Avian Influenza in Wild Birds

Overview and Taxonomy of Avian Influenza in Wild Birds

Avian influenza viruses (AIVs) represent a remarkable and diverse group of RNA viruses that possess the capacity to infect a vast array of bird species, with wild birds acting as their natural reservoir. The taxonomy and evolution of these viruses are shaped by a complex interplay of genetic reassortment, host adaptation, and ecological dynamics. Given the key role of wild avian hosts in propagating both low- and high-pathogenicity strains, an in‑depth understanding of their taxonomy is essential for risk assessment, surveillance strategies, and effective management as endorsed by international bodies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH).

Taxonomic Structure and Molecular Diversity

AIVs belong to the Orthomyxoviridae family and are classified based on the antigenic properties of their two surface glycoproteins: hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA). The classification into subtypes such as H5, H7, and H9 has significant epidemiological implications; for instance, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) strains, including the H5N1 virus of the Goose/Guangdong lineage, are of particular concern due to their zoonotic potential and economic impact [1, 2]. Within the HPAI category, clade 2.3.4.4b has attracted intense attention because of its rapid global dissemination and its propensity for reassortment with both low pathogenicity avian influenza (LPAI) viruses and other HPAI strains [7, 14, 35]. These viruses display a high degree of genetic plasticity, with numerous genotypes emerging from gene segment exchange events observed during migratory movements [5, 7, 9].

Wild birds are not only reservoirs but also serve as melting pots of genomic diversity. Studies have shown that viruses recovered from wild birds frequently exhibit mosaic genomes, with evidence of multiple reassortment events that reflect their circulation across different geographical regions [25, 37]. The absence of stable “genome constellations” in wild bird populations, as opposed to the more lineage-restricted viruses in mammals, underscores the dynamic nature of AIV evolution in these hosts [25, 37]. In many instances, whole-genome analyses from surveillance programs have identified novel reassortant strains with gene segments originating from distinct viral lineages and even from viruses of different intercontinental origins [6, 21, 32]. This genomic plasticity is a direct consequence of the segmented nature of the influenza genome and the chance encounters of multiple viral strains in densely populated migratory stopover sites [2, 25].

Ecological Drivers and Host Specificity

Wild waterfowl, particularly members of the Anseriformes (ducks, geese, and swans) and Charadriiformes (gulls, terns, and shorebirds), are central to the natural ecology of AIVs. These bird orders have been linked to specific viral subtype distributions; for example, mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) are frequently associated with a high diversity of LPAI viruses, whereas certain species exhibit higher susceptibility when exposed to HPAI strains [10, 26]. Notably, surveillance in diverse ecosystems, from the high-latitude overwintering sites in the Northern Hemisphere [6, 27] to the unique ecological niches in regions such as the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [36], has revealed that host ecology strongly influences the evolution, circulation, and reassortment dynamics of these viruses. Host species act as both victims and vectors; while many wild birds display subclinical or asymptomatic infections, others experience severe morbidity and mortality, which in turn affects local population dynamics and provides critical cues for enhanced surveillance [3, 20, 29].

The interface between wild and domestic birds is also crucial; gene flow from wild birds to poultry populations has been well documented, particularly when biosecurity measures are breached on poultry farms. Phylogenetic analyses have consistently demonstrated that LPAI viruses isolated from domestic birds are often closely related to those circulating in local wild bird populations, emphasizing the spillover risk at this interface [24, 28]. This situation is further complicated by the ease with which co-infections occur, permitting concurrent circulation of multiple AIV subtypes and increasing the likelihood of reassortment events that may yield more pathogenic variants [12, 33]. Such interactions underscore the importance of targeted surveillance efforts, as recommended by CDC and WHO guidelines, to monitor and mitigate potential outbreaks that could cross the species barrier [2].

Biological Mechanisms and Molecular Adaptations

The evolution of AIVs in wild birds is driven by a series of molecular mechanisms that enable rapid adaptation and immune evasion. Key adaptations include changes at the HA cleavage site, which are determinants of pathogenicity, as well as mutations in internal genes, particularly the PB2 gene, that facilitate replication in different host species [1, 15, 31]. For example, specific substitutions such as PB2-E627K and PB2-D701N have been frequently detected in strains that exhibit attributable mammalian adaptation markers, which is a critical concern given the potential zoonotic threat [18, 35, 38]. These mutations enhance virus replication efficiency in mammalian cells and have been identified in cases where spillover infections have occurred in non-avian hosts, including terrestrial mammals [19, 34].

Furthermore, antigenic drift, a process driven by immune selection pressures, operates continuously within wild bird populations, leading to the emergence of novel antigenic variants [2, 13, 22]. This phenomenon not only complicates vaccine design in poultry but also heightens the risk of human infection given that vaccine mismatches can reduce protective efficacy. Studies using hemagglutination inhibition assays have revealed significant antigenic diversity among the H5 and H7 subtypes isolated from wild birds, illustrating the ongoing evolutionary arms race between the virus and host immune defenses [10, 22, 35]. This molecular evolution is modulated by both neutral processes, such as geographic expansion through migration, and non-neutral processes, such as antigenic selection, which together create distinct epidemiologic patterns in different regions [17, 25].

Global Spread and Surveillance Imperatives

Wild birds play an indispensable role in the transboundary spread of AIVs owing to their long-distance migratory behaviors. The wide geographical distribution, from Eurasia to North America, and increasingly to regions like South America and Antarctica [1, 8], is a testament to the capacity of these viruses to exploit migratory flyways for dissemination. Phylogenetic studies have demonstrated that HPAI viruses, including H5N8 and H5N1 strains, can be introduced into new regions via migratory pathways, highlighting an intercontinental connectivity that complicates control measures [6, 7, 18]. This global spread has been substantiated by molecular clock analyses and robust phylodynamic models, which confirm that the rapid dispersal of AIVs among wild birds is largely driven by the overlapping migratory routes of diverse wild bird populations [5, 23, 25].

International organizations such as the FAO, CDC, and WHO emphasize the critical importance of integrating genomic data into routine surveillance programs to facilitate early detection of emerging variants that may possess enhanced transmissibility or virulence. The need for sustained, cost-effective investments in surveillance is underscored by outbreaks that have had devastating impacts on both commercial poultry operations and wildlife [1, 16, 27]. Notably, active and passive surveillance programs in regions such as Canada, Europe, and East Asia have provided invaluable insights into the spatiotemporal dynamics of AIV spread, as well as the genetic reassortment events that occur during mass mortality events in wild birds [4, 11, 20].

Advances in Phylogenetic and Epidemiologic Methods

Recent advances in genomic sequencing and bioinformatics have allowed researchers to dissect the evolutionary trajectories of AIVs with unprecedented resolution. High-throughput sequencing of viral isolates from wild birds has revealed complex patterns of gene flow and reassortment, with some studies demonstrating that viral gene segments can originate from disparate geographical and host reservoirs [21, 25, 32]. Time-rooted phylodynamic analyses have even enabled researchers to estimate the basic reproduction number (R0) for various AIV strains in wild bird populations, providing crucial data to inform control strategies in both wild and domestic settings [30]. These methods have proven especially critical during global outbreaks of HPAI, such as those involving clade 2.3.4.4b viruses, which require timely genetic characterization and risk assessment to prevent cross-species transmission [1, 18, 35].

