Table 1 New infectious agent variants and species, their characteristics and taxonomic diversity
From: Spatiotemporal trends in the discovery of new swine infectious agents
All types | Virus (All) | Virus (DNA) | Virus (RNA) | Bacteria | Others | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New infectious agent variants | ||||||
.New variants (%) | 173 (100%) | 74 (43%) | 17 (10%) | 57 (33%) | 93 (54%) | 6 (3%) |
.Taxonomic diversity | ||||||
..Species inc. new variants (d) | 91 (1.9) | 42 (1.8) | 17 (1) | 25 (2.3) | 43 (2.2) | 6 (1) |
..Genera inc. new variants (d) | 63 (2.7) | 32 (2.3) | 10 (1.7) | 22 (2.6) | 26 (3.6) | 5 (1.2) |
..Families inc. new variants (d) | 47 (3.7) | 21 (3.5) | 6 (2.8) | 15 (3.8) | 21 (4.4) | 5 (1.2) |
.Country group | ||||||
..HIC (%) | 138 (80%) | 44 (59%) | 12 (71%) | 32 (56%) | 91 (98%) | 3 (50%) |
..LMIC (%) | 35 (20%) | 30 (41%) | 5 (29%) | 25 (44%) | 2 (2%) | 3 (50%) |
.Host Range | ||||||
..From swine-sp. species (%)a | 64 (37%) | 39 (53%) | 17 (100%) | 22 (39%) | 25 (27%) | 0 (0%) |
…In HIC (%) | 51 (37%) | 26 (59%) | 12 (100%) | 14 (44%) | 25 (27%) | 0 (0%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 13 (37%) | 13 (43%) | 5 (100%) | 8 (32%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 1 (0.6-1.8, p = 1) | 1.4 (0.9-2.4, p = 0.2) | - | - | - | - |
..From zoonotic species (%)a | 95 (55%) | 33 (45%) | 0 (0%) | 33 (58%) | 58 (62%) | 4 (67%) |
…In HIC (%) | 75 (54%) | 17 (39%) | 0 (0%) | 17 (53%) | 56 (62%) | 2 (67%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 20 (57%) | 16 (53%) | 0 (0%) | 16 (64%) | 2 (100%) | 2 (67%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 1 (0.7-1.4, p = 0.9) | 0.7 (0.4-1.2, p = 0.2) | - | - | - | - |
.Context of detection | ||||||
..Outbreak investigation (n,%) | 58 (144, 40%) | 18 (68, 26%) | 2 (17, 12%) | 16 (51, 31%) | 39 (70, 56%) | 1 (6, 17%) |
…In HIC (%) | 51 (112, 46%) | 12 (41, 29%) | 2 (12, 17%) | 10 (29, 34%) | 38 (68, 56%) | 1 (3, 33%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 7 (32, 22%) | 6 (27, 22%) | 0 (5, 0%) | 6 (22, 27%) | 1 (2, 50%) | 0 (3, 0%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 2.1 (1.2-5.4, p = 0.02) | 1.3 (0.6-4, p = 0.6) | - | - | - | - |
New infectious agent species | ||||||
.New species (%) | 73 (100%) | 35 (48%) | 17 (23%) | 18 (25%) | 32 (44%) | 6 (8%) |
..Unknown before disc. in pigs | 50 (68%) | 27 (37%) | 17 (23%) | 10 (14%) | 22 (30%) | 1 (1%) |
..Known to infect other hosts | 23 (32%) | 8 (11%) | 0 (0%) | 8 (11%) | 10 (14%) | 5 (7%) |
.Taxonomic diversity | ||||||
..Genera inc. new species (d) | 52 (1.4) | 26 (1.3) | 10 (1.7) | 16 (1.1) | 21 (1.5) | 5 (1.2) |
..Families inc. new species (d) | 44 (1.7) | 19 (1.8) | 6 (2.8) | 13 (1.4) | 20 (1.6) | 5 (1.2) |
.Country group | ||||||
..HIC (%) | 54 (74%) | 20 (57%) | 12 (71%) | 8 (44%) | 31 (97%) | 3 (50%) |
..LMIC (%) | 19 (26%) | 15 (43%) | 5 (29%) | 10 (56%) | 1 (3%) | 3 (50%) |
.Host Range | ||||||
..From swine-sp. species (%) | 37 (51%) | 24 (69%) | 17 (100%) | 7 (39%) | 13 (41%) | 0 (0%) |
…In HIC (%) | 30 (56%) | 17 (85%) | 12 (100) | 5 (62%) | 13 (42%) | 0 (0%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 7 (37%) | 7 (47%) | 5 (100%) | 2 (20%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 1.5 (0.9-3.5, p = 0.2) | 1.8 (1.1-4, p = 0.03) | - | - | - | - |
..From zoonotic species (%) | 24 (33%) | 9 (26%) | 0 (0%) | 9 (50%) | 11 (34%) | 4 (67%) |
…In HIC (%) | 14 (26%) | 2 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (25%) | 10 (32%) | 2 (67%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 10 (53%) | 7 (47%) | 0 (0%) | 7 (70%) | 1 (100%) | 2 (67%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 0.5 (0.3-1, p < 0.05) | 0.2 (0–0.7, p = 0.02) | - | - | - | - |
.Context of detection | ||||||
..Outbreak investigation (n,%) | 17 (23%) | 6 (17%) | 2 (12%) | 4 (22%) | 10 (31%) | 1 (17%) |
…In HIC (%) | 16 (30%) | 5 (25%) | 2 (17%) | 3 (38%) | 10 (32%) | 1 (33%) |
…In LMIC (%) | 1 (5%) | 1 (7%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
…RR (CI, p) | 5.6 (1.5-∞, p = 0.03) | 3.8 (0.8-∞, p = 0.2) | - | - | - | - |