spillover, amplification, and spread of zoonotic pathogens in animal and human populations," they told CNN.

Johnson told CNN that implementing partners are already communicating with other colleagues who work in the same field, as the current situation will require "all hands on deck," regardless of who is awarded the next contract.

But she also acknowledged that there will likely be inevitable challenges going forward.
"The kind of work that we're doing requires a lot of forward thinking on the preparedness front in between epidemics. It's always really easy after a huge epidemic to get Congress and other funding mechanisms behind public health, but what happens in terms of these emerging zoonotic diseases, which is the wildlife health sector, needs to be strengthened," she said.

CNN's Jennifer Hansler contributed reporting

Study suggests healthy ecosystems are vital in reducing risk of future deadly pandemics

Practices recommended to reduce the risk of future pandemics through 'protected and conserved area management'

CABI

Research News

 

IMAGE: INVASIVE ALIEN PLANTS HAVE REDUCED THE HABITAT QUALITY OF THE MAURITIAN FLYING FOX, RESULTING IN INCREASED FORAGING IN AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND URBAN ENVIRONMENTS. view more 

CREDIT: PIXABAY

CABI scientist Dr Arne Witt has shared his expertise on invasive alien plant species as part of a new paper which argues that healthy ecosystems are vital in reducing the risk of future pandemics - such as coronaviruses (including COVID-19) - that threaten human health.

The paper - 'Land use-induced spillover: priority actions for protected and conserved area managers' - is published as part of a special issue by the journal PARKS entitled 'COVID-19 and Protected Areas: Essential Reading for a World Haunted by a Pandemic.'

Lead author Dr Jamie K. Reaser - along with a team of researchers from institutions including the African Wildlife Foundation, the University of Oklahoma and the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas - recommend practices to reduce the risk of future pandemics through 'protected and conserved area management.'

They rightly state that pandemic prevention 'requires that human health be regarded as an ecological service' and call upon multi-lateral conservation frameworks to recognise that 'protected area managers are in the frontline of public health safety.'

The scientists highlight that land use change 'drives the emergence and spread of micro-organisms (pathogens) that infest wildlife and humans with severe consequences for environmental, animal and human health.'

The authors underscore the fact that "The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, demonstrates society's inability to respond it a timely manner to novel pathogens. The result is mass human suffering and mortality, bringing substantial moral, ethical and economic dilemmas."

"A protected and conserved areas are the most widely used approaches to securing species and ecological integrity, they have a crucial role to play in safeguarding public health."

"From our perspective, a 'healthy' ecosystem is one in which wildlife-pathogen interactions are in balance, wildlife are not overly stressed or concentrated together by land use-induced changes."

The scientists say that the strategic removal of invasive alien plants, that support populations of zoonotic pathogens, vectors or hosts, can function as an ecological countermeasure.

Dr Witt said, "In Mauritius, for example, invasive alien plants have reduced the habitat quality of the Mauritian flying fox (Pteropus niger), resulting in increased foraging in agricultural lands and urban environments."

"Krivek et al. (2020) showed that non-native plant invasions reduced native fruit production and that weeded forests provide a better habitat for flying foxes. They conclude that their study lends support to invasive alien plant control as a management strategy in mitigating human-wildlife conflicts."

Dr Reaser and the team of researchers put forward a series of proposals that reinforce existing conservation strategies while 'elevating biodiversity conservation as a priority health measure.'

The proposals include conducting surveillance about the occurrence of pathogens, or their clinical diseases, in animal or human populations as well as fostering 'landscape immunity' in conserved and protected areas. The latter of which can be achieved, the scientists suggest, by measures including not disturbing landscapes and 'retaining a full complement of native species and their inter-relationships.'

Dr Reaser and her colleagues conclude by arguing that, "Nations can no longer treat conservation as a second order priority. COVID-19 shows that we should now recognise that protected areas are at the frontline of public health infrastructure and that their managers are vital to disease prevention."

"Looking ahead, we have to conserve nature as if our lives depended on it."

###

Full paper reference

Reaser, J. K., G. M. Tabor, D. J. Becker, P. Muruthi, A. Witt, S. J. Woodley, M. Ruiz-Aravena, J. A. Patz, V. Hickey, P. J. Hudson, H. Locke, and R. K. Plowright. 'Land use-induced spillover: priority actions for protected and conserved area managers', 11 March 2021, PARKS, 27, Special Issue, 161-178. DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SUKR.en

The paper can be read as part of the special issue of the journal PARKS - 'COVID-19 and Protected Areas: Essential Reading for a World Haunted by a Pandemic' here: https://parksjournal.com/

CAPTION

The authors state that human activities that destroy and degrade ecological systems can trigger land use-induced spillover--the infect-shed-spill-spread cascade. Wildlife stressed by the environmental conditions associated with land use change can decline in immune function, thus becoming more susceptible to zoonotic pathogen infection. Stress can also increase the likelihood that wildlife will release (shed) pathogens in ways and locations that lead to the infection of other animals of the same or different species, including humans (spillover). When land use change increases interaction between infected animals and people, it is more likely that zoonotic pathogens will be transmitted into human populations. The rate and scale of pathogen spread in human populations is largely driven by patterns of human contact (social behaviour) and pathogen biology.

CREDIT

PARKS