Moreover, the development of rapid and sensitive diagnostic assays, such as improved rRT-PCR protocols, has enhanced the capacity for early detection and subsequent phylogenetic analysis of AIVs circulating in wild birds [15]. These innovations not only bolster the surveillance infrastructure but also support early intervention efforts, which are vital for limiting the intercontinental spread of viruses that pose significant public health and economic risks as identified by both WHO and USDA recommendations [2, 7].

In summary, the overview and taxonomy of avian influenza in wild birds encapsulate a dynamic and multifaceted ecosystem, where viral diversity, host ecology, and global migration converge to shape the evolutionary landscape of AIVs. This complex bio-ecological network serves as both a reservoir and a crucible for viral genetic diversity, underscoring the importance of continued, coordinated surveillance efforts to mitigate the risks associated with these ever-evolving pathogens.

Molecular Pathogenesis of Avian Influenza in Wild Birds

The molecular pathogenesis of avian influenza in wild birds represents a multifaceted interplay between viral genetic determinants and the host’s unique biological environment. Wild birds, particularly waterfowl and shorebirds, are not only natural reservoirs for diverse avian influenza viruses (AIVs) but also serve as dynamic environments where evolutionary processes such as mutation, reassortment, and antigenic drift shape virus pathogenicity. Molecular studies have illuminated how these viruses achieve entry, establish infection, replicate, and sometimes adapt to cause high-pathogenic outcomes, with implications extending to domestic poultry and even mammals as noted by international health organizations including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) [1, 2].

Virus Entry and Receptor Specificity

The initial step in the pathogenesis of AIVs in wild birds is mediated by the viral surface glycoprotein hemagglutinin (HA), which binds to sialic acid receptors on the epithelial cells of the host’s respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts. In wild birds, the predominant receptor type is the α-2,3-linked sialic acid, a binding preference that allows the virus to effectively attach and initiate infection [2, 10]. The cleavage of the HA precursor into HA1 and HA2 subunits is a critical step for activation and subsequent membrane fusion. In low-pathogenicity viruses, the cleavage site tends to be monobasic, enabling only localized infections due to restricted protease availability. In contrast, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) strains, such as those belonging to clade 2.3.4.4b, possess multi-basic cleavage sites that are recognized ubiquitously by furin-like proteases, expanding tissue tropism and often leading to systemic infection in wild bird hosts [14, 22]. This molecular modification heightens the potential for severe pathological outcomes and widespread dissemination within bird populations.

Viral Replication, Reassortment, and Genetic Diversification

Once internalized, the influenza virus hijacks the host cell machinery to replicate its segmented RNA genome. The segmented nature of the viral genome not only enables efficient replication but also predisposes the virus to genetic reassortment during co-infection scenarios in wild bird populations. Reassortment, the exchange of gene segments between circulating AIV strains, has been documented extensively in wild birds and is a key driver of genetic diversification [3, 25, 37]. For example, molecular genetic analyses have revealed that reassortant genotypes can emerge when HPAI viruses intermingle with co-circulating low-pathogenic strains, resulting in novel gene constellations and altered virulence profiles [7, 9, 14]. This recombination can lead to changes in the polymerase complex, surface glycoproteins, and internal proteins that together impact viral fitness, host range, and pathogenicity.

Mutations in key polymerase genes, such as PB2, represent another molecular mechanism that modulates pathogenicity. Although the hallmark PB2-E627K and D701N substitutions are commonly associated with enhanced replication efficiency in mammalian hosts, their presence or absence in viruses isolated from wild birds provides insights into adaptation processes [14, 18]. In wild bird systems, the selective pressures differ; the virus may not always require such mutations for efficient replication, yet the sporadic detection of these changes points to the intrinsic capacity of the virus to evolve towards broader host specificity when ecological barriers are breached [34, 38].

Host Immune Response and Viral Evasion Strategies

The outcome of AIV infection in wild birds is also intricately linked to the host’s immune defenses. Wild birds exhibit a range of immune responses, from innate antiviral responses mediated by interferon pathways to the production of specific antibodies targeting viral antigens. Acquired antibody responses, as measured by hemagglutination inhibition assays, often broaden with age, suggesting that lifelong exposure to diverse AIV subtypes can modulate both susceptibility and clinical presentation in these hosts [41]. However, AIVs have evolved countermeasures to evade these immune obstacles, including antigenic drift through point mutations in the HA antigenic sites and glycosylation changes that effectively mask epitopes from neutralizing antibodies [22, 25, 35]. These adaptations are particularly significant in the context of wild bird populations where high variability in immune status exists due to varying exposure histories and differing genetic backgrounds.

Furthermore, emerging data indicate that even in asymptomatic wild birds, subclinical infections may lead to persistent or transient viral replication, contributing to the maintenance and dissemination of these viruses across vast geographic regions. Such scenarios not only allow the virus to circulate undetected but also set the stage for periodic outbreaks when viral loads reach threshold levels sufficient to inflict overt disease and mass mortality events in species such as swans, geese, and terns [1, 20].

Determinants of Pathogenicity and Spillover Risks

The pathogenicity of AIVs in wild birds is determined by a complex network of factors that include both viral genetics and host physiology. The acquisition of multiple basic amino acids at the HA cleavage site is a defining feature of HPAI viruses and underlies the rapid systemic spread observed in certain species [14]. Additionally, polymerase gene adaptations, modulations of the non-structural protein NS1, and variations in the nucleoprotein (NP) have all been implicated in the differential clinical manifestations observed among wild bird hosts [14, 25]. The dynamic interplay between these viral determinants and the natural resistance of many wild bird species frequently results in a spectrum of outcomes, ranging from benign, asymptomatic infections in waterfowl to lethal systemic disease in more sensitive species such as certain raptors and seabirds [3, 7, 20].

Epidemiological investigations have underscored that wild birds play dual roles as both victims and reservoirs of HPAI viruses. While some species tolerate infection with minimal clinical signs, they may subsequently excrete high viral loads, facilitating rapid virus dissemination along migratory flyways [2, 17]. The global spread of HPAI H5 clade 2.3.4.4b viruses across continents has been attributed in part to these migratory movements, an observation that has been emphasized by international bodies such as the WOAH and FAO in their disease management guidelines. Surveillance using molecular diagnostic tools – including sensitive rRT-PCR assays and rapid HP H5 detection protocols – has been instrumental in elucidating the spatial and temporal distribution of these viruses in wild birds [15, 40].

In parallel, studies focusing on the molecular evolution of AIVs in wild bird ecosystems have demonstrated that the constant genetic reshuffling not only drives adaptation to avian hosts but can also pave the way for zoonotic spillover events. Although direct human infections are rare, the potential for reassortment leading to strains with broader species tropism underscores the importance of maintaining robust surveillance systems in wild bird populations. Such surveillance is critical for early detection and rapid intervention as recommended by the CDC, WHO, and FAO, particularly given the high pathogenic impact these viruses can exert on both animal and human health [1, 35, 39].

