STUDY ON LUMPY SKIN DISEASE: MORBIDITY, MORTALITY RATE AND

ASSOCIATED RISK FACTORS IN AND AROUND BISHOFTU, OROMIA REGION,

ETHIOPIA

DVM THESIS

BY:

Beranu Girma Wendafro

A Thesis Submitted to the College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture of Addis Ababa
University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree “Doctor of Veterinary
Medicine” (DVM).

June, 2022

Bishoftu, Ethiopia
 STUDY ON LUMPY SKIN DISEASE: MORBIDITY, MORTALITY RATE AND
ASSOCIATED RISK FACTORS IN AND AROUND BISHOFTU, OROMIA REGION,
ETHIOPIA

DVM THESIS

BY:
Beranu Girma Wendafro

A Thesis Submitted to the College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture of Addis Ababa
University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree “Doctor of Veterinary
Medicine” (DVM).

Board of External Examiner:

Name Signature Date

1. Dr, Berecha Bayissa _____________ ____________

2. Dr, Getachew Abichu _____________ ____________
Main Advisor:
1. Dr, Shimels Tesfaye ____________ ____________
Moderator:
1. Prof. Yacob Hailu ____________ ____________

June, 2022
Bishoftu, Ethiopia
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... v
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. vi
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS .......................................................................................... 4
2.1. Study area ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.2. Study populations ........................................................................................................... 4
2.3. Study design .................................................................................................................... 5
2.4. Sampling and sample size determination ....................................................................... 5
2.4.1. Sample size determination .......................................................................................... 5
2.4.2. Questionnaire survey .................................................................................................. 6
2.5. Data management and analysis ...................................................................................... 6
3. RESULT ................................................................................................................................ 7
3.1. Herd structure, cattle at risk, affected and dead of lumpy skin diseases...................... 7
3.2. Morbidity and mortality of lumpy skin disease ............................................................. 7
3.3. Seasonal occurrence versus vaccination schedule ......................................................... 9
4. DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................... 10
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 13
6. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 14
7. APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................... 19
7.1. Questionnaire Survey ................................................................................................... 19

i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost all glory should be god and I would like to thank the blessed virgin saint marry
who prays and save my life. Next to that I would like to express my gratitude to Addis Ababa
University College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture. I would like to express my special
gratitude to my advisor Dr, Shimelis Tesfaye for his advice motivation and devotion of time in
correcting and reviewing this paper. I gratefully acknowledge my instructors, animal’s owners and
friends for their valuable advice and assistance. Last but not the least I would like to thank my
family for their invaluable supports.

ii
LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 1: The number of cattle at risk, affected and dead due to LSD reported during interview…....6
Table 2: Morbidity and mortality rate of lumpy skin disease and associated risk factors....................7

iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure.1. Map of the study area............................................................................................................4

iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

^ Power of
DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid
EFSA European food safety authority
LSD Lumpy skin disease
LSDV Lumpy skin disease virus
MOA Ministry of Agriculture
N Sample size
no Number
OIE Office International des Epizooties
P Morbidity

v
ABSTRACT

Lumpy skin disease is a viral disease of cattle caused by the lumpy skin disease virus, poxviridae
family which is OIE notifiable and enzootic to Ethiopia. This study was conducted in and around
Bishoftu town to assess lumpy skin disease morbidity rate, mortality rate and associated risk factors.
In this study a cross-sectional study design was employed from October 2021 to April 2022 in and
around Bishoftu town. Data collected with structured questionnaires survey. The study was
conducted in 100 householders having a total of 848 cattle. From the total 848 cattle 29 (3.41%)
cattle were reported clinically ill of lumpy skin disease and 8 (0.94%) were dead of directly from
lumpy skin disease. This study revealed that local and cross breed morbidity rate were 5.92 %, and
2.24%, which is statistically significant (p<0.05) and mortality rate were 0.37% and 1.21% which is
statistically not significant (p>0.05) respectively. Morbidity rate in vaccinated cattle were 2.58 %
and not vaccinated cattle were 5.24 %, which is statistically significant (p<0.05). Mortality rate in
vaccinated cattle 1.38 % and dead not record in none vaccinated cattle, which is not statistically
significant (p>0.05). Higher morbidity rate were observed in female and adult cattle, which is not
statistically significant (p>0.05). Higher mortality rate observed in young and female cattle, which is
not statistically significant (p>0.05). From this point of view still the finding suggested that
prevention and control measure based on vaccination have great impact to prevent the spread of
lumpy skin disease.

