brucellosis in Malaysia: A case study of Melaka state of Malaysia 1

Aim: A study was carried out to elucidate the seroprevalence of brucellosis in small and large ruminants in Melaka state of Malaysia and estimate the economic impact of zoonotic brucellosis in Malaysia using available data. 
 
Materials and Methods: Data was collected during culling exercises by the Department of Veterinary Services of Malaysia as a result of surveillance using CFT as a confirmatory test for brucellosis. 
 
Results:The average compensation in 4 years per district of Melaka state was RM12248.875(USD 3874.75) and the total compensation paid in 4 years was RM146,986.50(USD45,865.24) with year 2009 having the highest compensation amount of RM 58,914.40 (USD18,383.48). The estimated total economic losses due to brucellosis stands at about RM200,607,946.80 (USD 62,926,060.84) in a year for the whole of Malaysia. The odds of brucellosis in large ruminants (cattle/buffaloes) was significantly 1.6 times more compared to small ruminants (goats/sheep) in Melaka (P


Introduction
countries like Australia, Canada, Cyprus, Finland, Denmark, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Norway, Brucellosis is a bacterial zoonotic infection Sweden and New Zealand where bovine brucellosis caused by members of the Brucella genus.Currently has been eradicated [4].It has been reported in there are eight known species in terrestrial animals and different countries in Asia including Pakistan [7], Sri 2 in marine animals.The species in terrestrial animals Lanka [8], India [9], China [10], Mongolia [11] and include: B. abortus, B.melitensis, B. suis, B. neotomae, other parts of Asia [12].There are about 500,000 new B. canis, B. ovis, B. microti and B. inopinata [1,2,3,4].
human cases of brucellosis reported annually The species in marine mammals include: B. ceti and B.
worldwide making it the commonest zoonosis [4].pinnipedialis [5].The most common domestic animals In Malaysia, Brucella was first isolated in 1950 affected by brucellosis are Cattle, Buffaloes, Goats, and the government embarked upon an eradication Sheep and Pigs [4].The economic impact of program for brucellosis in Cattle, Buffaloes, Goats and brucellosis is enormous and varies from country to Sheep since 1978 with full implementation and country and from region to region.In Latin America compensation scheme taking off in 1982 [13,14] annual losses are estimated at $600 million and in the Losses usually arise from the following: loss of foetus, U.S.A. the cost of abortion and reduced milk decreased milk yield, interference with breeding system, production in 1952 alone were put at $400 million [4,6]   National estimate: Average compensation amount livestock.This will be: RM77,654,689.07+ RM for 1 cattle was estimated to be RM1, 591.25 and this 51,769,792.71=RM 129,424,481.8(money actually multiplied by the total number of cattle to be culled spend by farmers to purchase animals).using 5.0% national seroprevalence rate as of the Taking 5% of this as money spent on logistics population of cattle in 2010 (table 3) will be RM 72, and administration such as wages, allowances, 579,299.38.transport, materials, laboratory costs, etc.by the Average compensation for 1 buffalo was RM eradication officers and allied committees: 5% of RM 1,971.67 and computing for the total population of 129,424,481.8will be=RM 6,471,224.09.buffaloes with the national prevalence rate of 5.0% Based on calculations of cost of production for a will be RM3, 989,966.05.typical farm we arrived at a production cost of Average compensation for the goats at approved approximately 50% of cost of purchase of the animal RM5.60 per kg, computing for the national in a year: seroprevalence rate of 0.95% will be RM870, 908.47.
Computing using the total cost of purchase of Average compensation for sheep at approved RM5.60 RM 129,424,481.8:50% of RM 129,424,481.8= per kg, computing for the national seroprevalence rate RM64,712,240.90. of 0.95% will be RM 214,515.17.

Discussion
Calculating the 40% unpaid cost to farmers will be RM77, 654,689.07 × 0.4(40%) ÷ 0.  compensation amount shown is not a perfect of test and slaughtering the positive animals and then representation of the actual compensation as some vaccinating the livestock population [36] which is not being practiced in Malaysia may be a better approach.farmers will have to wait for an indefinite period With a GDP real growth rate of 7.2% [37] which sometimes after verification before they are given is one of the best in Asia, Malaysia's economy would their compensation.More money was spend on even be better without brucellosis and its potentials for compensation in year 2009 inspite of the fact that year greater losses to the economy.With over $62 million 2010 had the highest seroprevalence.Records annually which is lost to brucellosis, a lot can be done (unpublished data) indicated that for the same year to better the lot of Malaysians and improve the 2010 many positive animals were not yet culled and livestock and other sectors of the economy.The hence the farmers could not be compensated since the economic impact caused by colossal losses due to compensation record only contains farmers already brucellosis all over Malaysia is a cause for more compensated after verification.The year 2010 has the radical steps at eradicating the infection completely.highest prevalence rate of 7.78% in Melaka may be The millions of dollars spend in compensation due to due to the increase in number of animals imported into the disease will only be justified if it is completely the country as that year also has the highest number of eradicated.With the successful eradication of livestock (see table 3) imported into Malaysia in the brucellosis money which would have been lost can be continuous effort for years to improve and increase the ploughed into the economy to develop the livestock genetic pool of livestock in Malaysia [14] many of industry more and ensure maximum food security for which are from endemic countries which may the nation and safe guard the health of the public.contribute to the increase in prevalence of brucellosis Strategic steps must aim at stopping all means of entry [27].The addition of new animals has also been of the infection into the country especially from identified as a risk factor for brucellosis in a previous endemic countries when importing livestock in order study in Jordan [28].
to reap the fruits of the eradication policy.The odds of brucellosis in large ruminants in our study was 1.6 times compared to the small ruminants.Conclusion The disease status was significantly associated with About 30 years after the commencement of the the species of animals but the relationship was eradication policy for brucellosis and the implemennegligible using the Guilford's rule of thumb [29] and tation of the compensation scheme, Malaysia is still likewise the association with year.That large endemic for brucellosis.The eradication policy needs ruminants had a significantly higher seroprevalence to be reinforced with measures that will guard against than the small ruminants disagrees with the findings of all risk factors for brucellosis at all levels and farmers El Sherbini et al [30] who found sheep had the highest need to be more compensated for the total cost of prevalence among livestock in a study in Egypt but animals lost or provided with full insurance schemes.agrees with the findings of Omer et al [31] in Eritrea, Small ruminants seem to be more susceptible to who found husbandry systems have effect on the brucellosis than the large ruminants but this needs prevalence of brucellosis and large ruminants had further investigation and increasing the number of higher prevalence than small ruminants.In another imported animals could increase the seroprevalence study in Zambia large ruminants were also found to rate of brucellosis.Although eradication may be have higher seroprevalence than small ruminants [32].
considered expensive but it is estimated that $7 is It is worth noting that most farmers keep goats and saved for every 1$ spend on eradication of brucellosis sheep along with large ruminants which increases the (Acha & Szyfres, 2003).Eradication may be costly but odds of testing seropositive for brucellosis among not eradicating is even costlier.Cattle and Buffaloes 6.32 times [33].The keeping of sheep in addition to goats has been identified as risk Acknowledgements factor for brucellosis increasing the risk by upto 6 The Department of Veterinary Services of times compared to keeping only goats [34].The Malaysia Headquarters, Putrajaya and all the state control of the disease in humans will depend to a great offices.All the laboratory staff of the Melaka extent on how much of it is controlled in livestock [35] Veterinary regional laboratory and the Veterinary and its presence in livestock in Malaysia raises serious Research Institute, Ipoh, Malaysia.public health concerns for Malaysia and the Asia Pacific region.Perhaps, instead of just applying the

Competing interests
test and slaughter policy that is yet to eradicate Authors declare that they have no competing interests.brucellosis in Malaysia, the Egyptian 2 fold approach

Figure- 1 :Figure- 2 :
Figure-1: chart showing the amount of compensation already paid by government in the 3 districts of Melaka Figure-2: Seroprevalence rates for large and small ruminants in Melaka from 2007-2010

Table - A. Compensation for Cattle and Buffaloes
[21]smallest states in Malaysia with only 3 kg for goats/sheep and for cattle/Buffaloes as shown in districts but is key to understanding Malaysia thereby Table-A.earning the designation of historical state and theThe online currency converter [24] was used for capital Melaka is called the historical city of Malaysia.convertingtoUnitedStates dollars (USD) equivalents It has a rich cultural diversity and a flourishing of the local currency the Malaysian Ringgit (RM).The livestock industry.The human population is about average compensation amount for cattle and buffaloes 761000 out of the total population of Malaysia which was used for calculating for the total nationwide is about 27,895000[21].
Source: Department of Veterinary Services, Malaysia

Table 1 : Species Status Cross tabulation
compensation.We estimated the given compensation averagely for all animals based on market trends,SpeciesStatus Total transport and inflation to be grossly about 60% of actual Negative Positive cost to the farmer for purchase.Some information CATTLE/ the local farmers and used in estimation.Since the weight of goats and sheep are highly variable compensated with the present population of sheep and goats in Malaysia.For national seroprevalence rate for (Odds Ratio for Species: Cattle/Buffaloes/Goats/Sheep=1.60; C.I. 1.41, 1.81; Phi=0.056)P<0.0001(Disease status is bovine brucellosis, 5.0% was used for cattle and 1.6% significantly dependent on species but relationship is negligible) for buffaloes [18].The current available livestock population for 2010 (table 3) was used [16].