Victor Marambio

Backyard poultry systems (BPS) are the most widespread form of animal production worldwide, contributing to household economies and improving food availability. However, limited biosecurity measures and close human–animal interactions raise concerns regarding zoonotic disease transmission. In recent years, consumer-driven motivations have given rise to non-traditional BPS with differential attributes (BPS-DA), yet there is limited knowledge about their food production practices. This study aimed to characterize and compare practices across 25 BPS and 25 BPS-DA in the Metropolitan Region using surveys, interviews, and direct observations of egg collections and poultry slaughters. Eggs were the main animal product in both systems, with women primarily responsible for care. Poultry slaughter was reported exclusively in BPS (60%), generally performed under inadequate hygienic conditions and without veterinary oversight. These practices, (poultry slaughter, food production and handling), may considerably increase the risk of human exposure to zoonotic pathogens, such as avian influenza viruses. In contrast, BPS-DA prioritized birds as companion animals (60%), free-range rearing (68%), and hobby-based production (80%). While both systems showed limited biosecurity, significant differences were found in the use of dedicated footwear (p = 0.01; V = 0.35), egg collection sites (p = 0.04; V = 0.29), and refrigeration (p = 0.004; V = 0.41). Veterinary access was limited in both (32% in BPS; 44% in BPS-DA). These findings highlight critical gaps in health management and underscore the need for context-specific educational and regulatory strategies for safer backyard poultry production.

Backyard poultry systems (BPS) are the most widespread form of animal production worldwide, contributing to household economies and improving food availability. However, limited biosecurity measures and close human–animal interactions raise concerns regarding zoonotic disease transmission. In recent years, consumer-driven motivations have given rise to non-traditional BPS with differential attributes (BPS-DA), yet there is limited knowledge about their food production practices. This study aimed to characterize and compare practices across 25 BPS and 25 BPS-DA in the Metropolitan Region using surveys, interviews, and direct observations of egg collections and poultry slaughters. Eggs were the main animal product in both systems, with women primarily responsible for care. Poultry slaughter was reported exclusively in BPS (60%), generally performed under inadequate hygienic conditions and without veterinary oversight. These practices, (poultry slaughter and by-food production), may considerably increase the risk of human exposure to zoonotic pathogens, such as avian influenza viruses. In contrast, BPS-DA prioritized birds as companion animals (60%), free-range rearing (68%), and hobby-based production (80%). While both systems showed limited biosecurity, significant differences were found in the use of dedicated footwear (p = 0.01), egg collection sites (p = 0.04), and refrigeration (p = 0.004). Veterinary access was limited in both. These findings highlight critical gaps in health management and underscore the need for context-specific educational and regulatory strategies for safer backyard poultry production.

Backyard production systems (BPS) are highly distributed in central Chile. While poultry BPS have been extensively characterized, there remains a notable gap in the characterization of swine BPS in central Chile. In addition, there is evidence that zoonotic pathogens, such as influenza A virus and Salmonella spp., are circulating in backyard poultry and pigs. A total of 358 BPS located in central Chile were evaluated between 2013 and 2015 by interviewing farm owners. Severe deficiencies in biosecurity measures were observed. The value chain of swine backyard production identified food, veterinary care (visits and products), and replacement or breeding animals as the primary inputs to the backyard. The most common origin of swine replacements was from outside the BPS (63%). The main outputs of the system were identified as meat and live animals, including piglets and breeding animals. In 16% of BPS, breeding animals were lent to other BPS, indicating the existence of animals and animal product movement in and out of backyard farms. Results from this study indicate that swine BPS in central Chile represents an animal–human interface that demands special attention for implementing targeted preventive measures to prevent the introduction and spread of animal pathogens and the emergence of zoonotic pathogens.

Backyard production systems (BPS) are highly distributed in central Chile. Poultry BPS have been previously characterized; however, swine BPS have not yet been deeply characterized in central Chile. In addition, there is evidence that zoonotic pathogens, such as influenza A virus and Salmonella spp., are circulating in both poultry and pigs kept these production systems. A total of 358 BPS located in central Chile were evaluated between 2013 and 2015 by interviewing farm owners. Severe deficiencies in biosecurity measures were observed. The value chain of swine backyard production identified feeding, products and veterinary visits, and replacement or breeding animals as the main inputs to the backyard. The most common origin of swine replacements was from outside the BPS (63%). Meat and live animals (piglets and breeding animals) were identified as the main outputs of the system. In 16% of BPS, breeding animals were lent to other BPS, indicating the existence of animal and animal products movement in and out of backyard farms. Results from this study suggest that swine BPS in central Chile represent an animal-human interphase that need special attention to direct preventive measures aimed at avoiding the introduction and dissemination of animal pathogens and the emergence of zoonotic pathogens.