Keywords: Bishoftu, Cattle, Lumpy skin disease, Morbidity rate, Mortality rate, Risk factors.
.

vi
1. INTRODUCTION

Lumpy skin disease is a viral disease of cattle caused by the lumpy skin disease virus. It is
characterized by fever and multiple hard, well-bounded, deep skin nodules and necrotic plaques in
the mucous membranes, primarily the upper respiratory tract and oral cavity (Tuppurainen et al.,
2018). LSDV is a double-stranded DNA virus belonging to the genus Capripoxvirus of the
Poxviridae family and is closely associated with sheep and goat pox viruses (OIE, 2010).

Lumpy skin disease virus was first isolated in the 1940s. However, the first widespread epidemic
was reported in Zambia in 1929 (Tuppurainen et al., 2018). Lumpy skin disease was first recognized
as a contagious disease in 1943 after an outbreak in northern Botswana (Von Backström, 1945). In
late 1944, LSD was reported from South Africa (Thomas et al., 1945). Later on the disease was
reported from central and eastern Africa in 1956 and then spread northward. It has since been widely
encountered in Africa and Madagascar (Nawathe et al., 1978; Odend'hal, 1983; Fenner et al., 1987;
Davies, 1991). In Ethiopia, it was first reported in 1983 (Mebratu et al., 1984) and in 1988 in Egypt
(House et al., 1990). It spread north into Sudan in 1970 and between 1981 and 1986 it reached
Tanzania, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Cameroon and Somalia. It has now spread to almost all agro-
ecological regions and areas of the continent Africa (Ayelet et al., 2013).

Lumpy skin disease is endemic in Ethiopia. The incidence is most common in humid and hot
weather. It is a disease with high morbidity and low mortality rate that affects cattle of all ages and
breeds. This leads to high economic losses associated with reduced milk production, loss of beef and
traction, abortion, infertility, loss of condition and skin deterioration (Carn and Kitching, 1995b;
Davies et al., 1971; MOA, 2012). All breeds are equally susceptible to disease. However, the
severity of LSD depends on the breed, age, physiological condition of the host, endemicity of the
disease, susceptibility of the host and population densities of the vector. Exotic breeds (Bos Taurus)
are more susceptible than local breed (Bos Indicus), young ages were more susceptible to disease
and, although animals of all ages are susceptible, typical lesions can develop in 24-48 hours (OIE,
2008). Cattle migration and the introduction of new animals into the herd are major risk factors for
the introduction and spread of LSD (Woods, 1990; Gari et al., 2010; Tuppurainen et al., 2017).

1
Transmission is mainly through arthropods, including hard ticks, biting flies and mosquitoes. Direct
transmission can occur through direct contact with saliva, semen, milk or an infected animal.
However, direct transmission is less efficient in the absence of vectors (Carn and Kitching, 1995a).
LSD virus has been found in Aedes and Culex mosquitoes. Flies such as Stomoxys calcitrans may
also be involved in transmission (Tuppurainen et al., 2018). LSDV transmitted by Rhipicephalus
decoloratus, Rhipicephalus appendiculatus and Amblyomma hebraeum tick (Tuppurainen et al.,
2011).

LSD spread into uninfected areas, principally by means of wind borne vectors or movement of
infected cattle. Therefore, restriction of cattle movement of infected to uninfected areas and also
vaccinations are important control measures (Davies, 1991; Radostits et al., 2007). Immunity
following vaccination are claimed to be lifelong. However, as immunity wanes local LSDV
replication will occur at the site of inoculation after challenge (Woods, 1990; OIE, 2010). Neonates
from naturally infected and vaccinated cow receive passive immunity (by colostrums), which
persists for six months (Woods, 1990; Sarma, 2004). LSD control and prevention is carried out
through vaccinations, quarantines, livestock movement controls, vector control, slaughter of infected
and exposed animals, and cleaning and disinfection of premises (Ochwo et al., 2019).

Lumpy skin disease vaccines should be safe for all ages, sex, all breed of cattle (OIE, 2021).
Vaccine seed viruses must be characterized by molecular means, the origin and history of
transmission must be well documented. In the worst case, live vaccines that are not described can
infect vaccinated animals with unwanted foreign pathogens (Tuppurainen et al., 2014). An open
vaccine vial should be used within 6 hours. During mass vaccination campaigns, all vaccines should
be kept in the shade. Vaccination of already infected animals may increase the risk of recombination
of vaccines and field strains (Weiss, 1968: Tuppurainen et al., 2014: Sprygin et al., 2020).

Live attenuated vaccines provide better protection for cattle against pathogenic LSDV field strains
(Wallace and Viljoen, 2005). However, an over attenuated vaccine loses its ability to protect animals
from LSDV. Unlike over attenuation, under attenuated vaccines can cause more side effects after
vaccination (Tuppurainen et al., 2014). All the above prevention and control measures require
adequate financial resources and an information system. Under current conditions in Ethiopia, it is
not possible to implement all of these strategies, but vaccination is considered the most important

2
practical approach to combat LSD (Brenner et al., 2009). However, recently lumpy skin disease has
been reported by animal’s owners at the Veterinary Teaching Hospital, CVMA, Bishoftu, Oromia
region, Ethiopia.

The objectives of this study were:

 To assess morbidity and mortality of lumpy skin disease

 To assess either vaccination effective to protect against LSD or not
 To identify risk factors associated with clinical lumpy skin disease

3
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study area

The study was conducted from October 2021 to April 2022 in and around Bishoftu town. Bishoftu is
a town located in East Shewa, Oromia region, Ethiopia, approximately 45 km south east of Addis
Ababa. The terrain is undulating, with plains to the north and east of the city, bordered by several
lakes, and in the south the hills predominate. The town is located at 8° 450’ N latitude and 38° 590’
E longitudes at an altitude of 1,880 m above sea level. The mean annual rainfall is approximately
1,150 mm, of which long rains from June to August. The district has a mean annual temperature
approximately 19℃ (Ayelet et al., 2013).

Fig.1. Map of the study area

2.2. Study populations

The study area cattle production system is both extensive and intensive production system. The
intensive production system is market oriented dairy farms in urban and peri-urban areas of Bishoftu
town, where exotic breeds or crossbred animals are mainly kept for their high performance. Crop

4
residues, hay, and industrial by products are the main feeds for urban dairy cattle. For the most part,
pastures are limited by land scarcity, so barn feeding is common. The extensive production system,
with indigenous breeds and poor husbandry practices The productivity of extensive production
system is constrained by several factors, including, poor quality and varying seasonal availability of
feed, disease incidence, and low accessibility to services. In this system, crops and livestock play an
interdependent role, animals provide draught power and fertilizer, and crop residues provide feed for
animals (Zeleke and Harris-Coble., 2021).

2.3. Study design

Cross-sectional study design was conducted from October 2021 to April 2022 in and around
Bishoftu town to assess lumpy skin disease morbidity rate, mortality rate and associated risk factors.
Data collected with employed semi-structured questionnaire survey used to generate information
related to LSD occurrence, history of vaccination, individual animal biodata, and disease associated
losses.

2.4. Sampling and sample size determination

2.4.1. Sample size determination

Cross-sectional study design was conducted to assess lumpy skin disease morbidity rate, mortality
rate and associated risk factors in and around Bishoftu town. A literature revealed that other
investigators has reported varies, but approximately range from 5% to32.1%. The formula used for
estimating sample size is given as follows (Charan and Biswas., 2013):

N = (z-α)^2×p×(1-q) = (2)^2×32.1x77.9 = 10002 = 100

d^2 (10) ^2 100
Where;
N: sample size.
P: morbidity =32.1%.
d: relative precision= 0.321×32.1=10.
Z-α: standard normal variate (1.96 ≈ 2).
(1-q): standard deviation.

5
Symbol”^” means power of

2.4.2. Questionnaire survey

Information were obtained from face to face interview with farm owners, animal health
professionals focused on five dairy farms (private and governmental) and 95 farmers. The farmers
and the bigger farms own a total of 848 cattle. The questionnaire survey used to generate
information related to LSD occurrence, history of vaccination, individual animal biodata and disease
associated losses.

2.5. Data management and analysis

All the information obtained from questionnaire survey data was coded and stored in Microsoft
Office Excel spread sheet and transferred to STATA version 12 for Windows (Stata Corp. College
Station, TX, USA) for statistical analysis. Descriptive data analysis like was proportions, percentage
as well as mortality rate and morbidity rate were done. Chi-square test and Fisher exact test were
done to test association between risk factors and morbidity and mortality rate. The degree of
association was considered significant when a P-value of less than 0.05 was obtained.

6
 3. RESULT

3.1. Herd structure, cattle at risk, affected and dead of lumpy skin disease

The study was conducted in 100 householders having a total of 848 cattle. The cattle herd structure
was so much varied among the farms, which covered from minimum 1 to maximum 848 cattle with
an average of holding capacity 8 heads of cattle per farm. From the total 848 cattle around 29
(3.41%) cattle were reported sick or affected by the lumpy skin disease and 8 (0.94 %) were dead of
directly from lumpy skin disease. With regarding to vaccination 581cattle out of 848 were
vaccinated and 267 out of 848 cattle were not vaccinated. In the investigation among sick one 51.7
% (15/29) were vaccinated and 48.3 % (14/29) were not vaccinated. All the dead were vaccinated.
The number of cattle at risk, affected and dead animals (cattle) in among different categories is
presented under table 1.

Table 1: The number of cattle at risk, affected and dead due LSD reported during interviews.

