New World Screwworm: Fact Sheet & SHIC Article 6/10/2026 & USDA NWS Website
New World Screwworm: Fact Sheet & SHIC Article 6/10/2026 & USDA NWS Website
The Swine Health Information Center, launched in 2015 with Pork Checkoff funding, protects and enhances the health of the US swine herd by minimizing the impact of emerging disease threats through preparedness, coordinated communications, global disease monitoring, analysis of swine health data, and targeted research investments.
The Swine Health Information Center, through a co-funding partnership with the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research, recently awarded funding for six projects to advance swine disease monitoring and mitigation capabilities. Aligning across both organizations’ priorities, these six projects help SHIC fulfill its mission to generate new intelligence and tools for preventing, preparing for, and responding to emerging swine disease threats. Representing a total investment of $719,415, this public-private partnership enables leveraging of Pork Checkoff dollars awarded to SHIC through a 1:1 match from FFAR to maximize swine health research initiatives.
Newly funded projects address SHIC’s research priorities, including enhanced integration of production and disease monitoring data, mitigation strategies for airborne diseases, development of novel tools and sample types for improved African swine fever virus detection including recombinant strains, and the evaluation of swine wastewater as a novel diagnostic sample type for detection of emerging diseases. Funding timely research enables SHIC to provide project outcomes that drive action for emerging disease prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and response for the US swine industry. Actionable data from project outcomes will be shared with pork industry stakeholders as soon as information becomes available.
These six new projects were initiated between November 2025 and June 2026, spanning 12 months in duration, and are being conducted at three institutions in the US and Canada. Research outcomes from the funded projects will provide critical information and resources to help pork producers as they face emerging disease challenges in their swine herds.
SHIC/FFAR co-funded projects, categorized here in the Center’s strategic pillars, include:
Improve Swine Health Information
Integrating production and disease monitoring data to strengthen industry reporting, optimize benchmarking, and support evidence-based decisionsMonitor and Mitigate Risks to Swine Health
Real-time monitoring of performance indicators of filters and an electrostatic precipitator (ESP) to advance the control of airborne diseases in swineResponding to Emerging Disease
Development of diagnostic tools necessary for early detection of African swine fever recombinant genotype I/II virusesSurveillance and Discovery of Emerging Disease
Leveraging wastewater for genome-based surveillance of emerging threats in swine healthImproving detection and understanding of viral pathogens in swine wastewaterEvaluation of tongue tip fluids for ASF surveillanceFoundation for Food & Agriculture Research
The Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) builds public-private partnerships to fund bold research addressing big food and agriculture challenges. FFAR was established in the 2014 Farm Bill to increase public agriculture research investments, fill knowledge gaps and complement US Department of Agriculture’s research agenda. FFAR’s model matches federal funding from Congress with private funding, delivering a powerful return on taxpayer investment. Through collaboration and partnerships, FFAR advances actionable science benefiting farmers, consumers and the environment. Connect: @FoundationFAR
Swine Health Information Center
The Swine Health Information Center, launched in 2015 with Pork Checkoff funding, protects and enhances the health of the US swine herd by minimizing the impact of emerging disease threats through preparedness, coordinated communications, global disease monitoring, analysis of swine health data, and targeted research investments. As a conduit of information and research, SHIC encourages sharing of its publications and research. Forward, reprint, and quote SHIC material freely. For more information, visit http://www.swinehealth.org or contact Dr. Megan Niederwerder at [email protected] or Dr. Lisa Becton at [email protected].
To better understand disease risks associated with mortality management, the Swine Health Information Center’s Wean-to-Harvest Biosecurity Research Program, in partnership with the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) and the Pork Checkoff, funded a study to determine whether swine pathogens can be detected around dead animal handling structures including dead boxes and composting bins. Led by Dr. Igor Paploski, University of Minnesota, the study tracked the presence of four major swine pathogens around structures to assess environmental contamination and the potential for pathogen spread. Researchers found that environmental contamination around mortality management areas was common on farms using both rendering and composting for carcass disposal, although contamination was more frequent around farms using rendering. Findings highlight that dead animal handling structures represent an important biosecurity risk and suggest that relatively simple management practices may help reduce environmental contamination, thus strengthening farm biocontainment and biosecurity.
Read the industry summary of project #24-076 here.
Key observations:
Rendering was associated with greater environmental contamination compared to composting.Vehicles and people may inadvertently transport environmental contamination from dead animal handling structures.Interventions such as whitewash may reduce environmental contamination on dead animal handling structures.Weather conditions such as rain can increase environmental contamination.Dead animal handling areas represent biosecurity risk areas, but also opportunities to reduce contamination.The study had four objectives: 1) assess environmental contamination surrounding dead animal handling structures on wean-to-market farms, 2) evaluate if a contamination-proxy compound could be mechanically transferred from these areas, 3) assess the effect of whitewash on reducing environmental contamination, and 4) identify farm practices associated with contamination levels around dead animal handling structures.
To conduct the study, a total of 40 PRRSV and/or PEDV positive wean-to-market farms were enrolled, including 20 that utilized rendering and 20 that utilized composting for mortality management. Ten environmental samples were collected per farm and tested by PCR for PRRSV, PEDV, PDCoV, and TGEV. Samples representing the ground near the structures, road, leachate, carcass, and the structure’s wall were collected. To determine if a viral proxy applied near a dead box could be detected in the vicinity of the farm or near a downstream dead box, Glo Germ was utilized as a marker for contamination. Glo Germ was applied on the road leading to the dead box on eight farms, and a car or a person was used to evaluate potential for movement of contaminated material.
Whitewash was also investigated as an intervention strategy through its application to the dead box of 10 additional farms that were potentially PRRSV and/or PEDV positive. To describe biosecurity and practices associated with dead animal disposal in wean-to-market farms and investigate their association with environmental viral contamination, questionnaires were administered to the 40 farms enrolled in objective 1 and results were used to stratify the environmental contamination findings. Farms were classified as environmentally contaminated or non-contaminated based on the detection of positive PCR results for viruses in environmental samples.
Results showed that environmental contamination was more frequently detected in farms using rendering (16/20; 80%) compared to composting (6/20; 30%) (p = 0.0015). The study found that farms that performed rendering were 5.4 times more likely to yield positive samples than composting sites, while recent precipitation increased the likelihood of environmental contamination. Specifically, the amount of precipitation during the seven days prior to sampling was positively associated with environmental contamination.
The quantity of viral genetic material detected in environmental samples also tended to be greater on rendering farms. Across all pathogens, positive samples from rendering farms had a mean Ct value of 30.8, while positive samples from composting farms had a mean Ct value of 33.6. Samples with the lowest Ct levels (highest viral genome quantity) were carcasses and leachates. While road samples were found positive, this sample type had fewer positive results comparatively. Overall, the environment surrounding dead animal handling structures on both rendering and composting farms frequently tested positive for pathogens known to be circulating within the herd.
Contamination of vehicles that drove over Glo Germ also occurred readily. In all six experiments, Glo Germ was detected on the vehicle’s wheels, mud guards, and undercarriage after driving through the treated area. After traveling 2 to 5 km to a neighboring farm, simulating the movement of a vehicle visiting multiple farms, Glo Germ could be detected both on the vehicle and on the road surface traversed immediately before reaching the destination farm. These findings demonstrate that vehicles can serve as potential fomites for pathogens, transporting material from the vicinity of dead animal handling structures to neighboring farm locations.
Glo Germ was applied to the road near the dead box, and a member of the research team, wearing disposable plastic boots, walked through the treated area before proceeding towards the farm office. Traces of Glo Germ were detected on the boots of the person, along the walking path, and near the entrance to the farm office, suggesting that personnel may inadvertently transport contaminants from the vicinity of dead animal handling structures even if wearing disposable plastic boots.
To investigate whitewash as an intervention to possibly diminish contamination around these structures, 10 additional farms were recruited, from which 10 environmental samples were collected from each farm, either from the ground immediately surrounding the dead animal handling structure or from the road leading to it. After sample collection, a whitewash solution was applied in the sampled area, and the farms were revisited two days later for post-treatment sample collection. On all collected samples, only PRRSV was found. The proportion of PRRSV-positive samples decreased from 13% to 3% after whitewash treatment with positive samples averaging a Ct value of 34.6. Results suggest that simple and inexpensive intervention measures, such as whitewash application, were associated with a substantial reduction in the frequency of PRRSV-positive environmental samples, indicating that practical mitigation strategies for contamination around these structures may exist.
Overall, dead animal handling areas represent biosecurity risk points and Dr. Paploski identifies opportunities for pork producers. The report recommends these areas should be treated as potential sources of contamination. Producers should ensure that mortality management structures are well maintained, properly designed, and used correctly. It is worth reviewing how carcasses are brought to the structure, if they are ever placed exclusively on the designated areas, and the structure’s overall condition. Also, having a line of separation, exclusive access routes for vehicles, unidirectional flow of carcasses and limiting unnecessary access to these structures may be beneficial.
The findings of this study highlight that dead animal handling structures represent a potentially important component of swine farm biosecurity. The consistency of the patterns observed across the objectives supports the hypothesis that dead animal disposal practices influence the accumulation and movement of pathogen-associated material in the farm environment. Future research should focus on determining the viability and infectivity of pathogens recovered from these locations, identifying which specific management practices contribute most to contamination, and evaluating interventions capable of reducing environmental contamination over longer periods.
Ultimately, improving our understanding of how dead animal handling structures contribute to disease epidemiology may provide new opportunities to strengthen biocontainment and reduce disease transmission risks within the swine industry.
Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research
The Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) builds public-private partnerships to fund bold research addressing big food and agriculture challenges. FFAR was established in the 2014 Farm Bill to increase public agriculture research investments, fill knowledge gaps and complement the U.S. Department Agriculture’s research agenda. FFAR’s model matches federal funding from Congress with private funding, delivering a powerful return on taxpayer investment. Through collaboration and partnerships, FFAR advances actionable science benefiting farmers, consumers and the environment.
Swine Health Information Center
The Swine Health Information Center, launched in 2015 with Pork Checkoff funding, protects and enhances the health of the US swine herd by minimizing the impact of emerging disease threats through preparedness, coordinated communications, global disease monitoring, analysis of swine health data, and targeted research investments. As a conduit of information and research, SHIC encourages sharing of its publications and research. Forward, reprint, and quote SHIC material freely. For more information, visit http://www.swinehealth.org or contact Dr. Megan Niederwerder at [email protected] or Dr. Lisa Becton at [email protected].
The Swine Health Information Center, in collaboration with the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research and the Pork Checkoff, funded 10 projects addressing research priorities and topics within its H5N1 Risk to Swine Research Program in July 2025. One project led by Dr. Yan Zhou, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization (VIDO), University of Saskatchewan, has recently published results in the Journal of Virology entitled “Receptor profiling and growth assessment of influenza A virus in porcine mammary and non-mammary tissues and derived cells.” Researchers said their findings suggest porcine mammary gland could support infection with HPAI 2.3.4.4b genotype B3.13.
The goals of the SHIC/FFAR/NPB H5N1 Risk to Swine Research Program are to enhance prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and response capabilities for H5N1 influenza in the US swine herd. Given the recent evidence of H5N1 replication in bovine mammary gland, it is important to address the question whether the porcine mammary gland could similarly support influenza virus infection. This study was intended to provide insights into whether porcine mammary tissue could serve as a site for virus replication as well as assess the potential for bovine H5N1 to replicate in the porcine respiratory tract compared to other IAV strains.
The project sought to characterize the sialic acid (SA) receptors present in the porcine mammary gland and respiratory tract tissues, including nasal turbinate, trachea, bronchiole, and alveoli, and assess the ability for IAV to bind to these tissues. Researchers identified that porcine mammary gland tissue, nasal turbinate, bronchiole, and alveoli express both SA-α2,3 and SA-α2,6 receptors, suggesting that these tissues may be susceptible to attachment by both avian and mammalian origin IAVs.
In addition, the study found that influenza viruses originating from cattle, birds, swine, and humans could bind to porcine respiratory and mammary gland tissues, although binding intensity varied by virus and tissue type. Primary epithelial cells isolated from these tissues also supported viral replication, with bovine-derived H5N1 showing particularly strong replication in mammary gland cells. These results suggest that receptor availability alone does not determine whether the H5N1 virus can replicate efficiently, with additional host and viral factors also playing critical roles.
Importantly, the study demonstrated that porcine mammary epithelial cells possess the ability to support replication of diverse IAV strains, raising the possibility that the mammary gland could serve as an alternative site for viral replication and potential reassortment. However, the authors emphasize that these laboratory findings differ from previous animal studies, where H5N1 infection in pigs has generally resulted in limited viral replication, mild clinical signs, and little to no transmission. The discrepancy highlights the influence of natural protective barriers—including mucus, tissue architecture, immune responses, and overall viral fitness—that cannot be fully replicated in cell culture systems.
In the published report, authors wrote, “Our findings expand the current understanding of IAV (influenza A virus) tissue tropism in swine by revealing that the porcine mammary gland may serve as an alternative and previously overlooked replication site for both avian and mammalian-origin viruses. Given the increasing frequency of interspecies spillover events and expanding host range of HPAI H5N1, our finding that mammary epithelial cells have an intrinsic capacity to support replication of diverse IAV strains provides new insight into the porcine mammary gland as a potential replication and reassortment site for IAV.”
While the findings were generated using laboratory cell and tissue models—not live pigs—they highlight an area that warrants further investigation. Additional swine studies are needed and currently underway to determine whether the mammary gland becomes infected during natural or experimental H5N1 exposure and what role, if any, it plays in disease transmission or virus evolution.
Why This Matters for Pork Producers
Although this study does not indicate that H5N1 is currently present within swine populations, it provides important new information about how emerging influenza viruses may interact with pigs. As H5N1 continues to infect an expanding range of animal species, understanding all potential sites of viral replication is critical for surveillance, risk assessment, and preparedness.
For pork producers and veterinarians, the findings reinforce the importance of:
Maintaining strong biosecurity to reduce opportunities for influenza viruses to move between species.Monitoring emerging influenza viruses as part of herd health surveillance.Recognizing that influenza viruses may have biological capabilities not previously appreciated, even if those capabilities do not necessarily translate into disease under field conditions.Supporting continued research is required to better understand the risks posed by evolving H5N1 viruses to swine health, production, and the pork industry.Overall, the study provides new insight into influenza biology while underscoring that additional research is needed to help inform potential changes to IAV surveillance and swine health management recommendations. Outcomes from the funded projects such as this provide critical and proactive information that producers, veterinarians, and industry stakeholders can use to better prevent incursion and develop preparedness plans if H5N1 is ever identified in US commercial swine herds.
Reference: Barron-Castillo U, Berube N, Swan CL, Javed MA, Aubrey L, Trann J, Gidych M, Shrivastava S, Baid K, Banerjee A, Zhou Y.0. Receptor profiling and growth assessment of influenza A virus in porcine mammary and non-mammary tissues and derived cells. J Virol 0:e00615-26. https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.00615-26
Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research
The Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) builds public-private partnerships to fund bold research addressing big food and agriculture challenges. FFAR was established in the 2014 Farm Bill to increase public agriculture research investments, fill knowledge gaps and complement the U.S. Department Agriculture’s research agenda. FFAR’s model matches federal funding from Congress with private funding, delivering a powerful return on taxpayer investment. Through collaboration and partnerships, FFAR advances actionable science benefiting farmers, consumers and the environment.
Swine Health Information Center
The Swine Health Information Center, launched in 2015 with Pork Checkoff funding, protects and enhances the health of the US swine herd by minimizing the impact of emerging disease threats through preparedness, coordinated communications, global disease monitoring, analysis of swine health data, and targeted research investments. As a conduit of information and research, SHIC encourages sharing of its publications and research. Forward, reprint, and quote SHIC material freely. For more information, visit http://www.swinehealth.org or contact Dr. Megan Niederwerder at [email protected] or Dr. Lisa Becton at [email protected].
The Swine Health Information Center funded a study to examine whether mammalian orthoreovirus (MRV) and porcine adenovirus (PAdV) are present in US swine herds and whether they pose health risks. Led by Dr. Wenjun Ma, University of Missouri, the study suggests that MRV and PAdV can infect pigs and contribute to general enteric disease but that these viruses are not associated with severe or unique clinical signs. These findings suggest that both viruses circulate in swine populations, with evidence pointing toward intestinal shedding or prior exposure rather than widespread active disease in routine tissue submissions. For producers and their veterinarians, this study helps interpret diagnostic findings on MRV or PAdV, enabling more informed herd health decisions.
Read the industry summary of study #24-022 here.
Emerging and re-emerging viral pathogens remain an ongoing threat to the US swine industry, and undiagnosed disease outbreaks continue to highlight important gaps in pathogen surveillance and characterization. Although MRV and PAdV have been reported in pigs in other countries globally, contemporary data for US swine populations are limited. Previous research suggests that MRV and PAdV may contribute to clinically significant disease in swine, yet their prevalence, epidemiology, pathogenic potential, and impact on production remain poorly defined. This project was designed to address two objectives: 1) define the prevalence and epidemiology of MRV and PAdV in US swine herds and 2) determine the pathogenicity and transmissibility of MRV and PAdV in weaned pigs, including the potential contribution of co-infection to clinical disease.
To provide a clearer picture of how common these viruses may be and whether they pose a health risk, lung, intestinal, blood, and fecal samples were tested for evidence of MRV and PAdV. A total of 794 swine tissue samples collected through diagnostic laboratories were screened, including eight intestinal samples and 783 lung samples from 18 US states (North Carolina, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Montana, Arkansas, California, South Dakota, and Kansas), as well as three lung samples from Mexico. RT-qPCR results showed that 29 of 786 (3.69%) swine lung tissue samples were positive for MRV and that one of eight (12.5%) intestinal samples were positive for MRV. However, only one virus was isolated from one RT-qPCR -positive lung sample, and not from other RT-qPCR-positive samples.
Additionally, investigators established an MRV ELISA and tested 481 serum samples collected from pigs in the US, of which 60% were seropositive. Together, these findings suggest that active MRV infection was infrequently detected in field tissue samples, whereas prior exposure to MRV was common in the sampled swine population.
To determine the prevalence and epidemiology of PAdV in US swine herds, researchers screened 576 swine samples by PCR, including 516 lung samples and eight intestinal samples collected for MRV screening, as well as 52 fecal samples collected from a Missouri swine farm. All eight intestinal samples were negative for PAdV, whereas one of 516 (0.02%) lung samples and six of 52 (11.5%) fecal samples were PCR-positive. Virus isolation was attempted for the seven PCR-positive samples but was unsuccessful, indicating that no infectious virus was recovered. These findings indicate that PAdV was not detected in the lung or intestinal tissue samples examined and that the positive fecal and lung PCR results did not provide confirmed evidence of live PAdV infection.
To determine the pathogenicity and transmissibility of MRV and PAdV, including the potential contribution of co-infection to clinical disease, controlled pig studies were conducted to determine whether MRV and PAdV individually or in combination could cause clinical disease and spread to other pigs. Groups of 3- to 4-week-old weaned pigs confirmed to be negative for swine influenza virus, PRRSV, PEDV, TGEV, porcine group A rotavirus, MRVs, and PAdVs were used in the study. Pigs infected with MRV, PAdV, or both developed mild clinical signs, including diarrhea and fever, and viral genetic material was found in intestinal tissues of infected pigs and contact pigs. Overall, these findings indicate that both viruses can infect pigs, but that co-infection did not produce significantly more severe clinical disease under these conditions.
For pork producers, these results suggest that MRV and PAdV are both capable of infecting pigs and can contribute to enteric and respiratory disease. However, neither virus was associated with severe or clearly distinct disease in this study. These results demonstrate that MRV exposure is common and that both MRV and PAdV can infect the intestinal and respiratory tracts of pigs, potentially contributing to diarrheal and respiratory disease. The detection rate of virus in field samples suggests low rates of active infection but may be due to sample limitations including the small number of intestinal and fecal samples included in this study.
Overall, continued monitoring and surveillance are necessary to determine when these viruses may contribute to disease and pork production losses in the field, such as when they are combined with other infections or management stressors. Investigating emerging diseases such as MRV and PAdV in US swine helps SHIC fulfill its mission to monitor potential threats to the US swine industry and develop information to protect the US herd.
The Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project, funded by the Swine Health Information Center, submitted its 2025 annual report for swine disease monitoring and project enhancements. Dr. Cesar Corzo, along with colleagues at the University of Minnesota, detail the outcomes from three project objectives for the past year. Key achievements include adding porcine deltacoronavirus to the list of monitored diseases, assessing requirements to include influenza A virus sequencing information for breeding herds, and supporting the dynamic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus variant classification system that serves as the basis for the PRRSV Variants Under Monitoring report. Further, project leaders report the continued expansion of producer participation in alignment with increasing inclusivity and representativeness. The MSHMP project data currently accounts for 3.9 million sows and represents approximately 65% of the US breeding herd.
Read the full MSHMP report here.
For 2025, the MSHMP project encompassed three main objectives, including 1) monitoring trends in pathogen incidence and prevalence for PRRSV, PEDV, PDCoV, and Senecavirus A, 2) prospective monitoring of PRRSV sequence evolution and impact, and 3) expanding participation in the voluntary program. Progress was reported on all three objectives.
In the report, Dr. Corzo and colleagues note that the PEDV cumulative incidence trend was different for 2025 when compared to previous years and that a sharp increase was observed during the fall and into the winter months. New to the MSHMP project was the addition of PDCoV to the list of monitored diseases, increasing its impact and value to the industry.
The MSHMP team also explored and developed a method to estimate the breeding herd IAV cumulative incidence in 2025, broadening the program’s deliverables to the US swine industry. While MSHMP confirmed it is possible to estimate cumulative IAV incidence based on veterinary diagnostic lab PCR data, more work needs to be performed to avoid potential underestimation of this metric. Overall, the IAV cumulative incidence ranged between 1% and 5% over the past 10 years.
During 2025, MSHMP continued to curate and expand its PRRSV ORF5 database. The representativeness of this database has enabled the team to closely monitor a newly emerged variant, 1H.18. Further, a new system to monitor emerging variants was developed called VUM, which is now shared publicly every month. The PRRSV VUM report allows producers to better understand the risks associated with each variant that shows rapid dissemination characteristics. Since this report is based on the number of newly infected sites, the industry has an objective measure of variant fitness and risk.
During 2025, MSHMP also assessed the potential to share weekly maps summarizing disease occurrence. While Dr. Corzo and colleagues believe this will be a valuable tool for the industry, further assessment is required to identify pathways to ensure producers and veterinarians are comfortable with sharing such granular data.
MSHMP continues to ensure producer representativeness of data, with a new production system being successfully onboarded in 2025 and two additional systems in the final stages of enrollment, pending submission of required documentation in 2026.
Gaining a better understanding of the health profile of Canadian pigs entering the US was also investigated as a potential valuable addition for data inclusion into MSHMP. Potential participants were approached to explore interest in joining the voluntary project. While interest was expressed, additional evaluation will need to occur before a decision can be made regarding broad producer participation. Continued opportunities for MSHMP expansion are being explored, including weaned pig and grow-finish production.
In addition to expanding participation, the MSHMP project has continued refining and strengthening the dataset by improving key variables of interest, such as air filtration status. This includes ongoing efforts to verify filtration presence and characterize system types (i.e., positive versus negative pressure), in response to stakeholder interest in biosecurity variables. Characterization of mortality management continues for participating breeding herds.
By supporting effective monitoring tools, the MSHMP project continues to provide a mechanism for the tracking and conversion of swine disease data into actionable information that supports preparedness efforts. The collection and dissemination of this information fulfills SHIC’s mission to identify and minimize the impact of emerging swine diseases and support readiness to address potential foreign animal disease emergencies, ensuring a healthier and more secure future for the US swine industry.
NPB’s Swine Disease Research task force (SDRTF) has issued an RFP to members of the swine health research community focused on advancing the National Swine Health Strategy’s goals and priorities. To address knowledge gaps related to reducing the impact of domestic diseases and preventing incursions of foreign animal diseases, the RFP seeks proposals to:
Reduce the impact of domestic swine diseases such as porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) and porcine epidemic diarrhea Virus (PEDV) by exploring elimination strategies and reducing the spread of pathogens.Prevent foreign and emerging disease incursions through enhanced prevention, preparedness and early detection.Funding of $1 million is available and will be allocated to multiple proposals selected by the SDRTF. Proposals will be evaluated throughout 2026, with the second review cycle closing on August 10.
Learn more about this research effort and submission details.
This month’s Domestic Swine Disease Monitoring Report highlights include PEDV and PDCoV activity returning to the expected range in July after spending several weeks above expected levels earlier in 2026. IAV activity continued to decline, with case positivity in adult/sow farms dropping to 13%, the lowest July level recorded since 2014. Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae activity decreased in July following elevated detection in June, while PCV2 activity increased compared to the previous month. PRRSV activity also continued to decline, while July marked the first detections of PRRSV variant 1A.29 in Louisiana and PRRSV variant 1C.2 in Tennessee. This month’s bonus page highlights the complementary roles of MSHMP and SDRS. The accompanying podcast features Dr. Cesar Corzo, University of Minnesota, discussing challenges in the wean-to-market phase for PEDV and PRRSV control, using surveillance data to strengthen biosecurity, and the importance of pig movement and transport biosecurity in limiting disease spread.
In this month’s Global Swine Disease Monitoring Report, you will find extensive information on African Swine Fever in Europe, Asia, and Africa. In late July, Finland reported its first ASF detection in wild boar near the border with Russia. In Vietnam, authorities dismantled a ring that moved more than 250 tons of ASF-infected pork to market. Also in Vietnam, the re-emergence of foot-and-mouth disease virus serotype A after an eight-year absence is causing concern. Classical swine fever was detected in Fujinomiya, Japan. Details on the pseudorabies status of the US with trading partners are also included, along with additional information on New World screwworm-related activities.
PRRS Cumulative Incidence for MSHMP
PEDV Cumulative Incidence for MSHMP
Seven PRRSV variants continue to be classified as VUM Category 2 or higher this month. Variants 1C.5.32 and 1A.13.29 remain in Category 4, joined by 1C.5, which shifted up from Category 3. Variant 1C.2 maintains its Category 3 status, while 1H.18 advanced to Category 3 from its previous Category 2 classification. Variants 1C.5.35 and 1C.2.45 remain at Category 2. Full details can be found in the current situation reports; all historical reports for variants reaching Category 2 or higher are archived and available for review.
