A cross-sectional assessment of brucellosis awareness and risk practices among sheep farmers in Telangana, India

Introduction

Sheep farming plays an important role in the livelihood and socio-economic development of rural communities in India, particularly among small and marginal farmers. The sector contributes significantly to household income, employment generation, and nutritional security. However, the productivity of sheep farming is often constrained by infectious diseases that adversely affect animal health, reproductive performance, and farm profitability. Among these diseases, brucellosis remains one of the most important bacterial zoonoses affecting both livestock and humans. Brucellosis is a contagious bacterial disease caused by members of the genus Brucella. In sheep and goats, Brucella melitensis is the principal causative agent and is responsible for considerable reproductive losses. The disease is characterized by abortion during late pregnancy, stillbirths, retention of placenta, birth of weak offspring, infertility, reduced fertility, and orchitis or epididymitis in males. These reproductive disorders result in substantial economic losses due to decreased flock productivity, reduced animal value, and increased veterinary expenditure. Brucellosis is also a major public health concern because of its zoonotic nature. Humans acquire infection primarily through direct contact with infected animals, aborted fetuses, placental materials, and contaminated secretions, or through the consumption of raw milk and unpasteurized dairy products (WHO/FAO/WOAH, 2006). Livestock farmers, shepherds, veterinarians, animal handlers, and abattoir workers are considered high-risk groups due to their www.extensionjournal.com frequent exposure to potentially infected animals and animal products. Human brucellosis is often characterized by fever, weakness, sweating, joint pain, and chronic debilitating illness, leading to significant health and economic consequences (Deka et al. 2020) [6] . Despite its importance, brucellosis continues to persist in many developing countries, including India, where livestock production systems are predominantly smallholder-based and biosecurity measures are often inadequate. A recent systematic review reported that brucellosis has been documented in ruminants across almost all states of India, highlighting its widespread occurrence and continued epidemiological significance. The persistence of the disease has been associated with several risk factors, including poor biosecurity practices, improper disposal of aborted materials, unrestricted animal movement, communal grazing, inadequate disease surveillance, and limited awareness among livestock owners (Lalrinzuala et al. 2023 & Dadar and Godfroid 2021) [10,5] . Farmer awareness and adoption of appropriate preventive measures are critical components of brucellosis control programs (Hegazy et al. 2016) [9] . Knowledge regarding disease transmission, zoonotic risks, vaccination, and safe animal-handling practices can significantly influence the effectiveness of disease prevention strategies. However, studies conducted in different parts of India and other countries have consistently reported low levels of awareness and inadequate preventive practices among livestock farmers. Poor understanding of disease transmission and risky husbandry practices often contribute to the maintenance and spread of infection within livestock populations and increase the risk of zoonotic transmission (Hegazy et al. 2016) [9] . Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) studies provide valuable information on farmers' perceptions, awareness levels, and management behaviors related to disease prevention and control. Such information is essential for designing effective veterinary extension programs, targeted awareness campaigns, and evidence-based disease control strategies. Although several studies have assessed brucellosis awareness among dairy farmers, information regarding sheep farmers in Telangana remains limited (Zhang et al. 2019) [13] . Therefore, the present study was undertaken to assess farm management practices, identify reproductive and health disorders suggestive of brucellosis in sheep farms established under government-supported livestock development schemes, and evaluate the knowledge, awareness, and management practices of sheep farmers regarding brucellosis in Telangana State, India. The findings are expected to provide baseline information for strengthening veterinary extension services, improving farmer awareness, and supporting effective brucellosis prevention and control programs.

Materials and Methods

Questionnaire

A structured questionnaire was developed to obtain preliminary information for the identification of sheep farms and selection of suspected animals for brucellosis screening. The survey involved direct interviews with sheep farm owners and workers to assess their knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding the prevention and control of brucellosis. The questionnaire was designed using simple, clear, and unambiguous language to ensure accurate understanding by respondents. All questions were aligned with the study objectives and formulated to avoid leading or biased responses. The questionnaire was arranged in a logical sequence, progressing from general farm information to specific questions related to animal health and disease awareness. The questionnaire comprised two sections. The first section collected farm-level and animal-level information, including herd management practices, history of abortion, stillbirth, retained placenta, arthritis, epididymitis, testicular swelling, vaccination status, and other clinical signs suggestive of brucellosis. Information regarding sheep farms established under government-supported livestock development schemes was also recorded. The second section focused on assessing farmers' knowledge, attitudes, awareness, and management practices related to brucellosis, including disease transmission, zoonotic significance, preventive measures, biosecurity practices, and vaccination. Prior to field implementation, the questionnaire was pre-tested on a small group of respondents to identify and correct any ambiguities and ensure its suitability for large-scale administration.