Herd Category Number Percen Number Percenta Number of Percentag

of animals tage of animals ge (%) animals e (%)
at risk (%) Sick Dead
Breed type local 270 31.80 16 55.15 1 12.50
cross 578 68.16 13 44.85 7 87.50
Age categories Calves(<2yrs) 258 30.42 7 24.14 0 0
Young(2-4yrs) 280 33.00 8 27.58 4 50.00
Older(>4yrs) 310 36.55 14 48.28 4 50.00
Sex Male 153 18.00 4 13.80 0 0
Female 695 82.00 25 86.20 8 100
Vaccination vaccinated 581 68.5 15 51.7 8 100
status Not vaccinated 267 31.5 14 48.3 0 0.00

3.2. Morbidity and mortality of lumpy skin disease

Morbidity and mortality rate of different associated risk factors were analyzed as depicted in Table2.
The study revealed that local and cross breed morbidity rate 5.92 % (16/270) and 2.24% (13/578)

7
 respectively, which was statistically significant (p<0.05). Mortality rate of local and cross breed
cattle were 0.37 %(1/270) and 1.21% (7/578) respectively. which was statistically not significant
(p>0.05). Morbidity and mortality rate between vaccinated and not vaccinated were compared.
Morbidity rate in vaccinated cattle was 2.58 % (15/581) and not vaccinated cattle was 5.24 %
(14/267), the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Mortality rate in vaccinated cattle was
1.38 % (8/581) and death was not record in non-vaccinated cattle, the variation was statistically in
significant (p>0.05).

The morbidity rate observed in different age categories were 2.71 % (7/258), 2.86 % (8/280), 4.51 %
(14/310) in calves, young and older cattle respectively. Mortality rates were 1.42% (4/280) and
1.29% (4/310) in young and older cattle respectively, while death was not recorded in calves, which
was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Morbidity rate of male and female were 2.61 % (4/153)
and 3.60% (25/695) respectively, which was not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Table 2: Morbidity and mortality rate of lumpy skin disease and associated risk factors.

Risk factors no. at no. of no. of Morbidity p-value Mortality p-value

risk sick dead rate rate
Breed Local 270 16 1 5.92 0.37
type Cross 578 13 7 2.24 1.21
Total 848 29 8 3.41 0.01492 0.94 0.447

Age calves 258 7 0 2.71 0

categories Young 280 8 4 2.86 1.42
Older 310 14 4 4.51 1.29
Total 840 29 8 3.41 0.4358 0.94 0.1464

sex male 153 4 0 2.61 0

female 695 25 8 3.60 1.15
total 848 29 8 3.41 0.7334 0.94 0.3629

Vaccinatio vaccinated 581 15 8 2.58 1.38

n status not vaccinated 267 14 0 5.24 0
total 848 29 8 3.41 0.00857 0.94 0.063

8
3.3. Seasonal occurrence versus vaccination schedule

During interview with livestock owners, among 100 householder 11 % (11/100) vaccinated their
cattle of these 45.5 %(5/11) farms disease outbreak occurred. The remaining farms (89%) were
unvaccinated their animals of which in 4 farm disease outbreak reported. Most respondents
vaccinated their animals between July 2021 and January 2022. The outbreak appeared to be
worsening from September 2021 to December 2021 and in some cases, from September 2021 to
January 2022.

9
4. DISCUSSION

The present study confirmed that morbidity and mortality rate of lumpy skin disease in study area
were nearly 3.41% and 0.94% respectively. There is another previous report from same area (Ayelet
et al., 2013) who reported the morbidity and mortality rate was nearly similar with 22.9% and
2.31% respectively. This finding in agreement with mentioned in Oman (Davies, 1991a; Tageldin et
al., 2014) who suggested variation in morbidity and mortality rate of LSD in Oman. The morbidity
rate of lumpy skin disease varies from 3% to 85% and mortality rate never exceeds 3 % (Babiuk, et
al., 2008; Tuppurainen and Oura, 2012). These differences are thought to reflect transmission
efficiency and densities of potential vector populations (Davies, 1991b).

During study period morbidity and mortality rate were analyzed between cross and local breed of
cattle. Morbidity rate were almost nearly 5.92% and 2.24% for local and cross breed of cattle,
respectively. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). This appeared higher morbidity
rate in local breed than cross breed cattle, suggesting that mostly local breed cattle kept extensively
i.e. Travel and cross different types of vegetation for grazing and watering, which could increase
risk of local breed cattle in contact with arthropod vectors, also increases contact with wildlife and
other herds, but most of the time cross breed cattle were kept in house or restricted movement. In
contrast this finding reported in Uganda cattle kept intensively were at higher risk for LSD than
those kept extensively (Ochwo et al., 2019). The animal movement, wildlife-cattle interface,
communal grazing and watering has also been associated with a higher occurrence of LSD (Chihota
et al., 2001; Waret-Szkuta et al., 2011; Zelalem et al., 2015; Gomo et al., 2017).

Mortality rate were 0.37% and 1.21% in local and cross breed cattle respectively. This might be
because of that cross breed cattle have are severely susceptible than local breed cattle. This finding
in agreement with previous study conducted by Ayelet et al.,( 2013) who reported the presence of
breed variation in LSD susceptibility. European cattle (Bos Taurus) are more severely susceptible to
LSD than African cattle (Bos Indicus) (Khalafalla et al., 1993; Fayez and Ahmed, 2011; Gari et al.,
2011; Tageldin et al., 2014; Kiplagat et al., 2020). It is not known which genetic factors to influence
the severity of the disease (Babiuk et al. 2008; Kiplagat et al., 2020). High ambient temperatures,
coupled with husbandry practices and high milk yields can stress animals and contribute to disease
severity in Holstein Friesian cattle (Tageldin et al., 2014).

10
The present study, morbidity rate was higher in older age (above 4 years) compared to other age
categories (table2). While morbidity rate observed in young age (between 2-4 years) was
comparable to morbidity rate in calve age (below 2 years). In the present study, LSD morbidity rate
was not associated with animals age categories. Conflicting results were reported by Ochwo et al.,
(2019) and Ayelet et al., (2013). Adult cattle are at higher risk than calves (Ochwo et al., 2019). In
contrast, the study conducted by Ayelet et al., (2013) who reported morbidity was higher in calves
than in adult cattle. The animal movement, wildlife cattle interface, communal grazing and watering
has also been associated with a higher occurrence of LSD (Woods, 1988; Chihota et al., 2001;
Waret-Szkuta et al., 2011; Zelalem et al., 2015; Gomo et al., 2017). LSD was higher occurrence in
adults than in calve due to the high frequency of exposure in adults (Magori -Cohen et al., 2012;
Abera et al., 2015; Molla et al., 2018). The presence of passive maternal immunity protects calves
for about 6 months (Weiss, 1968). This suggest that adult animals travel and cross different types of
vegetation for grazing and watering this increased risk of adult livestock contact with arthropod
vectors, also increases adult livestock contact with wildlife and other herds, but most of the time
calves were kept in house or restricted movement this makes adult animals at higher risk than
calves. But higher mortality rate was recorded in young age between 2-4 years as compared to other
age categories. This indicates severity of disease in young cattle may relate to stressing factors.

Morbidity and mortality rate have been almost nearly 3.60% and 1.15% in female respectively.
Morbidity rate was 2.61% in male and any death was not recorded in male animals. Even though not
significant, higher morbidity rate of lumpy skin disease in female cattle. Higher morbidity rate
reported in female because of lactation and/or being pregnant which might be physiologically
stressful and compromise cellular immunity (Ayelet et al., 2013). In Uganda indicates females are
generally kept longer by farmers while males are sold at a younger age, hence the sex effect may be
related to duration of exposure time (Ochwo et al. 2019).

The study confirmed that lower morbidity rate of lumpy skin disease in vaccinated animals as
compared to not vaccinated, which was statistically significant (p<0.05)(table2). This showed that
LSD vaccine protect against lumpy skin disease. This finding was agreement with (EFSA, 2019)
mentioned that vaccination would be the most effective method to control LSD in endemic and non-
endemic areas. In contrast higher morbidity rate was observed in vaccinated cattle than unvaccinated

11
ones (Ayelet et al., 2013). In Israeli, dairy herds Kenya sheep and goat pox vaccine is under
attenuated, causing clinical disease in vaccinated animals (Brenner et al., 2006). The freeze dried
vaccine is saved at a fridge temperature and for shipping, the vaccine vials want to be stored at less
than -15 degree Celsius. When mass vaccination field campaigns are achieved, the vaccines should
be saved inside the shade (Weiss, 1968; Tuppurainen et al, 2014; Sprygin et al, 2020).

Higher mortality rate were recorded in vaccinated cattle as compared to non vaccinated cattle, which
was not statistically significant (p>0.05) (table2). Most respondent vaccinated their cattle before
disease outbreak occurred that differs in time of length with individual farm. This is comparable
with vaccination, were ineffective this is because of the animals already incubating the virus, for this
reason making it too late for the vaccine to afford protection (Weiss, 1968; Hunter and Wallace,
2001; Tuppurainen et al., 2014; Sprygin et al., 2020). This may increase the risk of recombination of
Vaccines and field strains (Weiss, 1968; Tuppurainen et al., 2014; Sprygin et al., 2020).

The study showed that most of disease out break occurred between September 2021 to December
2021, but sporadically it could occurred in January 2022. The area receives long rainy season is
from June to August. Moreover the dry season extends from October to February. This finding was
agreement with reported In Ethiopia (Ayelet, et al., 2013) and in Egypt (Fayez and Ahmed, 2011)
who mentioned LSD transmission is largely dependent of insect density which is believed to be
highest during rainy season. In Ethiopia (Ayelet, et al., 2013) indicates that the incidence of lumpy
skin disease increased during rainy season. The incidence is most common in humid and hot
weather (Carn and Kitching, 1995b, Davies et al., 1971: MOA, 2012,).

12
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In conclusion, the present study showed that Lumpy skin disease is an important disease in and
around Bishoftu due to direct losses from affected cattle even when morbidity and mortality are low.
Breed and vaccination status were found to be associated risk factors with clinical lumpy skin
disease. Furthermore, the study suggested that vaccination was effective in protect against lumpy
skin disease, meaning that low morbidity was observed in vaccinated cattle. Most outbreaks of the
disease have been seasonal, but they can be sporadic over a year.

Therefore, based on above finding the following recommendations were forwarded:

 Further detailed studies are needed to be done especially on vaccination timing, real
outbreaks of the disease and vaccine efficacy.
 Cattle should bevaccinate before humid and hot weather season.to avoid vaccination of
already infected animals

13
6. REFERENCES

Abera, Z., Degefu, H., Gari, G. and Kidane, M. (2015): Sero-prevalence of lumpy skin disease in
selected districts of West Wollega zone, Ethiopia. BMC Veterinary Research, 11(1), 1-9.
Ayelet, G., Abate, Y., Sisay, T., Nigussie, H., Gelaye, E., Jemberie, S. and Asmare, K. (2013):
Lumpy skin disease: preliminary vaccine efficacy assessment and overview on outbreak
impact in dairy cattle at Debre Zeit, central Ethiopia. Antiviral Research, 98(2), 261-265.
Babiuk, S., Bowden, T., Boyle, D., Wallace, D. and Kitching, R., (2008): Capri poxviruses: an
emerging world wide threat to sheep, goats and cattle. Transboundary and Emerging
diseases, 55(7), 263-272.
Brenner, J., Bellaiche, M., Gross, E., Elad, D., Oved, Z., Haimovitz, M., Wasserman, A., Friedgut,
O., Stram, Y., Bumbarov, V. and Yadin, H. (2009): Appearance of skin lesions in cattle
popula-tions vaccinated against lumpy skin disease: statutory challenge. Vaccine, 27(10),
1500-1503.
Brenner, J., Haimovitz, M., Oren, E., Stram, Y., Fridgut, O., Bumbarov, V., Kuznetzova, L., Oved,
Z., Waserman, A. and Garazzi, S. (2006): Lumpy skin disease (LSD) in a large dairy herd in
Israel, June 2006. Israel Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 61(3/4), 73.
Calistri, P., DeClercq, K., Gubbins, S., Klement, E., Stegeman, A., Cortiñas Abrahantes, J.,
Antoniou, S., Broglia, A. and Gogin, A. (2019): Lumpy skin disease: III. Data collection and
analysis. EFSA Journal, 17(3).
Carn, V. and Kitching, R. (1995a); An investigation of possible routes of transmission of lumpy skin
disease virus (Neethling). Epidemiology and Infection, 114(1), 219-226.
Carn, V. and Kitching, R. (1995b): The clinical response of cattle experimentally infected with
lumpy skin disease (Neethling) virus. Archives of Virology, 140(3), 503-513.
Charan, J. and Biswas, T. (2013): How to calculate sample size for different study designs in

medical research?. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 35(2), 121-126.

Chihota, C., Rennie, L., Kitching, R. and Mellor, P. (2001): Mechanical transmission of lumpy skin
disease virus by Aedes aegypti (Diptera:Culicidae). Epidemiology and Infection, 126, 317-
21.
Davies, F. (1991): Lumpy pores and skin ailment of livestock: A developing trouble in Africa and
the Near East. World Animal Review, 68, 37-42.
14
Davies, F. (1991b): Lumpy pores and skin ailment, an African Capripoxvirus ailment of livestock.
British Veterinary Journal, 147(6), 489-503.
Davies, F., Krauss, H., Lund, J. and Taylor, M. (1971): Laboratory prognosis of lumpy pores and
skin ailment. Research in veterinary science, 12, 123-127.
Davies, F.G. (1991a): Lumpy pores and skin ailment of livestock: a developing trouble in Africa and
the Near East. World Animal Review, 68(3), 37-42.
Fayez, S., and Ahmed, O. (2011): Incidence of lumpy pores and skin ailment amongst Egyptian
livestock in Giza Governorate, Egypt. Veterinary World, 4(4).
Fenner, F., Bachmann, P., Gibbs, E., Murphy, F., Studdert, M. and White, D. (1987): Epidemiology
of viral infections. Veterinary Virology, 283.
Gari G., Waret-Szkuta A., Grosbois V., Jacquiet P. and Roger F. (2010): Risk factors associated
with observed clinical lumpy skin disease in Ethiopia. Epidemiology and Infection 138:1657-
66.
Gari, G., Bonnet, P., Roger, F. and Waret-Szkuta, A. (2011): Epidemiological components and
monetary effect of lumpy pores and skin ailment in Ethiopia. Preventive Veterinary
Medicine, 102(4), 274-283.
Gomo, C., Kanonhuwa, K., Godobo, F., Tada, O. and Makuza S. (2017): Temporal and spatial
distribution of lumpy skin disease (LSD) outbreaks in Mashonaland West Province of
Zimbabwe from 2000 to 2013. Tropical Animal Health Production, 49:509-14.
House, J., Wilson, T., Nakashly, S., Karim, I., Ismail, I., Danaf, N., Moussa, A. and Ayoub, N. (
1990): The isolation of lumpy pores and skin ailment virus and bovine herpes virus-from
livestock in Egypt. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, 2(2), 111-115.
Hunter, P. and Wallace, D. (2001) Lumpy pores and skin ailment in southern Africa: an evaluation
of the ailment and components of control. Journal of the South African Veterinary
Association, 72(2), 68-71.
Khalafalla, A., Elamin ,M. and Abbas, Z. (1993): Lumpy skin disease: observations on the recent
outbreaks of the disease in the Sudan. Rev Elev Med Vet Pays Tropical Journal. 46, 548-50.
Kiplagat, S., Kitala, P., Onono, J., Beard, P. and Lyons, N. (2020): Risk factors for outbreaks of
lumpy skin disease and the economic impact in cattle farms of Nakuru County, Kenya.
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7, 259.

15
Magori-Cohen, R., Louzoun, Y., Herziger, Y., Oron, E., Arazi, A., Tuppurainen, E., Shpigel, N. and
Klement, E. (2012): Mathematical modelling and evaluation of the different routes of
transmission of lumpy skin disease virus. Veterinary Research, 43(1), 1-13.
Mebratu, G., Kassa, B., Fikre, Y. And Berhanu, B. (1984): Observation at the outbreak of lumpy
pores and skin ailment in Ethiopia. Revue d'élevage et de médecine vétérinaire des can pay
tropicaux, 37 (4), 395-399.
MOA (2012): Epidemiology News letter Biannual. 2 (2). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Molla, W., Frankena, K., Gari, G., Kidane, M., Shegu, D. and Jong M. (2018): Seroprevalence and
risk factors of lumpy skin disease in Ethiopia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 160, 99-104.
Nawathe, D., Gibbs, E., Asagba, M. and Lawman, M. (1978): Lumpy pores and skin ailment in
Nigeria. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 10, 49–54.
Ochwo, S., VanderWaal, K., Munsey, A., Nkamwesiga, J., Ndekezi, C., Auma, E. and Mwiine, F.
(2019): Seroprevalence and risk factors for lumpy skin disease virus seropositivity in cattle
in Uganda. BMC Veterinary Research, 15(1), 1-9.
Odend’hal, S. (1983): The Geographical Distribution of Animal Viral Diseases. New York, London:
Academic Press.
OIE (2008): Lumpy pores and skin ailment. In: Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for
Terrestrial Animals: Office International des Epizooties
OIE (2010): Lumpy pores and skin ailment. In: Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for
Terrestrial Animals. Office International des Epizooties, World Organization for Animal
Health, Paris, 1-13.
OIE (2021): Lumpy pores and skin ailment. In Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for
Terrestrial Animals; World Organization for Animal Health: Paris, France, 2(3).
Radostits, O., Gay, C., Hinchcliff, K., Constable, P. (2007): Veterinary Medicine: A Textbook of the
Diseases of Cattle, Sheep, Pigs, Goats and Horses. Sounders Elsevier, Spain. 1424-1426.
Sarma, D. (2004): A Textbook of Veterinary Virology and Viral Diseases. Kalyani Publishers, New
Delhi, 179-181.
Sprygin, A., Pestova, Y., Bjadovskaya, O., Prutnikov, P., Zinyakov, N., Kononova, S., Ruchnova,
O., Lozovoy, D., Chvala, I. and Kononov, A. (2020): Evidence of recombination of vaccine
strains of lumpy skin disease virus with field strains, causing disease. PLoS One, 15(5).

16
Tageldin, M., Wallace, D., Gerdes, G., Putterill, J., Greyling, R., Phosiwa, M., Al Busaidy, R. and
Al Ismaaily, S. (2014): Lumpy pores and skin ailment of livestock: an rising trouble within
side the Sultanate of Oman. Tropical animal fitness and production, 46(1), 241-246.
Tamire, M. (2022): Current Status of Lumpy Skin Disease and Its Economic Impacts in Ethiopia.
Journal of Vaccine Research, 1, 103.
Thomas, A., Robinson, E. and Alexander, R. (1945): Lumpy pores and skin ailment-
knopvelsiekte.Onderstepoort Division of Veterinary Services, Veterinary Newsletter, 10.
Tuppurainen, E. and Oura, C. (2012); lumpy pores and skin ailment: an rising hazard to Europe, the
Middle East and Asia. Transboundary and rising illnesses, 59(1), 40-48.
Tuppurainen, E., Babiuk, S. and Klement, E. (2018): Lumpy pores and skin ailment. Springer.
Tuppurainen, E., Pearson, C., Bachanek-Bankowska, K., Knowles, N., Amareen, S., Frost, L.,
Henstock, M., Lamien, C., Diallo, A. and Mertens, P. (2014): Characterization of sheep pox
virus vaccine for cattle against lumpy skin disease virus. Antiviral research, 109, 1-6.
Tuppurainen, E., Stoltsz, W., Troskie, M., Wallace, D., Oura, C., Mellor, P., Coetzer, J. and Venter,
E. (2011): A ability function for ixodid (hard) tick vectors with inside the transmission of
lumpy pores and skin ailment virus in livestock. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 58,
93-104.
Tuppurainen, E., Venter, E., Shisler, J., Gari, G., Mekonnen, G., Juleff, N., Lyons, N., De Clercq,K.,
Upton, C., Bowden, T., Babiuk, S., Babiuk, L. (2017): Review: capripoxvirus illnesses:
modern-day popularity and possibilities for control. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases.
64, 729-745.
Von Backström, U. (1945): Ngamiland livestock ailment: Preliminary record on a brand new
ailment, the aetiological agent being probable of an infectious nature. Journal of the South
African Veterinary Medical Association, 16, 29–35.
Wallace, D. and Viljoen, G. (2005): Immune responses to recombinants of the South African
vaccine strain of lumpy skin disease virus generated by using thymidine kinase gene
insertion. Vaccine, 23(23), 3061-3067.
Waret-Szkuta, A., Ortiz-Pelaez, A., Pfeiffer, D., Roger, F. and Guitian, F. (2011): Herd contact
structure based on shared use of water points and grazing points in the highlands of Ethiopia.
Epidemiology and Infection, 139(6), 875-885.

17
Weiss, K. (1968): Lumpy skin disease virus. In Cytomegaloviruses. Rinderpest Virus. Lumpy Skin
Disease Virus. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 111-131.
Woods, J. (1988): Lumpy skin disease-a review. Tropical animal health and production, 20(1), 11-
17.
Woods, J. (1990): Lumpy skin disease virus. Virus infections of ruminants. Amsterdam: Elsevier
Science publishers BV, 53-67.
Zelalem, A., Degefu, H., Gari, G. and Ayana, Z. (2015): Review on epidemiology and economic
impo-rtance of lumpy skin disease. International Journal of Basic and Applied Virology, 4,
8-21.
Zeleke, M. and Harris-Coble, L. (2021): Ethiopia’s Livestock Systems: Overview and Areas of
Inquiry.

18
7. APPENDIX

7.1. Questionnaire Survey

Semi-structured questionnaires survey aimed to collect data about lumpy skin disease morbidity and
mortality rate of LSD and associated risk factors in and around Bishoftu town
Name of farm/clinics_________Questionnaires no_________ Location______Date________
1. Is there lumpy skin disease case reported in your farm? a. Yes____b. no_____
2. If your answer was yes or no in question above (1) how many animals?
a. no. of animals in farm_________b. no. of sick_______c. no. of dead_______
3. How many animals with respects to their breed?
Local: affected____________not affected________
Cross: affected______not affected ________
4. How many animals with respects to their ages?
<2 years: affected ______not affected ______
2-4 years: affected______not affected______
>4 years: affected not affected_______
5. How many animals with respects to their sex?
Male: affected________not affected_________
Female: affected________not affected _______
6. Is there vaccination history? a. yes____b. no____
7. If your answer was yes or no in question above (7) fill the following information.
a. vaccinated: no. at risk_____no. of sick_____ no. of dead______ Total_______
b. non vaccinated: no. at risk______ no. of sick _______no. of dead ____Total _____
c. time vaccinated___________ d. time of LSD outbreak occurred .

Thank you!!!!

19