Search

Various zoonotic microorganisms cause reproductive problems such as abortions and stillbirths, leading to economic losses on farms, particularly within livestock. In South Africa, bovine brucellosis is endemic in cattle, and from 2013–2018, outbreaks of Brucella melitensis occurred in sable. Coxiella burnetii, the agent responsible for the zoonotic disease known as Q-fever and/or coxiellosis, also causes reproductive problems and infects multiple domestic animal species worldwide, including humans. However, little is known of this disease in wildlife. With the expansion of the wildlife industry in South Africa, diseases like brucellosis and coxiellosis can significantly impact herd breeding success because of challenges in identifying, managing and treating diseases in wildlife populations. This study investigated samples obtained from aborted sable and roan antelope, initially suspected to be brucellosis, from game farms in South Africa using serology tests and ruminant VetMAX™ polymerase chain reaction (PCR) abortion kit. The presence of C. burnetii was confirmed with PCR in a sable abortion case, while samples from both sable and roan were seropositive for C. burnetii indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (iELISA). This study represents the initial report of C. burnetii infection in sable and roan antelope in South Africa. Epidemiological investigations are crucial to assess the risk of C. burnetii in sable and roan populations, as well as wildlife and livestock in general, across South Africa. This is important in intensive farming practices, particularly as Q-fever, being a zoonotic disease, poses a particular threat to the health of veterinarians and farm workers as well as domestic animals. Contribution: A report of clinical C. burnetii infection in the wildlife industry contributes towards the limited knowledge of this zoonotic disease in South Africa.

In this study, Brucella melitensis infection in sable antelope (Hippotragus niger) was investigated on two wildlife ranches in South Africa over a 12-year period in order to determine the origin of the outbreaks and the role of livestock in maintaining the disease. Retrospective data were obtained from farm records and interviews as well as samples tested from different disease scenarios and clinical settings. On one ranch, 10 of 74 sable tested seropositive for B. melitensis in 2004 but were certified clear of infection after no further brucellosis cases were detected following repeated serological tests and culling over a five-year period. Recrudescence occurred in 2013 (7 of 187 brucellosis positives) and in 2014 (one positive), with persistent, latent infection being the most reasonable explanation. In a second case study, linked to the first one through a common vendor, 15 of 80 sable tested positive in 2016, some five years after the acquisition of the animals from a putative source. Brucella melitensis biovar 1 and/or 3 were isolated from each outbreak on both ranches. Both outbreaks resulted in substantial losses for the owners, arising from testing and culling and significant resource expenditure by the state. The study identified the diagnostic challenges for identifying and resolving disease outbreaks in wildlife, the persistence of B. melitensis in sable, the risks associated with animal movements, and the need for a wildlife-sensitive disease control scheme. Although the actual source of infection could not be identified, the investigation points away from local livestock as a source of ongoing infection while the persistent infection is consistent with the disease circulating within small, ranched populations and being spread through the keeping and trading of high-value animals. The implications of the study findings to disease control in wildlife are discussed.