Collectively, the molecular pathogenesis of avian influenza in wild birds encapsulates a complex series of interactions that govern virus entry, replication, reassortment, immune evasion, and ultimately, disease outcome. The convergence of molecular biology, host-pathogen interactions, and ecological factors continues to provide critical insights into how AIVs persist in wild bird reservoirs and occasionally leap across species barriers, highlighting the need for sustained global surveillance and research efforts in this domain.

Epidemiological Patterns and Global Spread via Migratory Pathways

Migratory wild birds have long served as natural reservoirs and dispersal vectors for avian influenza viruses (AIVs), a role underscored by their seasonal movements across continents, which creates a dynamic network for viral persistence, reassortment, and geographical spread. Detailed analyses of recent outbreaks indicate that the epidemiology of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses, notably H5 strains belonging to the clade 2.3.4.4b, is inextricably linked to the migration patterns of waterfowl and other wild birds. These birds’ asymptomatic carriage and the broad spectrum of subtypes they harbor facilitate intercontinental virus dispersal, as documented in an array of studies spanning Eurasia, North America, and even reaching remote regions such as Antarctica [1-4].

A primary driver of these global spread events is the intersection of distinct migratory flyways. For example, wild birds migrating from Eurasia into North America have been implicated in the introduction of HPAI H5N1 and related strains, with phylogenetic analyses indicating close genetic relationships between North American isolates and viruses circulating in Eurasian waterfowl [6, 7]. The potential of migratory routes such as the Atlantic, Pacific, and even pelagic pathways is highlighted by studies that tracked virus phylogeography, revealing that birds such as whooper swans and various waterfowl species can serve both as carriers and as active agents of local amplification [5, 17]. Such pathways often coincide with areas of dense bird congregation, including breeding and staging sites in high-latitude regions, where viral transmission dynamics become particularly complex due to the convergence of multiple migratory populations [17, 23].

Biologically, the ability of AIVs to persist and evolve in wild bird populations is underpinned by a combination of reservoir host immunity, ecological adaptability, and a high rate of genetic reassortment. The segmented nature of the influenza virus genome enables different viral strains to exchange gene segments during coinfection events in host species that congregate during migration [1, 3]. This reassortment mechanism is pivotal for the generation of novel genotypes with enhanced pathogenic profiles, as observed in several studies where viruses adapted to multiple host species, sometimes even infecting mammals and raising zoonotic concerns promoted by international agencies such as the CDC, WHO, FAO, or WOAH [1, 15]. In many instances, reassortment events have been temporally linked to migratory periods, suggesting that as birds migrate, the chances for genetic mixing are elevated in staging areas with high species diversity and density [9, 43].

Epidemiologically, the spatial and temporal distribution of AIV in wild birds reveals a patchwork pattern of virus detection that aligns closely with migratory movements. In Europe, for instance, enhanced surveillance following the detection of H5N1 in Canada demonstrated a seasonal peak in virus prevalence during spring and autumn migratory seasons, with significant variability observed across different flyways [4, 11]. This temporal clustering reflects not only the arrival of potentially infected birds but also local amplification events at key junctures where birds of different origins coalesce, such as the Baltic region or the Central Asian flyway [16, 23]. Moreover, these fluctuations in virus incidence provide critical windows for intervention, as evidenced by coordinated surveillance efforts guided by recognized international guidelines from the CDC and WHO [16].

The direct link between migratory patterns and virus transmission is further supported by mapping studies that integrate telemetry data and viral detection records. Analyses using GPS tracking data from waterfowl have demonstrated that species like mallards and spot-billed ducks substantially contribute to the risk landscape of AIV spread, with habitat suitability models correlating high-risk zones with poultry outbreak hotspots [23]. This evidence underscores the epidemiologic conundrum in balancing natural bird movements with practical efforts to prevent spillover to domestic poultry, a challenge that is addressed in guidelines issued by the FAO and WOAH for biosecurity and surveillance protocols [4, 16, 42].

An additional epidemiological layer is provided by the detection of genetically distinct virus clades in wild bird populations, which coexist with viruses found in domestic poultry. In North America, molecular surveillance has identified multiple independent introductions and reassortant events of HPAI H5 viruses into wild birds, which have subsequently been linked to outbreaks in commercial poultry flocks. These findings highlight a spillover dynamic where migratory birds, serving as both reservoirs and vectors, continuously introduce new virus variants into regions with dense poultry operations [7, 30, 45]. The intricacies of these transmission cycles are not only of veterinary and economic importance but also raise potential zoonotic risks, leading to intensified surveillance and rapid sequencing efforts by entities such as the CDC and WHO.

Furthermore, studies conducted in regions as geographically distinct as South America, Antarctica, and Asia illustrate that despite differences in migratory routes and bird species compositions, similar epidemiological drivers are at play. In South America, for example, the incursion of H5N1 into wild bird populations was temporally associated with migratory arrivals from northern latitudes, leading to widespread morbidity and mortality among diverse avian species [1, 8]. In Antarctica, the rapid spread and amplification of virus among seabirds have been linked to the clustering of migratory birds at breeding colonies, where high density and species mixing create ideal conditions for viral transmission and reassortment [1]. These case studies reinforce the global nature of AIV transmission via migratory pathways and the need for coordinated multi-agency surveillance efforts worldwide.

Finally, nuanced aspects of environmental and host-specific factors further shape the epidemiological patterns observed. The relative susceptibility among different avian orders, influenced by genetic and physiological differences, determines virus persistence and propagation within migratory populations [17, 42, 44]. For instance, gulls have been identified as particularly effective long-distance dispersers of HPAI H5 viruses, a feature that may be due to their pelagic lifestyle and limited prior exposure to specific virus subtypes [17, 26]. Such species-specific insights are critical for refining risk models and enhancing early detection systems, as recommended by international bodies.

Collectively, these observations reveal that the global spread of avian influenza is a multifactorial phenomenon driven by migratory dynamics, viral genetic reassortment, and ecological convergence. The integration of advanced molecular techniques, detailed ecological mapping, and international cooperation forms the foundation for modern surveillance strategies, all of which are essential in mitigating the impacts of HPAI viruses on poultry industries and in preventing spillover events that could threaten human health.

Diagnostic Advances in Wild Bird Populations

Recent advances in diagnostic methodologies have revolutionized the surveillance and detection of avian influenza viruses (AIV) in wild bird populations, providing unprecedented insights into both virus evolution and epidemiological dynamics. Novel applications of molecular diagnostics, serological assays, and genomic sequencing technologies have enabled rapid and sensitive identification of both low-pathogenic (LPAIV) and highly pathogenic strains (HPAIV, e.g., H5 clade 2.3.4.4b) in free-ranging avifauna. The integration of these methodologies with geospatial analytics and host ecology has allowed veterinary researchers and public health agencies, including the CDC, WHO, WOAH, and FAO, to enhance their early-warning systems for zoonotic and economically significant pathogens.

Molecular Diagnostic Platforms

One of the most significant improvements in diagnostic capabilities is the refinement of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) techniques. Novel assays have been designed to specifically target hemagglutinin genes associated with HPAIV, such as those detecting clade 2.3.4.4b H5 viruses. For example, the rapid, cost-effective HP H5-detection rRT-PCR assay demonstrates high specificity and sensitivity by directly discriminating between LPAIV H5 RNA and viral RNAs unrelated to AIV, significantly reducing time-to-pathotype determination compared to conventional Sanger sequencing of the hemagglutinin cleavage site [15]. The robust performance of such assays is critical for timely responses during outbreaks when rapid differentiation between high- and low-pathogenic viruses is essential for implementing biosecurity measures in both wild and domestic bird populations.

Genomic Sequencing and Phylogenetic Analysis

Complementary to molecular diagnostics, whole-genome sequencing has emerged as a powerful tool for both characterizing circulating strains and inferring transmission dynamics. In wild birds, genomic sequencing allows investigators to identify reassortant viruses and uncover intercontinental introduction events by linking genetic constellations with migratory flyway patterns [1, 5, 7]. Phylogenetic studies conducted in Canada following the incursions of HPAIV H5N1 have been instrumental in identifying multiple reassortants involving both Eurasian and North American gene segments, which underscores the need for continued genomic surveillance to monitor virus evolution and potential zoonotic risk [4, 11]. This level of resolution is paramount for tracking mutations associated with increased mammalian adaptation, as observed in sequences demonstrating adaptive mutations in the PB2 gene segment linked to enhanced replication in mammalian hosts [18, 38].

Enhancing Surveillance through Integrated Approaches

The dynamic ecology of AIV in wild birds necessitates a multi-tiered surveillance strategy that includes both passive and active sampling. Passive surveillance, which primarily involves testing dead or overtly sick birds, has proven valuable for detecting HPAIV outbreaks as exemplified by surveillance data from Europe and North America indicating mass mortality events in wild bird populations [4, 20, 29]. Active surveillance approaches, including the testing of live, apparently healthy birds, or hunter-harvested specimens, offer an opportunity to detect subclinical infections and gauge virus prevalence within reservoirs [4, 40]. In several instances, the integration of these methodologies has provided critical early-warning signals ahead of outbreaks in domestic poultry, ensuring that agencies such as the WHO and FAO remain informed for risk mitigation and pandemic preparedness.

Technological advances have also enhanced the spatial and temporal resolution of surveillance data. For instance, spatiotemporal risk assessment models combine habitat suitability analysis based on global positioning system (GPS) tracking data of migratory waterfowl with virus detection outcomes. This method has been successfully applied in some regions to predict high-risk areas for AI occurrence in wild birds, thereby guiding targeted sampling efforts near domestic poultry populations [23]. Such models consider variables like the distance to wetlands, a factor found to correlate with increased likelihood of virus detection [42], and further refine risk estimates when multiple wild bird species congregate during migration. This synthesis of ecological data with diagnostic outputs represents a significant leap forward in the design of cost-effective and efficient surveillance programs.

Sentinel Species and Novel Sampling Techniques

In addition to molecular and genomic approaches, employing sentinel species has further augmented diagnostic strategies among wild bird populations. Ducks, particularly mallards, have been established as reliable sentinels due to their high susceptibility and frequent interactions with both domestic and other wild birds [26]. Studies have demonstrated that using sentinel birds in strategic locations can provide early indicators of virus circulation, giving veterinary authorities a crucial lead time for enacting containment measures. Moreover, hunter-sourced sampling has also proven effective in detecting AIV in waterfowl prior to major outbreaks in poultry [40]. The combined use of these sampling techniques across different ecological niches ensures a more comprehensive surveillance network capable of capturing the heterogeneity inherent in wild bird populations.

Integration with International Biosurveillance Networks

The continuous evolution of AIV, particularly the emergence of clade 2.3.4.4b viruses, has prompted collaborative efforts among international health organizations. Under the coordinated directives of the CDC, WHO, and WOAH, harmonized protocols for sample collection, diagnostic testing, and genomic data sharing have become a cornerstone for global surveillance networks. These organizations advocate for standardized testing methods and the timely dissemination of surveillance data to inform both local and international response strategies [2, 13]. The integration of data from diverse geographic locations, such as the extensive surveillance programs executed in Europe, North America, and East Asia, allows for the real-time monitoring of viral evolution and reassortment events, ultimately bolstering pandemic preparedness and the strategic allocation of resources.

Technical and Biological Considerations

From a biological perspective, the sensitivity of diagnostic assays must account for the diverse virological and immunological characteristics across wild bird species. The higher prevalence of AI antibodies in certain species, potentially due to accumulated immunity with age, necessitates serological testing regimes that can differentiate between antibodies generated from prior exposures and those indicating a recent infection [41]. Furthermore, the variability in receptor binding properties among AIV isolates, where some wild bird viruses demonstrate dual binding to both avian-type and human-type receptors, complicates the interpretation of diagnostic results for zoonotic risk assessment [10, 46]. Consequently, advances in multiplexed diagnostic platforms that can simultaneously detect a spectrum of viral subtypes and their pathogenic markers are critical for a nuanced understanding of virus dynamics in these complex ecosystems.

Altogether, these diagnostic advances and integrated surveillance strategies in wild bird populations serve as a linchpin in the global effort to understand and mitigate the impacts of avian influenza outbreaks. By employing state-of-the-art molecular techniques, comprehensive genomic analyses, and innovative spatial modeling approaches, researchers and health authorities continue to improve the detection, characterization, and control of AIV, thereby reducing the risk to poultry industries and public health worldwide.

Virus Ecology and Transmission Dynamics between Wild and Domestic Avian Hosts

The ecology of avian influenza viruses (AIVs) is deeply intertwined with the complex lifestyle, migratory behavior, and environmental interactions of wild avian hosts. Wild waterfowl and other migratory bird species have long been recognized as the primary natural reservoir for AIVs, harboring a great diversity of viral subtypes without necessarily manifesting severe disease signs themselves. These species, particularly dabbling ducks, geese, swans, and shorebirds, constitute ecological niches where AIVs can persist, reassort, and occasionally cross over into domestic bird populations [2, 25]. The interplay between wild and domestic birds is governed by both biological mechanisms at the molecular level and ecological factors at macro scales, as these viruses continuously adapt through modification of receptor specificity, reassortment between different viral lineages, and shifts in pathogenicity.

Ecological Niches and Environmental Drivers

Wild birds exploit a range of habitats from remote wetlands to agricultural landscapes, where domestic poultry operations frequently coexist with natural water bodies. Migration routes, staging areas, and overwintering sites create concentration points where high species density and interspecific interactions promote virus exchange [17]. For instance, highly pathogenic H5N1 and H5Nx viruses have been documented to spread via wild birds crossing intercontinental boundaries through corridors such as the Atlantic, Pacific, and Central Asian flyways [6, 17]. Environmental contamination of water resources by infected feces can serve as an efficient conduit for AIV dissemination, further enabling virus maintenance during migration and subsequently introducing viruses into areas with high domestic bird density. Such settings facilitate the confluence of different subtypes, thereby enhancing the evolutionary potential of these pathogens through processes such as antigenic drift and antigenic shift [2, 9].

Seasonal dynamics compound these interactions: periods of peak migration are often associated with increased viral prevalence in wild birds, providing critical windows when virus introduction into domestic settings is most likely. Enhanced sampling and surveillance efforts have revealed that virus detection rates in wild birds correlate with distance to wetlands – a key environmental risk factor [42]. International organizations like the CDC, WHO, FAO, and WOAH emphasize that integrated surveillance in migratory birds is vital given the potential zoonotic risks and the economic impact on poultry industries worldwide.

Biological Mechanisms and Genetic Dynamics

At the molecular and genetic level, the segmented genome of AIVs provides an inherent mechanism for reassortment when viruses co-infect the same host. This reassortment can generate novel viral genotypes with different pathogenic potentials and host ranges [9, 14]. In zones where wild birds mix with domestic flocks, these evolutionary processes are particularly pronounced. For example, full-genome analyses from surveillance programs have identified multiple reassortant genotypes and intercontinental gene segment exchange between Eurasian and North American strains [7, 11, 45]. Migratory birds not only carry viruses over vast distances but also act as incubators where reassortment events can produce variants with modified virulence and host tropism, enhancing the likelihood of spillover into domestic poultry and even mammalian species [3, 19].

Virus evolution in wild bird populations is further modulated by host immunity. Age-related accumulation of immunity, as shown in natural host species such as swans, suggests that the breadth of antibody responses increases with time; however, such immunity might select for virus variants that can bypass existing antibody defenses [41]. This immunological landscape drives antigenic variation and contributes to the continuous emergence of virus strains with pandemic potential, a fact underscored by international health authorities in their preparedness guidelines.

Transmission Pathways at the Wild-Domestic Interface

The interface between wild and domestic birds presents a complex landscape for viral transmission. Direct contact, environmental contamination, and indirect exposures via fomites or shared water sources are critical pathways that facilitate viral spillover from wild reservoirs to poultry flocks. In several surveillance studies conducted across Europe, the spatial and temporal patterns of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) outbreaks in domestic poultry have frequently aligned with local incidences in wild bird populations [4, 47]. Detailed phylogenetic studies in North America and Europe reveal that wild bird–origin viruses frequently seed outbreaks on poultry farms through point-source introductions, with limited subsequent farm-to-farm transmission [7, 11]. This is a dynamic corroborated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and regional animal health authorities that highlight wild bird migration as a critical risk factor in AIV spread.

In environments where biosecurity breaches occur and proximity to wetlands or migratory stopover sites is high, the risk of interspecies transmission escalates [23, 42]. Domestic birds, particularly free-range and backyard flocks, are at elevated risk as they often graze on areas frequented by wild birds. Risk mapping based on ecological niche models has proven useful to predict these high-risk zones and to guide targeted surveillance initiatives [23]. Furthermore, analysis of virus genetic constellations from wild birds and poultry across different geographical regions has provided strong evidence that viruses circulating in poultry are, in many cases, derived directly from local wild bird populations, though the evolutionary paths may vary according to environmental and host-specific factors [24, 33, 47].

Reassortment, Spillover, and One Health Implications

The interface is not limited solely to avian hosts; spillover into mammalian species has been reported following close proximity to wild bird populations, emphasizing the One Health significance of avian influenza surveillance [1, 19, 34]. Cases of mammalian infections, including those in foxes, skunks, and even marine mammals, have been associated with high-concentration outbreaks in wild birds. This cross-species transmission is mediated by a combination of adaptive viral mutations and high infection pressure in ecosystems where wild birds, domestic poultry, and other susceptible species converge. The rapid virus evolution facilitated by reassortment mechanisms in wild birds is therefore central to understanding the emergence of highly pathogenic variants capable of broader host transmission. International organizations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) specifically call for sustained surveillance at the wild–domestic interface to mitigate potential public health crises and economic losses associated with avian influenza outbreaks.

The cumulative evidence from recent surveillance programs in North America, Europe, and Asia supports the notion that wild birds play an indispensable role in shaping the evolutionary trajectory and transmission dynamics of AIVs [2, 7, 17, 33]. Monitoring these ecological processes is critical for early warning and to inform targeted interventions in domestic poultry populations, underscoring the importance of adopting One Health approaches articulated by institutions like the CDC and WHO for managing zoonotic and economically critical pathogens.

Zoonotic Potential and Public Health Considerations of Avian Influenza

Avian influenza viruses, notably the highly pathogenic H5Nx subtypes, have long been recognized for their ability to infect a wide spectrum of avian hosts, yet recent studies reveal an increasingly complicated zoonotic profile that has notable implications for public health. The dynamic evolution of these viruses is mediated by frequent reassortment events in highly diverse wild bird populations, resulting in new virus genotypes with altered host specificity and pathogenic potential [2, 3, 35]. Wild birds, particularly migratory waterfowl, serve as robust natural reservoirs where viruses can circulate asymptomatically before acquiring mutations that favor infection in mammalian species. This genetic plasticity underscores the necessity for vigilant monitoring, as highlighted by global organizations such as the CDC, WHO, and WOAH, which regularly stress the importance of robust surveillance in both avian and mammalian populations.

Biological Mechanisms Underpinning Zoonotic Spillover

At the molecular level, the zoonotic potential of avian influenza viruses is intricately linked to specific genetic alterations that enhance virus binding and replication in mammalian cells. Mutations in the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, especially those that affect the receptor-binding domain, are pivotal for modulating host range. Typically, avian viruses preferentially bind to α-2,3-linked sialic acid receptors present on bird epithelial tissues; however, several studies have identified emergent strains that show increased affinity for human α-2,6-linked sialic acid receptors, a change that can facilitate human infection [2, 13]. Concurrently, adaptive mutations in internal genes, such as polymerase basic protein 2 (PB2), including E627K and D701N, have been documented. These mutations significantly enhance viral replication efficiency at the lower temperatures of the human upper respiratory tract, thereby bridging the species barrier [34, 38]. The ability of reassortant viruses to incorporate gene segments from diverse avian influenza strains through reassortment further augments the risk of emergence of strains with pandemic potential [2, 35].

Epidemiological Dynamics and Infection Pathways

The epidemiology of avian influenza underscores a complex, interrelated dynamic between wild avian reservoirs and secondary spillover into domestic birds and mammals. Wild bird populations, especially among species such as ducks, geese, and swans, facilitate the maintenance and broader dissemination of these viruses along migratory flyways [2, 27]. Surveillance programs have demonstrated variable prevalence rates in wild birds across different regions, emphasizing that while wild waterfowl typically exhibit asymptomatic infections, these subclinical carriers may nonetheless transmit virulent strains to susceptible hosts, including poultry and occasionally mammals [1, 8]. The transmission cycle is further complicated by the ecological interfaces between wild and domestic birds, a situation exacerbated by live bird markets and small-scale poultry farming practices. Studies using detailed logistic regression analyses link higher infection rates in domestic settings to proximity with natural wetlands and regions of high migratory bird density [42]. This ecological spillover, coupled with the observed genetic reassortments in wild birds, poses a latent but significant threat of zoonotic transmission to humans.

Role of Wild Birds in Viral Reassortment and Spillover

Wild birds not only serve as the principal reservoir but also as active sites of viral evolution. The dynamic “mixing vessel” scenario is well illustrated by genetic studies documenting the introduction of reassortant viruses into new geographical regions by migratory species [1, 6, 7]. The exchange of gene segments, enabled by coinfections and the high degree of host diversity, creates opportunities for the emergence of novel strains with enhanced replication capabilities within non-avian hosts [2, 3]. Such reassortments can generate viruses that manifest altered antigenic properties, complicating diagnostics and undermining existing vaccination approaches in poultry and consequently increasing the potential for zoonotic events [13, 35]. In addition, sporadic spillover infections among wild mammals observed during large-scale outbreaks further accentuate the intertwined relationship between avian and mammalian hosts [34]. These mammalian infections, manifesting predominantly as neurologic disease with supporting molecular evidence of mammalian-adaptive markers, signal the possibility of a more permissive host range under high infection pressures, a development that raises alarms not only for animal health but also for human public health.

Public Health Surveillance and International Preparedness

The profound public health consequences of avian influenza outbreaks extend beyond the direct impacts on poultry industries. The zoonotic dimensions of these events necessitate a One Health approach, integrating animal and human health surveillance. International bodies, including the WHO and FAO, underscore the importance of coordinated surveillance efforts across borders to monitor viral evolution in wild bird populations while assessing risks to human populations [39]. In instances where animal-to-human transmission has been documented, prompt public health interventions, rigorous biosecurity measures, and rapid containment strategies are essential to prevent potential outbreaks in human communities. The rapid identification and characterization of viral subtypes through molecular diagnostic techniques, such as reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays and whole genome sequencing, play a pivotal role in facilitating early warning systems [15, 39].

Furthermore, public health authorities are increasingly leveraging data from passive and active surveillance efforts to model zoonotic risk. Detailed spatiotemporal analyses of virus dissemination in wild birds have provided valuable indicators for targeting high-risk regions where virus spillover into domestic poultry is most likely [23]. These models, integrated with migratory bird tracking data, enable risk assessment frameworks that not only inform local biosecurity protocols but also guide international preparedness strategies endorsed by public health organizations like the CDC and WHO.

Integrated One Health Strategies

The intersection of avian influenza ecology with public health demands integrated mitigation strategies. A collaborative “One Health” paradigm, which connects veterinary services, ecological surveillance, and human public health agencies, is critically necessary for early detection and intervention. This approach fosters the timely sharing of epidemiological data, genetic sequencing results, and risk assessments, enabling swift responses to potential zoonotic threats. The integration of sophisticated surveillance tools and international data sharing networks, as emphasized by the CDC and WOAH, ensures that emergent strains are rapidly detected and characterized, thus reducing the lag between discovery and public health response [39]. The implementation of such coordinated strategies is paramount in curtailing the risk of a future pandemic arising from avian influenza viruses that have crossed the species barrier, a lesson that resonates deeply in the contemporary public health landscape.

Through detailed molecular surveillance and a robust One Health framework, researchers and public health officials are better equipped to address the multifaceted challenges posed by avian influenza. The convergence of ecological, virological, and public health insights reinforces the imperative to continue refining surveillance networks and biosecurity practices, ensuring that evolving avian influenza threats are met with informed and rapid responses to safeguard both animal and human populations.

Conservation Management and Biosecurity Measures in Response to HPAI Outbreaks

The emergence and rapid spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses in wild bird populations has posed significant challenges not only to poultry production and human health but also to conservation efforts regarding wild avifauna. In response, conservation management and biosecurity measures have evolved to address the dual imperative of safeguarding biodiversity and containing economically critical outbreaks. Integrated with guidance from international entities such as the CDC, WHO, WOAH, and FAO, these measures aim to mitigate zoonotic transmission, preserve critical bird populations, and maintain ecosystem balance.

Ecosystem-Level Surveillance and Adaptive Management

Active and passive surveillance remains the cornerstone of conservation management in areas impacted by HPAI outbreaks. Conservation practitioners have progressively implemented adaptive monitoring programs that combine both systematic testing of live, apparently healthy birds and intensified sampling of sick or deceased specimens. For instance, surveillance programs in regions like Canada, where over 17,000 wild bird samples were analyzed following incursions of HPAI, have underscored the importance of tracking both asymptomatic and symptomatic birds to detect early viral incursion and monitor its spatial distribution [4, 11]. These approaches are essential for understanding transmission dynamics and identifying potential risk zones within high-density migratory stopover regions, such as those observed in the Antarctic and along major flyways [1, 7].

In addition to classical virological surveillance, conservation management employs ecological niche modeling and spatiotemporal risk assessment to predict areas with elevated likelihood for viral transmission based on migratory patterns and habitat suitability [23]. By integrating high-resolution tracking data of wild waterfowl with virus prevalence data, managers can identify pandemic “hotspots” and implement targeted interventions. These predictive models support the decisions on where and when to intensify biosecurity measures, thus reducing the likelihood of viral spillover into endangered populations or domestic poultry operations and limiting ecosystem-level impacts.

Biosecurity Practices on Poultry Farms and at the Wild–Domestic Interface

Effective biosecurity measures serve as a critical barrier to the transmission of HPAI from wild birds to domestic poultry and vice versa. Stringent practices have been developed at the interface between wild bird habitats and poultry farms. These include establishing robust physical barriers, such as netting and secure housing systems, to prevent access by migratory birds known to be natural reservoirs of HPAI viruses [9, 42]. Farms are increasingly implementing protocols in accordance with recommendations from FAO and WOAH that call for regular disinfection, controlled human and equipment movement, and the use of personal protective equipment by farm workers. In some regions, comprehensive measures have been instituted within high-risk periods, particularly during peak migratory seasons, to limit viral introductions on poultry operations [7, 9].

The evolution of HPAI viruses through continuous reassortment events, as noted in both wild birds and domestic populations, further underscores the need for dynamic biosecurity strategies [3, 14]. Enhanced genomic surveillance, including rapid real-time RT-PCR assays for pathotype determination, allow for swift detection of novel virus genotypes and subsequent refinement of containment protocols [15]. In parallel, regional coordination efforts among governmental agencies and conservation organizations ensure that biosecurity policies adapt in real time to the evolving epidemiology of HPAI outbreaks, thereby reducing large-scale culling and mitigating economic losses.

Habitat Management and Conservation-Friendly Interventions

Conservation management strategies must also address the preservation of critical wild bird habitats that serve as reservoirs and migratory corridors. The modification and management of these habitats can reduce exposure risk while balancing the need to conserve biodiversity. For instance, maintaining buffer zones around wetlands and minimizing disturbances in high-risk areas during outbreak periods can reduce the interface between wild birds and domestic stock [23]. Additionally, site-specific interventions, such as controlled water management in natural reserves, can help dilute viral concentrations in the environment, indirectly lowering the probability of mass mortality events observed during epidemic peaks [1, 20].

Furthermore, conservation practitioners are increasingly considering alternative strategies to conventional culling and displacement. Measures such as vaccination programs in domestic poultry, when used alongside strict biosecurity, have proven effective at attenuating outbreaks without directly impacting wild bird populations [14]. By integrating vaccination strategies into regional management plans, policymakers can alleviate the pressure to implement drastic isolation measures that might otherwise disrupt migratory patterns and ecosystem dynamics.

Collaborative One Health Approaches and International Coordination

Successful conservation management in the context of HPAI outbreaks necessitates a One Health approach that bridges the gap between wildlife conservation, animal health, and public health disciplines. International guidance from the WHO, CDC, and WOAH reinforces the need for coordinated, transboundary surveillance systems that enable rapid data sharing and comprehensive risk assessments [39]. Collaborative projects often involve partnerships between governmental agencies, academic institutions, and non-governmental organizations to enhance active surveillance efforts across flyways that span multiple geopolitical regions. The integration of genomic and epidemiological data collected from diverse geographic locales empowers decision-makers to implement timely and informed management actions that can reduce cross-border transmission events [27, 47].

In practice, joint initiatives have been established to structure responses not only to outbreak containment but also to long-term ecosystem resilience. For instance, conservation authorities are working with international bodies to develop biosecurity protocols that target high-risk interfaces and ensure that outbreak responses are harmonized with conservation priorities. This collaboration is particularly critical in regions where wild migratory birds and endangered species coexist, and where indiscriminate measures might cause irreversible ecological damage.

Integration of Advanced Diagnostic Technologies and Communication Systems

The integration of advanced diagnostic technologies, including high-throughput sequencing and rapid molecular assays, has accelerated the detection and characterization of HPAI viruses in wild bird populations [15, 18]. These tools provide valuable insights into viral evolution, reassortment events, and potential mechanisms underpinning host adaptation. Such information is vital for fine-tuning conservation management strategies and refining biosecurity protocols. Importantly, real-time diagnostic capabilities facilitate timely public health responses and enable the implementation of containment measures before the virus can establish a foothold in either wild or domestic populations.

Moreover, modern communication systems, encompassing coordinated alert networks and digital reporting platforms endorsed by international health agencies, have enhanced transparency and cooperation among stakeholders. These systems ensure that outbreak information is disseminated promptly, thereby supporting rapid mobilization of biosecurity measures and conservation interventions in response to emerging HPAI strains.

References

[1] Kuiken T, Vanstreels R, Banyard A, Begeman L, Breed AC, Dewar ML, et al.. Emergence, spread, and impact of high‐pathogenicity avian influenza H5 in wild birds and mammals of South America and Antarctica. Conservation Biology. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70052

[2] Blagodatski A, Trutneva K, Glazova O, Mityaeva O, Shevkova L, Kegeles E, et al.. Avian Influenza in Wild Birds and Poultry: Dissemination Pathways, Monitoring Methods, and Virus Ecology. Pathogens. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10050630

[3] Puryear WB, Runstadler JA. High-pathogenicity avian influenza in wildlife: a changing disease dynamic that is expanding in wild birds and having an increasing impact on a growing number of mammals.. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.24.01.0053

[4] Giacinti J, Signore AV, Jones MEB, Bourque L, Lair S, Jardine CM, et al.. Avian influenza viruses in wild birds in Canada following incursions of highly pathogenic H5N1 virus from Eurasia in 2021–2022. mBio. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.03203-23

[5] Seo Y, Cho AY, Si Y, Lee S, Kim D, Jeong H, et al.. Evolution and Spread of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Clade 2.3.4.4b Virus in Wild Birds, South Korea, 2022–2023. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid3002.231274

[6] Caliendo V, Lewis N, Pohlmann A, Waldenstrom J, Toor MLv, Lameris T, et al.. Transatlantic spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 by wild birds from Europe to North America in 2021. Scientific Reports. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13447-z

[7] Youk S, Torchetti M, Lantz K, Lenoch J, Killian M, Leyson CM, et al.. H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza clade 2.3.4.4b in wild and domestic birds: Introductions into the United States and reassortments, December 2021-April 2022.. Virology. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2023.109860

[8] Ariyama N, Pardo-Roa C, Muñoz G, Aguayo C, Ávila C, Mathieu C, et al.. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Clade 2.3.4.4b Virus in Wild Birds, Chile. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2909.230067

[9] Engelsma M, Heutink R, Harders F, Germeraad E, Beerens N. Multiple Introductions of Reassorted Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5Nx Viruses Clade 2.3.4.4b Causing Outbreaks in Wild Birds and Poultry in The Netherlands, 2020-2021. Microbiology spectrum. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02499-21

[10] Stanislawek WL, Tana T, Rawdon TG, Cork S, Chen K, Fatoyinbo H, et al.. Avian influenza viruses in New Zealand wild birds, with an emphasis on subtypes H5 and H7: Their distinctive epidemiology and genomic properties. PLoS ONE. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303756

[11] Giacinti J, Signore AV, Jones MEB, Bourque L, Lair S, Jardine CM, et al.. Avian influenza viruses in wild birds in Canada following incursions of highly pathogenic H5N1 virus from Eurasia in 2021/2022. bioRxiv. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.23.565566

[12] Ringenberg JM, Weir K, Humberg L, Voglewede C, Oswald M, Root JJ, et al.. Prevalence of Avian Influenza Virus in Atypical Wild Birds Host Groups during an Outbreak of Highly Pathogenic Strain EA/AM H5N1. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/4009552

[13] El-Shesheny R, Moatasim Y, Mahmoud SH, Song Y, Taweel AE, Gomaa M, et al.. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Virus Clade 2.3.4.4b in Wild Birds and Live Bird Markets, Egypt. Pathogens. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens12010036

[14] Tian J, Bai X, Li M, Zeng X, Xu J, Li P, et al.. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Virus (H5N1) Clade 2.3.4.4b Introduced by Wild Birds, China, 2021. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2907.221149

[15] James J, Seekings A, Skinner P, Purchase K, Mahmood S, Brown I, et al.. Rapid and sensitive detection of high pathogenicity Eurasian clade 2.3.4.4b avian influenza viruses in wild birds and poultry.. Journal of Virological Methods. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2022.114454

[16] Aznar I, Kohnle L, Stoicescu A, Houtum Av, Zancanaro G. Annual report on surveillance for avian influenza in poultry and wild birds in Member States of the European Union in 2022. EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8480

[17] Hill N, Bishop M, Trovão NS, Ineson KM, Schaefer A, Puryear WB, et al.. Ecological divergence of wild birds drives avian influenza spillover and global spread. PLoS Pathogens. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1010062

[18] Si Y, Lee S, Lee H, Kim D, Jeong H, Lee S, et al.. Early detection and genetic characterization of clade 2.3.4.4b H5N1 and H5N9 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses at the onset of fall migration in wild birds during october 2025 in South Korea. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2026.1755375

[19] Steinsiepe VK, Cruz C, Icochea ME, Espejo V, Troncos G, Castro-Sanguinetti GR, et al.. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) from Wild Birds, Poultry, and Mammals, Peru. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2912.230505

[20] Caliendo V, Kleyheeg E, Beerens N, Camphuysen K, Cazemier R, Elbers ARW, et al.. Effect of 2020–21 and 2021–22 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Epidemics on Wild Birds, the Netherlands. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid3001.230970

[21] Kim J, Lee S, Kim D, Lee D, Song C, Lee D, et al.. Detection of intercontinental reassortant H6 avian influenza viruses from wild birds in South Korea, 2015 and 2017. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1157984

[22] Jiang W, Liu S, Yin X, Li Z, Lan Z, Xire L, et al.. Comparative Antigenicity and Pathogenicity of Two Distinct Genotypes of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Viruses (H5N8) From Wild Birds in China, 2020–2021. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.893253

[23] Yoo D, Lee K, Beatriz M, Chun B, Belkhiria J, Lee K. Spatio-temporal risk assessment for avian influenza outbreak based on the dynamics of habitat suitability for wild birds.. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.14376

[24] Bergervoet SA, Pritz-Verschuren S, Gonzales J, Bossers A, Poen M, Dutta J, et al.. Circulation of low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) viruses in wild birds and poultry in the Netherlands, 2006–2016. Scientific Reports. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50170-8

[25] Venkatesh D, Poen M, Bestebroer T, Scheuer R, Vuong O, Chkhaidze M, et al.. Avian Influenza Viruses in Wild Birds: Virus Evolution in a Multihost Ecosystem. Journal of Virology. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00433-18

[26] Globig A, Baumer A, Revilla-Fernández S, Beer M, Wodak E, Fink M, et al.. Ducks as Sentinels for Avian Influenza in Wild Birds. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1510.090439

[27] Lycett S, Bodewes R, Pohlmann A, Banks J, Bányai K, Boni MF, et al.. Role for migratory wild birds in the global spread of avian influenza H5N8. Science. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf8852

[28] Hassan M, Hoque MA, Debnath N, Yamage M, Klaassen M. Are Poultry or Wild Birds the Main Reservoirs for Avian Influenza in Bangladesh?. EcoHealth. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-017-1257-6

[29] Kleyheeg E, Slaterus R, Bodewes R, Rijks J, Spierenburg M, Beerens N, et al.. Deaths among Wild Birds during Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N8) Virus Outbreak, the Netherlands. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2312.171086

[30] Grear DA, Hall JS, Dusek R, Ip H. Inferring epidemiologic dynamics from viral evolution: 2014–2015 Eurasian/North American highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses exceed transmission threshold, R 0 = 1, in wild birds and poultry in North America. Evolutionary Applications. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12576

[31] Mine J, Uchida Y, Nakayama M, Tanikawa T, Tsunekuni R, Sharshov K, et al.. Genetics and pathogenicity of H5N6 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses isolated from wild birds and a chicken in Japan during winter 2017-2018.. Virology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2019.04.011

[32] Jeong S, Lee D, Kim Y, Lee S, Cho AY, Noh J, et al.. Introduction of Avian Influenza A(H6N5) Virus into Asia from North America by Wild Birds. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2511.190604

[33] Verhagen J, Lexmond P, Vuong O, Schutten M, Guldemeester J, Osterhaus A, et al.. Discordant detection of avian influenza virus subtypes in time and space between poultry and wild birds; Towards improvement of surveillance programs. PLoS ONE. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173470

[34] Elsmo EJ, Wünschmann A, Beckmen K, Broughton-Neiswanger LE, Buckles EL, Ellis J, et al.. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Virus Clade 2.3.4.4b Infections in Wild Terrestrial Mammals, United States, 2022. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2912.230464

[35] Graziosi G, Lupini C, Catelli E, Carnaccini S. Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) H5 Clade 2.3.4.4b Virus Infection in Birds and Mammals. Animals. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14091372

[36] Su S, Xing G, Wang J, Li Z, Gu J, Yan L, et al.. Characterization of H7N2 Avian Influenza Virus in Wild Birds and Pikas in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau Area. Scientific Reports. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep30974

[37] Dugan V, Chen R, Spiro D, Sengamalay NA, Zaborsky J, Ghedin E, et al.. The Evolutionary Genetics and Emergence of Avian Influenza Viruses in Wild Birds. PLoS Pathogens. 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000076

[38] Tammiranta N, Isomursu M, Fusaro A, Nylund M, Nokireki T, Giussani E, et al.. Highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5N1) virus infections in wild carnivores connected to mass mortalities of pheasants in Finland.. Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4339801

[39] Parums D. Editorial: Global Surveillance of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Viruses in Poultry, Wild Birds, and Mammals to Prevent a Human Influenza Pandemic. Medical Science Monitor. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.939968

[40] Wade D, Ashton‐Butt A, Scott G, Reid S, Coward V, Hansen RDE, et al.. High pathogenicity avian influenza: targeted active surveillance of wild birds to enable early detection of emerging disease threats. Epidemiology and Infection. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268822001856

[41] Hill S, Manvell R, Schulenburg B, Shell W, Wikramaratna PS, Perrins C, et al.. Antibody responses to avian influenza viruses in wild birds broaden with age. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.2159

[42] Liu Y, Kjær L, Boklund A, Hjulsager C, Larsen LE, Kirkeby C. Risk factors for avian influenza in Danish poultry and wild birds during the epidemic from June 2020 to May 2021. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2024.1358995

[43] Lee S, Cho AY, Kim T, Ahn S, Song J, Lee H, et al.. Novel Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Clade 2.3.4.4b Virus in Wild Birds, South Korea. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2907.221893

[44] Wille M, Lisovski S, Roshier DA, Ferenczi M, Hoye B, Leen T, et al.. Strong host phylogenetic and ecological effects on host competency for avian influenza in Australian wild birds. bioRxiv. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.2237

[45] Li L, Bowman A, Deliberto T, Killian M, Krauss S, Nolting J, et al.. Genetic Evidence Supports Sporadic and Independent Introductions of Subtype H5 Low-Pathogenic Avian Influenza A Viruses from Wild Birds to Domestic Poultry in North America. Journal of Virology. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00913-18

[46] Wang Y, Wang M, Zhang H, Zhao C, Zhang Y, He G, et al.. Emergence, Evolution, and Biological Characteristics of H10N4 and H10N8 Avian Influenza Viruses in Migratory Wild Birds Detected in Eastern China in 2020. Microbiology spectrum. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.00807-22

[47] Guinat C, Agüí CV, Vaughan T, Sciré J, Pohlmann A, Staubach C, et al.. Disentangling the role of poultry farms and wild birds in the spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus in Europe. bioRxiv. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ve/veac073