↓ Skip to main content

Questionnaire-Based Assessment of Wild Boar/Domestic Pig Interactions and Implications for Disease Risk Management in Corsica

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Questionnaire-Based Assessment of Wild Boar/Domestic Pig Interactions and Implications for Disease Risk Management in Corsica
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00198
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ferran Jori, Anne Relun, Bastien Trabucco, François Charrier, Oscar Maestrini, David Chavernac, Daniel Cornelis, François Casabianca, Eric Marcel Charles Etter

Abstract

Wild boars and domestic pigs belong to the same species (Sus scrofa). When sympatric populations of wild boars, feral pigs, and domestic pigs share the same environment, interactions between domestic and wild suids (IDWS) are suspected to facilitate the spread and maintenance of several pig pathogens which can impact on public health and pig production. However, information on the nature and factors facilitating those IDWS are rarely described in the literature. In order to understand the occurrence, nature, and the factors facilitating IDWS, a total of 85 semi-structured interviews were implemented face to face among 25 strict farmers, 20 strict hunters, and 40 hunting farmers in the main traditional pig-farming regions of Corsica, where IDWS are suspected to be common and widespread. Different forms of IDWS were described: those linked with sexual attraction of wild boars by domestic sows (including sexual interactions and fights between wild and domestic boars) were most frequently reported (by 61 and 44% of the respondents, respectively) in the autumn months and early winter. Foraging around common food or water was equally frequent (reported by 60% of the respondents) but spread all along the year except in winter. Spatially, IDWS were more frequent in higher altitude pastures were pig herds remain unattended during summer and autumn months with limited human presence. Abandonment of carcasses and carcass offal in the forest were equally frequent and efficient form of IDWS reported by 70% of the respondents. Certain traditional practices already implemented by hunters and farmers had the potential to mitigate IDWS in the local context. This study provided quantitative evidence of the nature of different IDWS in the context of extensive commercial outdoor pig farming in Corsica and identified their spatial and temporal trends. The identification of those trends is useful to target suitable times and locations to develop further ecological investigations of IDWS at a finer scale in order to better understand diseases transmission patterns between populations and promote adapted management strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 21 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 21%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 22 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,919,066
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#3,508
of 6,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,702
of 437,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#50
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 437,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.