Spatio‐temporal patterns and risk factors of wild boar–pig farm contact across Europe

Abstract Diseases circulating at the wild–domestic animal interface are increasingly difficult to control due to human encroachment into wildlife habitats. Understanding the factors driving wild animals to visit livestock farms is crucial for reducing the risk of disease outbreaks with severe economic and social consequences. In this study, we quantified the contact rate at the wild boar–domestic pig interface across Europe using a large‐scale dataset of wild boar GPS tracking and domestic pig farm geolocations. We estimated wild boar contact rate with pig farms at hourly and monthly scales and analysed the influence of environmental, wild boar‐ and farm‐related variables. Across 187 tracked wild boars and 457 pig farms, we detected 3322 contact events, with a highly skewed contact distribution: only 5% of wild boars and 1% of farms accounted for 50% of all events. On average, each wild boar had 1.59 contacts per month with a given farm (95% CI: 1.33–1.85) and 2.58 contacts per month when considering all farms located within its monthly home range (95% CI: 1.62–3.53). Seasonal variation differed between sexes, with a bimodal distribution for males with contact rates peaking in March and August–September, and a slight increase in contact rate throughout winter for females. Monthly contact rate increased with forest cover, human footprint, wild boar population density and individual proximity to pig farms. Farms with more built infrastructure faced fewer contacts, and larger farms had higher contact rates. Contacts occurred mostly after sunset and around sunrise. Synthesis and applications . Our results highlight the need to incorporate wild boar spatio‐temporal behaviour and farm context into strategies aimed at reducing contact at the wild–domestic pig interface. While physical barriers and avoiding unintentional feeding remain essential, targeted measures during high‐risk periods, such as night‐time surveillance in summer and autumn, especially around large farms in wooded landscapes or areas with high wild boar density, could help reduce contact occurrence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Ecology
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.70314
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

Spatio‐temporal patterns and risk factors of wild boar–pig farm contact across Europe

Marco Apollonio, Manisha Bhardwaj, Thibaud Porphyre, A. J. de Nahlik et al.
Journal of Applied Ecology
Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
article

Spatio‐temporal patterns and risk factors of wild boar–pig farm contact across Europe

Marco Apollonio, Manisha Bhardwaj, Thibaud Porphyre, A. J. de Nahlik, Éric Baubet, Tamás Tari, Miloš Ježek, Claude Fischer, Alisa Klamm, Thomas Scheppers, Rudy Brogi, Valérie De Waele, Janosch Arnold, Francesca Brivio, Stefan M. Suter, Stefano Focardi, Alain Licoppe, Maik Henrich, Kevin Morelle, Petter Kjellander, S. Saïd, Marco Heurich, Elodie Wielgus, Jim Casaer, Simon Chamaillé‐Jammes
article en

Abstract

Abstract Diseases circulating at the wild–domestic animal interface are increasingly difficult to control due to human encroachment into wildlife habitats. Understanding the factors driving wild animals to visit livestock farms is crucial for reducing the risk of disease outbreaks with severe economic and social consequences. In this study, we quantified the contact rate at the wild boar–domestic pig interface across Europe using a large‐scale dataset of wild boar GPS tracking and domestic pig farm geolocations. We estimated wild boar contact rate with pig farms at hourly and monthly scales and analysed the influence of environmental, wild boar‐ and farm‐related variables. Across 187 tracked wild boars and 457 pig farms, we detected 3322 contact events, with a highly skewed contact distribution: only 5% of wild boars and 1% of farms accounted for 50% of all events. On average, each wild boar had 1.59 contacts per month with a given farm (95% CI: 1.33–1.85) and 2.58 contacts per month when considering all farms located within its monthly home range (95% CI: 1.62–3.53). Seasonal variation differed between sexes, with a bimodal distribution for males with contact rates peaking in March and August–September, and a slight increase in contact rate throughout winter for females. Monthly contact rate increased with forest cover, human footprint, wild boar population density and individual proximity to pig farms. Farms with more built infrastructure faced fewer contacts, and larger farms had higher contact rates. Contacts occurred mostly after sunset and around sunrise. Synthesis and applications . Our results highlight the need to incorporate wild boar spatio‐temporal behaviour and farm context into strategies aimed at reducing contact at the wild–domestic pig interface. While physical barriers and avoiding unintentional feeding remain essential, targeted measures during high‐risk periods, such as night‐time surveillance in summer and autumn, especially around large farms in wooded landscapes or areas with high wild boar density, could help reduce contact occurrence.

Journal of Applied EcologyVol. 63(2)
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), 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), Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Business Administration (CH), Université de Montpellier (FR), ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences (CH), Research Institute for Nature and Forest (BE), University of Zurich (CH), 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), VetAgro Sup (FR), Research Centre of Medical Technology and Biotechnology (DE), Service Public de Wallonie (BE), Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior (DE), University of Inland Norway (NO), Centre For Wildlife Studies (IN), Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive (FR), Institute for Complex Systems (IT), Fondation Pour la Recherche Sur la Biodiversité (FR), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR), Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania (RO), University of Sopron (HU)
Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos, Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Soproni Egyetem, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Università degli Studi di Sassari, Česká Zemědělská Univerzita v Praze, Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz, Haute école Spécialisée de Suisse Occidentale, VetAgro Sup, Universitatea Sapientia, Office Français de la Biodiversité, Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
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.