Assessing Brucellosis Control in Wildlife-Livestock Interface: A Case Study of Farmers in Shandong Province

Thesis Abstract

Brucellosis presents a persistent threat at the wildlife–livestock interface in Shandong Province, where fragmented habitats and mixed farming practices facilitate bidirectional transmission between wild reservoirs and domestic herds. The study addresses the persistent gap in understanding how interface dynamics, farmer practices, and local bovid management influence disease persistence and control outcomes. The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of current brucellosis control measures and identify socio-ecological determinants that influence transmission risk among farmers in Shandong. Specific objectives are to (1) quantify seroprevalence and incidence of brucellosis in cattle and small ruminants across agroecological zones; (2) assess farmers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) related to brucellosis prevention and control; (3) characterize wildlife–livestock contact patterns and environmental drivers of spillover risk; (4) evaluate the performance of vaccination campaigns and surveillance systems; and (5) develop a context-specific intervention framework integrating veterinary, public health, and wildlife management strategies. A mixed-methods design combines cross-sectional epidemiological surveys with qualitative explorations to capture both quantitative patterns and underlying rationales. The population comprises cattle and small ruminant herds managed by smallholder and semi-commercial farmers within Shandong’s major pastoral–agricultural interfaces. A stratified random sample of 320 herds will be selected, with 1,600 animals subjected to serological testing (ELISA and Rose Bengal tests) and molecular confirmation (qPCR) for Brucella spp. Additionally, 40 focus group discussions and 60 in-depth interviews with farmers, veterinarians, and wildlife managers will illuminate interface dynamics. Data collection instruments include structured sero-surveys, standardized KAP questionnaires, GPS-enabled mapping of grazing and watering points, wildlife activity trackers where feasible, and interview guides anchored to the socio-ecological model. Validity will be reinforced through pilot testing, triangulation of serology with molecular assays, and expert review of instruments. Reliability will be ensured via standardized protocols, intercoder agreement for qualitative coding (Cohen’s kappa >0.70), and calibration exercises for field teams. Data analysis will integrate epidemiological and thematic approaches. Descriptive statistics will quantify seroprevalence and incidence across species, husbandry systems, and ecological zones. Multivariable logistic regression and generalized estimating equations will examine associations between serostatus and risk factors, including vaccination coverage, biosecurity practices, herd size, and proximity to wildlife habitats. Spatial analysis using kernel density estimation and SaTScan will identify clusters of infection and correlate them with land-use patterns and wildlife corridors. Thematic analysis of qualitative data will reveal perceived barriers to control, risk perceptions, and adoption of preventive measures, guided by the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior. A conceptual framework synthesizing epidemiological findings with KAP and interface characteristics will be proposed, and a practical decision-support tool for stakeholders will be developed. Expected findings include higher brucellosis burden in herds with extensive wildlife contact and low vaccination uptake, significant gaps in knowledge and practices among smallholders, and distinct ecological gradients of transmission linked to water source sharing and grazing proximity to wildlife habitats. The study anticipates identifying critical control points where integrated interventions—enhanced vaccination campaigns, targeted biosurveillance, wildlife management measures, and farmer education—can most effectively reduce transmission at the interface. The contribution to knowledge lies in providing a context-specific, evidence-based framework for brucellosis control that bridges veterinary epidemiology, wildlife ecology, and community behavior in a rapidly changing agricultural landscape. The main conclusion is that success hinges on coordinated multisectoral actions tailored to the local interface structure and farmer incentives, rather than isolated vaccination or surveillance efforts. Recommendations include adopting a harmonized vaccination schedule with catch-up campaigns in high-risk zones, strengthening cross-sectoral surveillance between veterinary and wildlife authorities, implementing secure water and feeding points to minimize wildlife contact, and developing participatory extension services that address observed KAP gaps and perceived barriers. The study will also suggest scalable models for rural livelihood integration that sustain long-term disease control while supporting farmer livelihoods.