Results

Information on sheep farms established under governmentsubsidized livestock development schemes was obtained from the Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Department, Telangana. A total of 13 sheep farms distributed across different districts of the state were identified for the study (Table 1). These farms had procured sheep through government-supported schemes aimed at promoting smallruminant production. Baseline data were collected from each farm regarding housing conditions, flooring type, rearing system, and the occurrence of reproductive and clinical signs suggestive of brucellosis as reported by farm owners or workers. Data collection was carried out with the support of officials from the Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Department. The information obtained served as the basis for identifying farms with suspected brucellosis and selecting animals for subsequent serological investigation. Various types of information were gathered from the farms, including farm management practices, the health status of the sheep, and farmers' knowledge and understanding of brucellosis. The details collected were systematically represented and analyzed to gain insights into the occurrence and management of the disease, as follows.

Type of Floor

Information regarding flooring systems was collected from 13 sheep farms included in the study (Table 2). Among these, 10 farms (76.92%) had earthen/concrete floors, whereas only 3 farms (23.08%) maintained elevated flooring systems. The predominance of earthen/concrete flooring indicates that traditional housing systems are widely practised in the study area. The distribution of flooring types is presented in Figure 1.

Rearing System

The management systems followed by the surveyed farms are presented in Table 3. Of the 13 farms investigated, 10 (76.92%) practised a semi-intensive rearing system, while 3 (23.08%) adopted an intensive system. Semi-intensive sheep rearing was therefore the predominant production system among the surveyed farms. The distribution of rearing systems is illustrated in Figure 2.

Selection of Sheep Using Questionnaire Information

Based on questionnaire responses and farm-level observations, sheep exhibiting reproductive and clinical disorders suggestive of brucellosis were identified across the surveyed farms. Although suspected cases were observed in both intensive and semi-intensive systems, a higher occurrence of clinical signs was recorded in sheep maintained under semi-intensive management. Consequently, 10 of the 13 farms were selected for detailed investigation. A total of 245 sheep showing reproductive and health disorders compatible with brucellosis were randomly selected from the identified farms for serological screening. The frequency of recorded clinical manifestations is presented in Table 4 and Figure 3. Abortion was the most frequently observed condition, accounting for 28% (69/245) of cases, followed by retention of placenta (19%; 47/245), stillbirths (16%; 39/245), mastitis (12%; 29/245), arthritis (10%; 25/245), repeat breeding (8%; 20/245), orchitis (4%; 10/245), and infertility (3%; 7/245).

Socio-demographic Characteristics

The socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 5. The age of respondents ranged from 23 to 65 years. The majority belonged to the 23-35year age group (58%; n=29), followed by 36-45 years (22%; n=11), 46-55 years (16%; n=8), and 55-65 years www.extensionjournal.com (4%; n=2) (Figure 4). Most respondents were male (82%; n=41), whereas females accounted for 18% (n=9) (Figure 5). Regarding educational status, more than half of the respondents (56%; n=28) were illiterate, while 18% (n=9) had primary-level education and 30% (n=15) had secondary-level education or above (Figure 6). Among the surveyed participants, 66% (n=33) owned livestock, while 34% (n=17) did not.

Adoption of Biosecurity and Protective Measures

The use of personal protective measures during animal handling was generally poor among respondents (Table 5).

A large majority of farmers (94%; n=47) reported not using any protective equipment while handling animals or animal products. Only 6% (n=3) reported using protective clothing and gloves, and none of the respondents reported employing professional disinfection practices (Figure 7).

Awareness of Brucellosis

The survey revealed a low level of awareness regarding brucellosis among sheep farmers. Of the 50 respondents, 36 (72%) had never heard of brucellosis, whereas only 14 (28%) were aware of the disease (Table 5; Figure 8). The overall awareness score was low (Mean ± SD: 0.28 ± 0.45).

