How big is enough? Movement‐informed zoning for African swine fever mitigation

Abstract African swine fever (ASF) poses a serious threat to domestic pigs and wild boar populations. Wild boar can disperse the virus, making effective containment crucial. One of the main control strategies involves establishing restricted zones around detected cases, i.e., areas with temporary restrictions on access and hunting; however, determining the appropriate size of these zones remains a major challenge. To inform the size of restricted zones, we analyzed GPS data from 527 wild boar across 46 European study sites using a two-step approach combining first-passage time analysis and survival modelling to quantify the risk of wild boar leaving areas of different radii (i.e., spatial scales). We investigated how the risk of leaving varied over time and across environmental gradients. To go further, we used our model findings to develop an online application that generates predictive maps of optimal buffer sizes for ASF management at the European scale, based on a given risk threshold (the maximum acceptable probability that a wild boar leaves the area). We found that the relationship between radius and the risk of leaving is negative exponential, and the risk of leaving increased over time, with a more rapid increase for smaller radii. Landscape homogeneity, terrain ruggedness and human impact increased the risk of leaving, with stronger effects at small scales. Contrary to other predictors, agricultural cover exerted a strong effect on risk of leaving over large spatial scales, especially when it was abundant. Across Europe, a buffer radius of ∼8 km is likely sufficient around high-risk infection zones in most areas (considering an infectious period of 14 days and a risk threshold of 5%); however, in certain areas, a radius of up to 20 km may be needed to effectively limit wild boar movement. Synthesis and applications : Our results highlight the need for adaptive, context-specific restricted zones. Buffers of 8 km around ASF-affected areas can limit the risk of infected wild boar dispersal, but they may be reduced to 5 km in highly heterogeneous landscapes or high-human impacted areas. Larger buffers may be required in agricultural landscapes. We provide spatially explicit outputs (optimal buffer sizes) that can directly inform policy and wildlife disease response strategies. The approach can be adapted to any other infectious disease.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Ecology
Published
2026-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.70559
Primary Topic
Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How big is enough? Movement‐informed zoning for African swine fever mitigation

Grzegorz Baś, Marco Heurich, Marco Apollonio, Klemen Jerina et al.
Journal of Applied Ecology
Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
article

How big is enough? Movement‐informed zoning for African swine fever mitigation

Grzegorz Baś, Marco Heurich, Marco Apollonio, Klemen Jerina, Éric Baubet, Miloš Ježek, Claude Fischer, Alisa Klamm, Thomas Scheppers, Janosch Arnold, Joaquín Vicente, Attila Farkas, Tobias Kürschner, Maik Henrich, Elodie Wielgus, Petter Kjellander, Кevin Мorelle, András Náhlik, Stefan M. Suter, Simon Chamaillé‐Jammes, Alain Licoppe, Stephanie Kramer‐Schadt, Tsviatko Alexandrov
article en

Abstract

Abstract African swine fever (ASF) poses a serious threat to domestic pigs and wild boar populations. Wild boar can disperse the virus, making effective containment crucial. One of the main control strategies involves establishing restricted zones around detected cases, i.e., areas with temporary restrictions on access and hunting; however, determining the appropriate size of these zones remains a major challenge. To inform the size of restricted zones, we analyzed GPS data from 527 wild boar across 46 European study sites using a two-step approach combining first-passage time analysis and survival modelling to quantify the risk of wild boar leaving areas of different radii (i.e., spatial scales). We investigated how the risk of leaving varied over time and across environmental gradients. To go further, we used our model findings to develop an online application that generates predictive maps of optimal buffer sizes for ASF management at the European scale, based on a given risk threshold (the maximum acceptable probability that a wild boar leaves the area). We found that the relationship between radius and the risk of leaving is negative exponential, and the risk of leaving increased over time, with a more rapid increase for smaller radii. Landscape homogeneity, terrain ruggedness and human impact increased the risk of leaving, with stronger effects at small scales. Contrary to other predictors, agricultural cover exerted a strong effect on risk of leaving over large spatial scales, especially when it was abundant. Across Europe, a buffer radius of ∼8 km is likely sufficient around high-risk infection zones in most areas (considering an infectious period of 14 days and a risk threshold of 5%); however, in certain areas, a radius of up to 20 km may be needed to effectively limit wild boar movement. Synthesis and applications : Our results highlight the need for adaptive, context-specific restricted zones. Buffers of 8 km around ASF-affected areas can limit the risk of infected wild boar dispersal, but they may be reduced to 5 km in highly heterogeneous landscapes or high-human impacted areas. Larger buffers may be required in agricultural landscapes. We provide spatially explicit outputs (optimal buffer sizes) that can directly inform policy and wildlife disease response strategies. The approach can be adapted to any other infectious disease.

Journal of Applied EcologyVol. 63(9)
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), African Wildlife Foundation (US), University of Sassari (IT), École Pratique des Hautes Études (FR), University of Freiburg (DE), HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (CH), Université de Montpellier (FR), ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences (CH), Research Institute for Nature and Forest (BE), Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZ), Bavarian Forest National Park (DE), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Centre d'Écologie Fonctionnelle et Évolutive (FR), Research Centre of Medical Technology and Biotechnology (DE), Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (ES), Slovenian Forestry Institute (SI), Service Public de Wallonie (BE), Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior (DE), University of Inland Norway (NO), Institute of Nature Conservation (PL), Centre For Wildlife Studies (IN), Bulgarian Food Safety Agency (BG), Fondation Pour la Recherche Sur la Biodiversité (FR), Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (DE), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR), Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania (RO), Technische Universität Berlin (DE), University of Castilla-La Mancha (ES), University of Sopron (HU)
Université de Montpellier, Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.