PDF(1021 KB)
Analysis of monitoring results of avian influenza in Fuyang from 2019 to 2023
FENG Shuo, SUN Liang, LI Huaibiao, SUN Qiankun, ZHU Yongzhi, GUO Liangzi, ZHUANG Yalei
Anhui Journal of Preventive Medicine ›› 2025, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (6) : 515-518.
PDF(1021 KB)
PDF(1021 KB)
Analysis of monitoring results of avian influenza in Fuyang from 2019 to 2023
Objective To investigate the distribution characteristics of avian influenza viruses in external environments of poultry-related settings in Fuyang from 2019 to 2023, and to provide scientific evidence for the prevention and control of avian influenza in Fuyang. Methods Samples from the external environment of urban and rural live poultry markets, large-scale poultry (including waterfowl) farms, and rural free-range households in Fuyang were collected from 2019 to 2023. Real-time fluorescent quantitative RT-PCR was used for nucleic acid detection of the avian influenza virus, and the positive rate was calculated and chi-square test was conducted. Results A total of 1 164 samples of the external environment of avian influenza were collected in Fuyang from 2019 to 2023, 594 samples were positive for type A influenza virus nucleic acid, with a positive rate of 51.03%. Among these, the H9 subtype accounted for the highest proportion (96.13%, 571/594). The positive rates of external environment monitoring for avian influenza in Fuyang from 2019 to 2023 were 49.82% (136/273), 67.06% (57/85), 57.01% (126/221), 53.33% (96/180), and 44.20% (179/405), respectively, with statistically significant differences (χ2=20.014, P<0.001). The results of external environment monitoring for avian influenza showed that the top three months with the highest positive rates were January (77.14%, 54/70), February (67.78%, 61/90), and May (65.71%, 46/70). The top three counties (cities, districts) with the highest positive rates were Yingzhou District (60.63%, 97/160), Jieshou City (53.38%, 284/532), Yingdong District (48.57%, 34/70), and Yingshang County (48.57%, 17/35). The top three sample types in order of positive rate were poultry drinking water (71.74%, 66/92), swab samples from feather cleaning machines (57.26%, 67/117), and sewage from cleaning poultry (56.50%, 100/177). Conclusion The positive rate of avian influenza virus in the external environment of poultry trading markets in Fuyang is relatively high, posing a risk of human infection with the avian influenza virus. It is recommended to strengthen management measures in poultry trading markets.
Avian influenza / External environment / Etiological surveillance
| [1] |
付小强, 黄威, 李文伟, 等. 2014—2021年湖北省鄂州市职业暴露人群血清学和外环境禽流感病毒监测分析[J]. 医学动物防制, 2023, 39(4):329-333.
|
| [2] |
楼秀玉, 王欣莹, 颜浩, 等. 2016—2020年浙江省禽类相关外环境禽流感病毒污染状况及职业暴露人群血清监测[J]. 疾病监测, 2022, 37(9):1170-1174.
|
| [3] |
瞿艳, 周舟, 何左. 2016—2020年大理州外环境禽流感病毒监测结果[J]. 江苏预防医学, 2022, 33(4):457-458+460.
|
| [4] |
刘玮, 贺莉, 石英, 等. 2011—2020年延安市外环境禽流感病毒监测分析[J]. 预防医学情报杂志, 2022, 38(9):1271-1275.
|
| [5] |
赵志荣, 江良梁, 江小鱼. 2009—2021年安徽省马鞍山市禽流感监测与分析[J]. 疾病监测, 2023, 38(2):148-151.
|
| [6] |
吴照春, 黄旭, 汪金生, 等. 安徽省安庆市涉禽外环境禽流感病毒监测分析[J]. 上海预防医学, 2023, 35(11):1058-1062.
|
| [7] |
余建, 陈宇鸿. 2016—2019年温岭市禽流感外环境监测结果分析[J]. 中国公共卫生管理, 2021, 37(2):211-213.
|
| [8] |
曹霞, 吴汶禧, 李龙, 等. 2017—2020年南川区外环境禽流感监测结果及预测分析[J]. 现代医药卫生, 2021, 37(2):215-218.
|
| [9] |
邓国华, 施建忠, 崔鹏飞, 等. 中国H5亚型禽流感病毒流行现状[C]// 中国畜牧兽医学会2018年学术年会禽病学分会第十九次学术研讨会论文集. 南宁, 2018:36.
|
| [10] |
康显虎, 赵晓南, 周洁楠, 等. 2016—2017年云南省禽类相关外环境禽流感病毒监测结果分析[J]. 疾病监测, 2018, 33(10):825-828.
|
| [11] |
程晓庆, 祁贤, 余慧燕, 等. 华东地区高致病性H5N6禽流感病毒血凝素蛋白分子特征分析[J]. 江苏预防医学, 2021, 32(1):1-4.
|
| [12] |
李琴, 闫姝利, 廖洪秀, 等. 2019—2022年攀枝花市外环境禽流感病毒监测分析[J]. 预防医学情报杂志, 2023, 39(9):1025-1028.
|
| [13] |
夏丹, 刘艳慧, 曹蓝, 等. 2020年广州市外环境禽流感病毒监测与职业暴露人群血清学分析[J]. 医学动物防制, 2023, 39(11):1064-1067.
|
| [14] |
帕丽达·吐尔迪, 色依提汗·热合木都, 张瑾, 等. 吐鲁番市活禽交易市场禽流感病毒监测及消毒剂量研究[J]. 实用预防医学, 2019, 26(12):1508-1509.
|
| [15] |
赵善露, 黄超洋, 刘子言, 等. 2013—2022年湖南省人感染H9N2禽流感病例及外环境H9亚型禽流感病毒监测分析[J]. 疾病监测, 2024, 39(7):836-840.
|
| [16] |
蒋惠, 谢加伟, 熊华利, 等. 重庆市首例人感染H5N6禽流感病例流行病学调查分析[J]. 寄生虫病与感染性疾病, 2022, 20(1):56-60.
|
利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |