Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Paolo Calistri is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Paolo Calistri.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Ad hoc method for the assessment on listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Denise Candiani; Andrea Gervelmeyer; Gabriele Zancanaro; Lisa Kohnle; Joana Morgado; Dominique Bicout

Abstract The European Commission has requested EFSA to assess animal diseases according to the criteria as laid down in Articles 5, 7, 8 and Annex IV for the purpose of categorisation of diseases in accordance with Article 9 of the Regulation (EU) No 2016/429 (Animal Health Law). This scientific opinion addresses the ad hoc method developed for assessing any animal disease for the listing and categorisation of diseases within the Animal Health Law (AHL) framework. The assessment of individual diseases is addressed in distinct scientific opinions that are published separately. The assessment of Articles 5, 8 and 9 criteria is performed on the basis of the information collected according to Article 7 criteria. For that purpose, Article 7 criteria were structured into parameters and the information was collected at parameter level. The resulting fact sheets on the profile and impact of each disease were compiled by disease scientists. A mapping was developed to identify which parameters from Article 7 were needed to inform each Article 5, 8 and 9 criterion. Specifically, for Articles 5 and 9 criteria, a categorical assessment was performed, by applying an expert judgement procedure, based on the mapped information. The judgement was performed by EFSA Panel experts on Animal Health and Welfare in two rounds, individual and collective judgement. The output of the expert judgement on the criteria of Articles 5 and 9 for each disease is composed by the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Urgent request on avian influenza

Simon J. More; Dominique Bicout; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; C Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; S Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; Hans H Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; C Adlhoch; Francesca Baldinelli; A Breed; A Brouwer; M Guillemain; Tilmann Harder; I Monne; H Roberts; J Cortinas Abrahantes; O Mosbach-Schulz

Abstract Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N8 is currently causing an epizootic in Europe, infecting many poultry holdings as well as captive and wild bird species in more than 10 countries. Given the clear clinical manifestation, passive surveillance is considered the most effective means of detecting infected wild and domestic birds. Testing samples from new species and non‐previously reported areas is key to determine the geographic spread of HPAIV H5N8 2016 in wild birds. Testing limited numbers of dead wild birds in previously reported areas is useful when it is relevant to know whether the virus is still present in the area or not, e.g. before restrictive measures in poultry are to be lifted. To prevent introduction of HPAIV from wild birds into poultry, strict biosecurity implemented and maintained by the poultry farmers is the most important measure. Providing holding‐specific biosecurity guidance is strongly recommended as it is expected to have a high impact on the achieved biosecurity level of the holding. This is preferably done during peace time to increase preparedness for future outbreaks. The location and size of control and in particular monitoring areas for poultry associated with positive wild bird findings are best based on knowledge of the wider habitat and flight distance of the affected wild bird species. It is recommended to increase awareness among poultry farmers in these established areas in order to enhance passive surveillance and to implement enhanced biosecurity measures including poultry confinement. There is no scientific evidence suggesting a different effectiveness of the protection measures on the introduction into poultry holdings and subsequent spread of HPAIV when applied to H5N8, H5N1 or other notifiable HPAI viruses.


Eurosurveillance | 2016

Outbreak of unusual Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium monophasic variant 1,4 [5],12:i:-, Italy, June 2013 to September 2014.

Francesca Cito; Francesca Baldinelli; Paolo Calistri; Elisabetta Di Giannatale; Gaia Scavia; Massimiliano Orsini; Simona Iannetti; Lorena Sacchini; Iolanda Mangone; Luca Candeloro; Annamaria Conte; Carla Ippoliti; Daniela Morelli; Giacomo Migliorati; Nadia Beatrice Barile; Cristina Marfoglia; Stefania Salucci; Cesare Cammà; Maurilia Marcacci; Massimo Ancora; Anna Maria Dionisi; Slawomir Owczartek; Ida Luzzi

Monophasic variant of Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Typhimurium (monophasic S. Typhimurium), with antigenic structure 1,4,[5],12:i:-, appears to be of increasing importance in Europe. In Italy, monophasic S. Typhimurium represented the third most frequent Salmonella serovar isolated from human cases between 2004 and 2008. From June 2013 to October 2014, a total of 206 human cases of salmonellosis were identified in Abruzzo region (Central Italy). Obtained clinical isolates characterised showed S. Typhimurium 1,4,[5],12:i:- with sole resistance to nalidixic acid, which had never been observed in Italy in monophasic S. Typhimurium, neither in humans nor in animals or foods. Epidemiological, microbiological and environmental investigations were conducted to try to identify the outbreak source. Cases were interviewed using a standardised questionnaire and microbiological tests were performed on human as well as environmental samples, including samples from fruit and vegetables, pigs, and surface water. Investigation results did not identify the final vehicle of human infection, although a link between the human cases and the contamination of irrigation water channels was suggested.


BMC Microbiology | 2017

Origins and global context of Brucella abortus in Italy

Giuliano Garofolo; Elisabetta Di Giannatale; Ilenia Platone; Katiuscia Zilli; Lorena Sacchini; Anna Abass; Massimo Ancora; Cesare Cammà; Guido Di Donato; Fabrizio De Massis; Paolo Calistri; Kevin P. Drees; Jeffrey T. Foster

BackgroundBrucellosis is a common and chronic disease of cattle and other bovids that often causes reproductive disorders. Natural infection in cattle is caused by Brucella abortus and transmission typically occurs during abortions, calving, or nursing. Brucellosis is also a major zoonotic disease due to contamination of dairy products or contact with the tissues of infected animals. Brucellosis has been eradicated from most of the developed world in the last 40 years but persists in many regions—the disease remains prevalent in portions of Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Central and South America, as well as in the Mediterranean basin. In Italy, B. abortus has persisted in southern regions in both cattle and water buffalo. Previous attempts at analyzing the phylogenetics of B. abortus in Italy have been challenging due to limited genetic variability and unresolved global population genetic structure of this pathogen.ResultsWe conducted genome-wide phylogenetic analyses on 11 representative strains of B. abortus from Italy, and compared these sequences to a worldwide collection of publically available genomes. Italian isolates belong to three clades that are basal to the main and global B. abortus lineage. Using six SNP-based assays designed to identify substructure within the Italian clades, we surveyed a collection of 261 isolates and found that one clade predominates throughout endemic districts in the country, while the other two clades are more geographically restricted to portions of southern Italy.ConclusionsAlthough related strains exist worldwide, B. abortus isolates from Italy are substantially different than those found in much of the rest of Europe and North America, and are more closely related to strains from the Middle East and Asia. Our assays targeting genetic substructure within Italy allowed us to identify the major lineages quickly and inexpensively, without having to generate whole genome sequences for a large isolate collection. These findings highlight the importance of genetic studies to assess the status and the history of pathogens.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): paratuberculosis

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel Angel Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Gabriele Zancanaro; Beatriz Beltrán-Beck; Lisa Kohnle; Joana Morgado; Dominique Bicout

Abstract Paratuberculosis has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of paratuberculosis to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of paratuberculosis according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to paratuberculosis. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, paratuberculosis can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL. The disease would comply with the criteria in Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in points (c), (d) and (e) of Article 9(1). The animal species to be listed for paratuberculosis according to Article 8(3) criteria are several species of mammals and birds as susceptible species and some species of the families Bovidae, Cervidae and Leporidae as reservoirs.


EFSA Journal | 2018

African swine fever in wild boar

Simon J. More; Miguel A. Miranda; Dominique Bicout; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Virginie Michel; Mohan Raj; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Klaus Depner; Vittorio Guberti; Marius Masiulis; Edvins Olsevskis; Petr Satran; Mihaela Spiridon; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Arvo Vilrop; Grzegorz Wozniakowski; Andrea Bau; Alessandro Broglia; José Cortiñas Abrahantes

Abstract The European Commission requested EFSA to compare the reliability of wild boar density estimates across the EU and to provide guidance to improve data collection methods. Currently, the only EU‐wide available data are hunting data. Their collection methods should be harmonised to be comparable and to improve predictive models for wild boar density. These models could be validated by more precise density data, collected at local level e.g. by camera trapping. Based on practical and theoretical considerations, it is currently not possible to establish wild boar density thresholds that do not allow sustaining African swine fever (ASF). There are many drivers determining if ASF can be sustained or not, including heterogeneous population structures and human‐mediated spread and there are still unknowns on the importance of different transmission modes in the epidemiology. Based on extensive literature reviews and observations from affected Member States, the efficacy of different wild boar population reduction and separation methods is evaluated. Different wild boar management strategies at different stages of the epidemic are suggested. Preventive measures to reduce and stabilise wild boar density, before ASF introduction, will be beneficial both in reducing the probability of exposure of the population to ASF and the efforts needed for potential emergency actions (i.e. less carcass removal) if an ASF incursion were to occur. Passive surveillance is the most effective and efficient method of surveillance for early detection of ASF in free areas. Following focal ASF introduction, the wild boar populations should be kept undisturbed for a short period (e.g. hunting ban on all species, leave crops unharvested to provide food and shelter within the affected area) and drastic reduction of the wild boar population may be performed only ahead of the ASF advance front, in the free populations. Following the decline in the epidemic, as demonstrated through passive surveillance, active population management should be reconsidered.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): infection with Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Frank Verdonck; Beatriz Beltrán Beck; Lisa Kohnle; Joana Morgado; Dominique Bicout

Abstract The infection with Brucella abortus, Brucella melitensis and Brucella suis has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of the infection with B. abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of the infection with B. abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to the infection with B. abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, the infection with B. abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL. The disease complies with the criteria as in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in points (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Article 9(1). The animal species to be listed for the infection with B. abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis according to Article 8(3) criteria are several mammal species, as indicated in the present opinion.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): Salmonella infection in poultry with serotypes of animal health relevance (S. Pullorum, S. Gallinarum and S. arizonae)

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Beatriz Beltrán-Beck; Lisa Kohnle; Dominique Bicout

Abstract Salmonella infection in poultry (Salmonella Pullorum, Salmonella Gallinarum and Salmonella arizonae) has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of Salmonella to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of Salmonella according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to Salmonella. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, Salmonella can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL. The disease would comply with the criteria as in Sections 4 and 5 of Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in points (d) and (e) of Article 9(1). The assessment here performed on compliance with the criteria as in Section 1 of Annex IV referred to in point (a) of Article 9(1) is inconclusive. The main animal species to be listed for Salmonella according to Article 8(3) criteria are all species of domestic poultry and wild species of mainly Anseriformes and Galliformes, as indicated in the present opinion.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): enzootic bovine leukosis (EBL)

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Beatriz Beltrán-Beck; Lisa Kohnle; Dominique Bicout

Abstract Enzootic bovine leucosis (EBL) has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of EBL to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of EBL according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to EBL. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, it is inconclusive whether EBL can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL because there was no full consensus on the criteria 5 B(i) and 5 B(iii). Consequently, since it is inconclusive whether EBL can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL, then the assessment on compliance of EBL with the criteria as in Sections 4 and 5 of Annex IV to the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in points (d) and (e) of Article 9(1), and which animal species can be considered to be listed for EBL according to Article 8(3) of the AHL is also inconclusive.


EFSA Journal | 2017

Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): bovine tuberculosis

Simon J. More; Anette Bøtner; Andrew Butterworth; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; S. A. Edwards; Bruno Garin‐Bastuji; Margaret Good; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Virginie Michel; Miguel A. Miranda; Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Mohan Raj; Liisa Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; J.A. Stegeman; Hans-Hermann Thulke; Antonio Velarde; Preben Willeberg; Christoph Winckler; Francesca Baldinelli; Alessandro Broglia; Beatriz Beltrán-Beck; Lisa Kohnle; Dominique Bicout

Abstract Bovine tuberculosis has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of bovine tuberculosis to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of bovine tuberculosis according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to bovine tuberculosis. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, bovine tuberculosis can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL. The disease would comply with the criteria as in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in points (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Article 9(1). The main animal species to be listed for bovine tuberculosis according to Article 8(3) criteria are several mammal species, as indicated in the present opinion.

Collaboration


Dive into the Paolo Calistri's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Klaus Depner

Friedrich Loeffler Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Simon J. More

University College Dublin

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Hans Spoolder

Wageningen University and Research Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mohan Raj

University of Bristol

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Preben Willeberg

Technical University of Denmark

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Hans-Hermann Thulke

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Miguel A. Miranda

Polytechnic University of Valencia

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge