Table 4 Results of the multivariable analyses regarding the effects of the control measures on the estimated ASFV genome prevalence, the proportion of hunted animals or found dead.

From: Epidemiological evaluation of Latvian control measures for African swine fever in wild boar on the basis of surveillance data

Measure

Null hypotheses

Mean/St.Dev.*

Incentives to all persons who report dead wild boar to the veterinary authorities (M1)

H01 No effect on the proportion of animals found dead

0.72

H02 No effect on the estimated virus prevalence

1.20

Incentives to hunters for hunted wild boar (M2)

H0 No effect on the proportion of hunted animals

0.65

Restrictions on driven hunts (M3a)

H0 No effect on the estimated virus prevalence

0.61

Restrictions on driven hunts (M3b)

H0 No effect on the estimated virus prevalence

0.58

Incentives for hunting adult and sub-adult female wild boar (M4a)

H0 No effect on the proportion of hunted animals

0.09

Incentives for hunting adult and sub-adult female wild boar (M4b)

H0 No effect on the proportion of hunted animals

0.78

Permission to use sound moderators (silencers) and night vision devices for wild boar hunting (M5)

H01 No effect on the proportion of hunted animals

1.71

H02 No effect on the estimated virus prevalence

1.30

  1. *Mean/Std.Dev. >1.96, indicating statistical significance.