ライフサイエンスコーパス: badger

1 ection in wildlife, principally the European badger.

2 bation increases, the spread of infection in badgers.

3 rol operations should target both cattle and badgers.

4 sion of experimentally induced TB in captive badgers.

5 e in the prevalence of M. bovis infection in badgers.

6 of infection cheaply and without destroying badgers.

7 diagnosing M. bovis infection in cattle and badgers.

8 rs and cattle, as well as naturally infected badgers.

9 n epidemic involving two species, cattle and badgers.

10 cattle population, it was detected in local badgers.

11 but do not explicitly consider any data from badgers.

12 se of vaccination to reduce bTB infection in badgers.

13 ere the vaccine showed efficacy) and control badgers.

14 iated with interventions primarily targeting badgers.

15 size in England and Wales was 6.74 (+/-0.63) badgers.

16 urvival and population abundance benefits in badgers.

17 nonymous FTP from ftp://ftp.sanger.ac.uk/pub/badger/.

18 provides an Fe-O stretching frequency of nu(Badger) = 563 cm(-1).

19 we estimate there are approximately 485,000 badgers (95% confidence intervals 391,000-581,000) in En

20 Here we present Badger, a lightweight and easy-to-install genome explora

21 We introduce BADGERS, a powerful method to perform polygenic score-ba

22 nited Kingdom legislation (The Protection of Badgers Act 1992).

23 esonance phenomenon originally identified by Badger and Brocklehurst lies at the core of the basic un

24 ported a possible association between bTB in badger and cattle, but none could directly show causatio

25 (Trichosurus vulpecula) in New Zealand, the badger and its sett are protected under United Kingdom l

26 neficial effect of vaccination in individual badgers and an indirect protective effect in unvaccinate

27 ture, amid debate over the relative roles of badgers and cattle in disease transmission.

28 cterial genome data to quantify the roles of badgers and cattle in M. bovis infection dynamics in the

29 highlights the co-incidence of infection in badgers and cattle in parts of the southern edge area co

30 The MTC spoligotypes of recovered from badgers and cattle varied: in the northern part of the s

31 e obtained from both experimentally infected badgers and cattle, as well as naturally infected badger

32 for contact and disease transmission between badgers and cattle.

33 tion), which can increase transmission among badgers and from badgers to cattle.

34 ble for a proportion of transmission amongst badgers and onwards to cattle.

35 ults have implications for the management of badgers and other carnivores with omnivorous tendencies

36 EE) and resting metabolic rate (RMR) of wild badgers and related this to their TB infection status an

37 un and transient effect on cattle of culling badgers and the effect of a period without routine testi

38 tilise solutions such as oral vaccination of badgers and/or cattle as well as increased biosecurity t

39 wildlife reservoir (principally the Eurasian Badger) and/or from cattle purchased from infected areas

40 ights in the home ranges of contact-collared badgers, and 5380 collar-nights in the home ranges of GP

41 ts of management strategies to reduce bTB in badgers, and thereby reduce cattle herd incidence.

42 mong the fauna are a new species of Eurasian badger (Arctomeles dimolodontus) and the largest concent

43 first North American occurrence of a meline badger (Arctomeles).

44 However, badgers are also known to be killed illegally.

45 ity populations in the United Kingdom, where badgers are atypical in their behaviour, physiology, eco

46 Badgers are protected in Wisconsin owing to an overall l

47 Mitigating the conflict concerning badgers as a vector of bTB requires cross-disciplinary s

48 infection may be transmitted from cattle to badgers, as well as vice versa.

49 ectly attribute the role of the reservoir to badgers based on this analysis alone, the result support

50 are undermined by culling-induced changes in badger behavior (termed perturbation), which can increas

51 Whether or not TVR may alter badger behaviours remains to be seen, but it would be be

52 ral scales (preceding month or season), with badgers being heavier if preceding temperatures (particu

53 Overall, the mean badger body weight of culled individuals rose during the

54 Using post-mortem badger body weight records from 15 878 individuals captu

55 n this region, we project heavier individual badger body weights in the future.

56 the design, construction, and testing of the BADGER (Box for Aerosol and Droplet Guarding and Evacuat

57 otype SB0129 predominated in both cattle and badgers, but elsewhere there was a much wider range of s

58 en because previous studies of reductions in badgers by culling, reported a possible association betw

59 used an established simulation model of the badger-cattle-TB system and investigated four proposed s

60 hile controlling for local abundance (unique badgers caught/sett/year).

61 esent data on the prevalence of infection in badgers collected along the southern edge of England's b

62 A badger control policy (BCP) commenced in 2013.

63 n addition, we show the risk of unvaccinated badger cubs, but not adults, testing positive to an even

64 fficient evidence to conclude RBCT proactive badger culling affected bTB breakdown incidence.

65 ctive was to measure the association between badger culling and bovine tuberculosis (TB) incidents in

66 Large-scale badger culling can reduce the incidence of confirmed cat

67 tantial decrease in bTB herd incidence where badger culling had been implemented, in comparison to un

68 Recently, badger culling has attracted controversy because experim

69 -scale field trials have recently shown that badger culling has the capacity to cause both increases

70 Badger culling has therefore been a component of British

71 to detect any disease control benefits from badger culling in England.

72 Here, we show that repeated badger culling in the same area is associated with incre

73 Ongoing illegal badger culling is likewise expected to increase cattle T

74 ale field trial that indicate that localized badger culling not only fails to control but also seems

75 s showed no evidence to support an effect of badger culling on bTB herd incidence 'confirmed' by visi

76 d incidents might be expected over 10 years, badger culling prevented 26 cattle herd incidents while

77 le is based on a field trial, the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) 1998-2005, which reported a

78 no badger management, large-scale proactive badger culling, badger vaccination, and culling with a r

79 population management interventions, such as badger culling.

80 We conducted a survey of badger dens (main setts) in 1614 1 km squares across Eng

81 to assess its performance across a range of badger densities.

82 This effect has been recorded in high badger density areas, such as in southwest England.

83 e evidence for the presence of superspreader badgers, despite the population-level effective reproduc

84 l across different temporal scales, although badgers did exhibit heavier weights when greater rainfal

85 We present well-supported evidence that badgers disperse much further in the low-density contine

86 fecundity, recruitment and survival rates in badgers, due to improved food availability and energetic

87 n measures were 100% effective in preventing badger entry into farm buildings, as long as they were a

88 creasing prevalence of M. bovis infection in badgers, especially where landscape features allow badge

89 Badger exclusion measures included sheet metal gates, ad

90 Badgers exhibit a slow life-history strategy, having hig

91 ociated with four metrics of perturbation in badgers: expanded ranging, more frequent immigration, lo

92 erformance of tests in detecting M. bovis in badger feces for the Department for Environment, Food, a

93 rimarily of bovine origin, but isolates from badgers, feral deer, sheep, humans, and a pig were inclu

94 of TB in cattle, noting that vaccination of badgers, fertility control and on farm biosecurity may a

95 vel approach that entails testing individual badgers for infection, vaccinating test-negative animals

96 shire, and East Sussex) submitted found-dead badgers for post-mortem examination and testing by bacte

97 ne tuberculosis (bTB) in Wales, an All Wales Badgers Found Dead (AWBFD) survey was carried out from 2

98 s, especially where landscape features allow badgers from neighboring land to recolonize culled areas

99 ted the statistical signal, where aggregated badger hairs were used, and where individuals were ident

100 d by Mycobacterium bovis, where the Eurasian badger has long been believed to act as a reservoir but

101 Overall, the BADGER has the potential to contain large droplets and s

102 inate or remove ('TVR') of bTB test-positive badgers, has been suggested to be a potentially useful p

103 us attempts to manage the disease by culling badgers have been hampered by social perturbation, which

104 Badgers have been implicated in the transmission and mai

105 While badgers have been implicated in the transmission and mai

106 In a previous study, two of eight badgers immunized with the heat-inactivated Mycobacteriu

107 er, little is known about the involvement of badgers in areas on the spatial edge of the cattle epide

108 Despite the importance of badgers in bTB and the well-documented role for macropha

109 ributed to the genetic variation observed in badgers in Europe today.

110 e, BCI was the principal driver of TE, where badgers in good condition were less likely to be trapped

111 representing both responsive persecution of badgers in high cattle risk areas and effects of persecu

112 In Britain, the role of badgers in infection persistence in cattle is highly con

113 Badgers in lowland habitats had diets richer in protein

114 The low prevalence of MTC in badgers in much of the study area, and, relative to in c

115 f a study of found-dead (mainly road-killed) badgers in six counties on the edge of the English epide

116 RRT estimated that 10.4% of farmers killed badgers in the 12 months preceding the study.

117 to leave some infected and some susceptible badgers in the population.

118 ther could impact government-led trapping of badgers in the UK, in relation to TB management.

119 In this study, we genotyped 233 American badgers in Wisconsin at 12 microsatellite loci to identi

120 epidemic in cattle in England to widespread badger infection.

121 o make NO after stimulation with recombinant badger interferon gamma (bdIFNgamma) or a combination of

122 The European badger is recognised as a wildlife reservoir for bovine

123 However, the practice of removing or culling badgers is controversial both for ethical reasons and be

124 Therefore, an accurate in vitro test for badgers is needed urgently to determine the extent of th

125 should be directed at controlling disease in badgers is unclear.

126 and implicit associations relate to farmers' badger killing behavior reported via RRT.

127 ation test (BIAT)) for investigating illegal badger killing by livestock farmers across Wales.

128 The extent of illegal badger killing is currently unknown.

129 ndicates that badger-to-cattle and cattle-to-badger M. bovis transmission may typically occur through

130 phages as anti-mycobacterial effector cells, badger macrophage (bdMphi) responses remain uncharacteri

131 980s, 1990s and 2011-13, using the number of badger main setts as a proxy for the abundance of badger

132 oposed strategies: business as usual with no badger management, large-scale proactive badger culling,

133 The distinctive social position of infected badgers may help explain how social stability mitigates,

134 In the United Kingdom, European badgers Meles meles are a protected species and an impor

135 lysis of the life histories of wild European badgers Meles meles in a population naturally infected w

136 tructured by sex in a population of European badgers Meles meles naturally infected with Mycobacteriu

137 han predicted WVC during lockdowns, included badgers Meles meles, foxes Vulpes vulpes, and pheasants,

138 ta and 28 years of pedigree for the European badger (Meles meles L.), a long-lived, iteroparous, poly

139 Using long-term data on a badger (Meles meles Linnaeus, 1758) population naturally

140 life reservoirs for bTB include the Eurasian badger (Meles meles) in Great Britain and Ireland, the b

141 The European badger (Meles meles) is a medium-sized carnivore that oc

142 Dispersal in the Eurasian badger (Meles meles) is believed to be very limited, wit

143 The European badger (Meles meles) is considered an important vector i

144 The European badger (Meles meles) is implicated as a wildlife reservo

145 The European badger (Meles meles) is implicated as a wildlife reservo

146 The European badger (Meles meles) is of considerable interest in the

147 road-scale genetic structure of the European badger (Meles meles) is of interest as it may result fro

148 The Eurasian badger (Meles meles) is partly responsible for maintenan

149 In the British Isles, the European badger (Meles meles) is thought to be the primary wildli

150 conduct diffusion analysis based on European badger (Meles meles) movement data obtained from three d

151 ulosis (TB) is hindered by infection in wild badger (Meles meles) populations.

152 , and illustrate it with an example based on badger (Meles meles) territoriality.

153 This policy includes culling of European badger (Meles meles) to reduce cattle TB incidence.

154 m bovis, also causes disease in the Eurasian badger (Meles meles), a secondary maintenance host.

155 as a wide host range, including the European badger (Meles meles).

156 In Britain, European badgers (Meles meles) are implicated in transmitting Myc

157 European badgers (Meles meles) are reservoirs for animal tubercul

158 phic ecology across a population of Eurasian badgers (Meles meles) at a regional scale.

159 For three decades, European badgers (Meles meles) have been culled by the British go

160 A study of European badgers (Meles meles) naturally infected with bovine tub

161 Wild badgers (Meles meles) play a role on its epidemiology in

162 An example is given, involving badgers (Meles meles), in which the key factor affecting

163 Culling badgers (Meles meles), the principal wildlife host, resu

164 by the involvement of wildlife, particularly badgers (Meles meles), which appear to sustain endemic i

165 is hindered by persistent infection in wild badgers (Meles meles).

166 d in part to a reservoir of the infection in badgers (Meles meles).

167 ssociated with an exchange of infection with badgers (Meles meles).

168 t of bovine tuberculosis] between cattle and badgers (Meles meles).

169 te contact patterns of group-living European badgers, Meles meles, which are an important wildlife re

170 This impact on prevalence in badgers might reduce the beneficial effects of culling o

171 Cattle pasture was badgers' most preferred habitat.

172 e life histories on 1179 individual European badgers over 3288 (re-) trapping events, to test whether

173 ject the hypothesis that culling up to three badgers per social group might avoid perturbation, we al

174 Average badger persecution was associated with reduced cattle bT

175 edict that climate change could increase the badger population across the Republic of Ireland.

176 ildlife host, results in perturbation of the badger population and an increased level of disease in c

177 otes the persistence of a naturally infected badger population and helps to explain the badger's role

178 identify potential infection hotspots in the badger population and quantify the heterogeneity in bact

179 rease TB incidence in cattle by reducing the badger population available to provide a wildlife reserv

180 al prevalence of bTB in the Woodchester Park badger population exhibits no straightforward relationsh

181 Since the 1970s, this badger population has been monitored with a systematic m

182 ded period, using empirical data from a wild badger population naturally infected with Mycobacterium

183 are consistent with a marked increase in the badger population of England and Wales since the 1980s.

184 r, direct protective effect of BCG in a wild badger population.

185 thesis is that the reservoir is the infected badger population.

186 al for understanding the social structure of badger populations along with mechanisms vital for under

187 o the epidemiology of bovine tuberculosis in badger populations and inform disease control interventi

188 differ from those observed in higher density badger populations in England, in which badger ranging i

189 nderstanding the epidemiology of M. bovis in badger populations is essential for directing control in

190 This method allows M. bovis infections in badger populations to be monitored without trapping and

191 t we did not assess behaviours of individual badgers, possible reasons why no differences in home ran

192 Simultaneous GPS-tracking revealed that badgers preferred land > 50 m from cattle.

193 reject the hypothesis that killing a single badger prompted detectable perturbation.

194 uarial senescence is further amplified among badgers putatively infected with bTB.

195 During 2014-2017, badger ranging behaviours were examined prior to and dur

196 sity badger populations in England, in which badger ranging increased following culling.

197 While removing badgers reduces population density, it may also result i

198 This is a result of a failure of the Badger relationship (the shorter bond is always the stro

199 Analysis of an extensive badger removal programme in England since 2013 has raise

200 tal (social and weather) conditions during a badger's first year on pace-of-life explained <10% of va

201 d badger population and helps to explain the badger's role as a persistent reservoir of M. bovis.

202 A Badger's rule analysis of this distance provides an Fe-O

203 Our results indicate that Badger's rule holds for heme and non-heme oxo and hydrox

204 In efforts to use Badger's rule to estimate the bond distance correspondin

205 pecies we have examined the applicability of Badger's rule to heme and non-heme iron-oxygen bonds.

206 e substantially from the values predicted by Badger's rule, while the short Fe-O bonds obtained from

207 ths, but the computed force constant follows Badger's rule.

208 tion measurements are in good agreement with Badger's rule.

209 nship for the bacteria taken from cattle and badgers sampled near to each other, the most parsimoniou

210 Combining these results with the recent Badger Sett Survey of England and Wales, we estimate the

211 Infected badgers shed M. bovis in their feces.

212 terogeneity in bacterial load; with infected badgers shedding between 1 x 10(3)- 4 x 10(5) M. bovis c

213 decrease (p < 0.001) in prevalence of bTB in badgers since a similar survey was carried out in 2005-2

214 Highest risks were in areas of high badger social group density and high rates of persecutio

215 d with herd risk than area-level measures of badger social group density, habitat suitability or pers

216 ts of persecution on cattle bTB risk through badger social group disruption.

217 There was considerable variation in badger social group size among Land Class Groups (LCGs),

218 social groups, the estimated mean density of badger social groups in England and Wales was 0.485 km(-

219 Determining the disease status of badger social groups requires multiple tests per group.

220 rate of increase in the estimated number of badger social groups was 2.6% (2.2-2.9%), equating to an

221 r main setts as a proxy for the abundance of badger social groups, none has combined contemporary dat

222 Using main setts as a proxy for badger social groups, the estimated mean density of badg

223 re has been an increase of 103% (83-123%) in badger social groups, while in Wales there has been litt

224 ition (EDMD) to uncover patterns relating to badger social organisation.

225 m the Best Add-On Giving Effective Response (BADGER) study tested the association between baseline bi

226 While there have been three national badger surveys in the 1980s, 1990s and 2011-13, using th

227 The M. bovis isolates from badgers tended to be similar to the genotypes of cattle

228 a much wider range of spoligotypes found in badgers than in cattle, in which infection was mostly wi

229 cribe the local immune response in divergent badgers (those with severe disease progression), with re

230 hat transmission occurs more frequently from badgers to cattle than vice versa (10.4x in the most lik

231 increase transmission among badgers and from badgers to cattle.

232 vidence of widespread and frequent visits by badgers to farm buildings during which there is the pote

233 cal disputes on the necessity of controlling badgers to limit the spread of infection.

234 the importance of reducing transmission from badgers to reduce the incidence of TB in cattle, noting

235 eing met by compensatory mechanisms enabling badgers to survive for extended periods without exhibiti

236 We applied BADGERS to two independent datasets for late-onset Alzhe

237 nto the immune mechanisms in HIMB-vaccinated badgers, to improve TB control strategies.

238 ery infrequent direct contact indicates that badger-to-cattle and cattle-to-badger M. bovis transmiss

239 high bTB prevalence areas of the UK can cull badgers under license.

240 on to cattle is through exposure to infected badger urine and faeces.

241 Compared to traditional approaches, BADGERS uses GWAS summary statistics as input and does n

242 unique > 40-year longitudinal study of 2,391 badgers using a recently developed individual forward fi

243 Badger vaccination and a deeper understanding of the sub

244 ement, large-scale proactive badger culling, badger vaccination, and culling with a ring of vaccinati

245 icity and sensitivity to monitor shedding in badgers via latrine sampling, delivering a potentially v

246 ildings to determine the background level of badger visits experienced by each farm.

247 s can substantially reduce the likelihood of badger visits to buildings and reduce some of the potent

248 Badger visits to farm buildings occurred on 19 of the 32

249 in improving farm biosecurity and preventing badger visits to farm buildings.

250 exclusion measures also reduced the level of badger visits to the rest of the farmyard.

251 -Pak) for detecting tuberculosis in Eurasian badgers was 49% sensitive and 93% specific against cultu

252 The commonest M. bovis clade in badgers was B6-62, which was predominant in 4/5 counties

253 edators, such as yellow-throated martens and badgers, was associated with sparser, less nested, but m

254 ar-nights in the home ranges of GPS-collared badgers, we detected no direct contacts between the two

255 Badgers were also heavier in areas with higher landscape

256 Between 1975 and 1997 over 20,000 badgers were culled as part of British TB control policy

257 We found that TB test-positive badgers were socially isolated from their own groups but

258 emi-sealed environment is created inside the BADGER, which is placed over the head of the patient and

259 In contrast, vaccinated badgers with a standard immune response showed a balance

260 nose (EN) to diagnose infection of cattle or badgers with M. bovis, using a serum sample.

261 Stat-Pak may be useful for the detection of badgers with the greatest risk of transmitting disease.

262 n Influenza A virus H9N2 in civets and Asian badgers, with the latter displaying respiratory symptoms

263 ow TVR affects the behaviour and movement of badgers within a medium density population, such as thos