Knowledge of Human Brucellosis

Knowledge regarding the clinical manifestations of brucellosis in humans was limited. The majority of respondents (72%; n=36) were unable to identify any symptoms associated with the disease. Fever was recognized by 10% (n=5) of respondents, painful scrotum in men by 14% (n=7), and miscarriage in women by 4% (n=2). None of the respondents identified chills or night sweats as symptoms of human brucellosis (Figure 9).

Knowledge of Disease Occurrence and Treatment

All respondents (100%; n=50) reported that they had never encountered a confirmed case of brucellosis in their community. Consequently, none reported any experience regarding treatment of the disease through traditional healers or formal medical services (Figure 10).

Knowledge of Brucellosis Transmission

Knowledge of disease transmission was found to be inadequate. Most respondents (90%; n=45) did not know how brucellosis is transmitted. Only 4% (n=2) identified consumption of raw milk or unpasteurized dairy products as a transmission route, while 6% (n=3) recognized contact with aborted fetuses and fetal membranes as a potential source of infection. None of the respondents identified consumption of infected meat or direct contact with infected individuals as possible transmission pathways (Figure 11). www.extensionjournal.com

Disposal of Aborted Materials

The disposal practices adopted by farmers for aborted fetuses and associated materials varied considerably.

Throwing aborted materials into open streets was the most commonly reported practice (38%; n=19), followed by burial (26%; n=13), burning (16%; n=8), and disposal into water canals (10%; n=5). Only 6% (n=3) consulted veterinarians regarding appropriate disposal procedures, while 4% (n=2) reported no involvement in disposal activities (Figure 4.12). (2024) [17] , who reported that pastoral livestock enclosures in northeastern Ethiopia predominantly had earthen floors with inadequate drainage and infrequent cleaning, leading to unhygienic conditions that may facilitate the persistence and spread of brucellosis. Similarly, Leahy et al. (2020) [11] observed a notable association between earthen-floored housing systems and brucellosis seropositivity among small ruminants in eastern India. However, the present observations differ from those reported by Deka et al. (2021) [7] , who found a higher seroprevalence of brucellosis among dairy animals maintained on concrete floors compared to those housed on earthen floors in Bihar and Assam. This variation may be attributed to differences in animal species, production systems, farm management practices, hygiene standards, stocking density, waste disposal methods, and prevailing climatic conditions. Furthermore, the condition and maintenance of the flooring system, rather than the flooring material alone, may play a crucial role in influencing the risk of brucellosis transmission within livestock farms. The present study revealed that semi-intensive rearing systems were predominant, accounting for 76.92% of the sheep farms surveyed, whereas only 23.08% followed intensive management practices. Sheep maintained under semi-intensive systems exhibited a higher frequency of reproductive and clinical signs suggestive of brucellosis compared to those reared under intensive systems. Semiintensive production systems typically involve regular www.extensionjournal.com grazing, movement of animals across communal pastures, and frequent contact with neighboring flocks and other livestock species. These practices increase opportunities for direct and indirect transmission of infectious diseases, including brucellosis, through exposure to contaminated environments, aborted materials, and infected animals. The present findings are consistent with those reported by Leahy et al. (2020) [11] , who identified the mixing of small ruminants with other livestock species as a potential risk factor for the transmission of brucellosis. Likewise, Sibhat et al. (2024) [17] documented several high-risk husbandry and livestock management practices among pastoral communities in northeastern Ethiopia, which were associated with increased transmission of Brucella spp. among animals and between animals and humans. These observations highlight the importance of adopting improved biosecurity measures, controlled grazing practices, and proper flock management to reduce the risk of disease spread.

Among the 245 sheep selected from farms suspected of brucellosis, abortion was the most frequently observed reproductive disorder, accounting for 28% of cases, followed by retention of placenta (19%), stillbirths (16%), mastitis (12%), arthritis (10%), repeat breeding (8%), orchitis (4%), and infertility (3%). The predominance of abortion among the affected animals is particularly significant, as abortion is widely recognized as the hallmark clinical manifestation of ovine brucellosis and is responsible for substantial economic losses due to reduced reproductive efficiency and lamb mortality. These findings are in accordance with the established clinical presentation of brucellosis in small ruminants. Singh et al. (2023) [18] reported that although abortion is one of the most important indicators of brucellosis, awareness of its association with the disease was limited among livestock keepers. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) [19] found that the majority of sheep and goat farmers in China recognized abortion as the principal clinical sign of brucellosis in infected animals. Furthermore, the occurrence of orchitis, infertility, repeat breeding, and retained placenta in the present study supports the likelihood of Brucella infection, as these reproductive disorders are commonly associated with brucellosis in both male and female animals. The presence of mastitis and arthritis among the affected sheep further corroborates the systemic nature of the disease and its ability to impair both reproductive performance and overall animal health. [6] , who found that 91.9% of dairy farmers in Bihar and Assam were unaware of brucellosis. Similarly, Singh et al. (2023) [18] reported that 94.6% of cattle keepers in Uttar Pradesh had never heard of the disease. Ghugey et al. (2022) [8] also documented extremely low baseline awareness among rural communities, where only 4.7% of participants had prior knowledge of brucellosis before educational intervention. The poor awareness observed in the present study may be attributed to factors such as limited literacy, inadequate veterinary extension services, insufficient public health education, and restricted access to information on zoonotic diseases in rural farming communities. The educational profile of the respondents further supports these observations. More than half of the farmers (56%) were illiterate, while only 30% had attained higher levels of education. Educational status is widely recognized as an important determinant of disease awareness, health-seeking behaviour, and adoption of preventive measures. Abbasi-Ghahramanloo et al. (2024) [1] reported that individuals with higher educational attainment possessed significantly better knowledge and more positive attitudes toward brucellosis prevention and control. Similar findings were reported by Xu et al. (2025) [19] and Reddy et al. (2024) [15] , who observed a strong association between educational level and awareness of zoonotic diseases. Therefore, the high proportion of illiterate respondents in the present study may have contributed substantially to the limited understanding of brucellosis, its transmission, clinical manifestations, and preventive strategies. Knowledge regarding the clinical symptoms of brucellosis in humans was also found to be inadequate. Nearly 72% of the respondents were unable to identify any symptoms associated with the disease. Among those who were aware, only a small proportion recognized signs such as fever, painful swelling of the scrotum in men, and miscarriage in women. These findings are comparable with those of Madzingira et al. (2023) [12] , who reported limited awareness of human brucellosis symptoms among communal livestock farmers. Likewise, Deka et al. (2020) [6] found that only a few farmers were aware that prolonged or recurrent fever could be a symptom of brucellosis in humans. In contrast, studies conducted in Saudi Arabia and China reported relatively higher levels of knowledge. Al-Homayani et al. (2023) [3] and Alhazmi et al. (2022) [2] observed that a majority of participants were aware of the zoonotic nature and clinical manifestations of brucellosis, while Xu et al. (2025) [19] reported satisfactory knowledge regarding symptoms such as undulant fever and reproductive disorders. These differences may be due to variations in literacy rates, public health education programs, disease control initiatives, and accessibility of veterinary and healthcare services across different regions. The present study also revealed poor understanding of the modes of transmission of brucellosis. Approximately 90% of the respondents were unaware of the disease transmission pathways, while only a small number identified consumption of raw milk and contact with aborted fetuses or reproductive discharges as potential risk factors. Similar findings were reported by Banu et al. (2023) [4] , who observed that many livestock owners were unable to identify the routes through which brucellosis is transmitted from animals to humans. Singh et al. (2023) [18] likewise reported that nearly 91% of respondents lacked knowledge regarding disease transmission pathways. Furthermore, Deka et al. (2020) [6] highlighted the extremely limited awareness of zoonotic transmission among dairy farmers in India. In contrast, studies involving more educated or www.extensionjournal.com previously sensitized populations reported better knowledge of transmission routes. Njenga et al. (2020) [14] found that mixed livestock farmers in Kenya were relatively well informed about transmission through consumption of raw dairy products and undercooked animal products. Similarly, Xu et al. (2025) [19] reported that most participants correctly identified contact with aborted materials, raw milk, and raw meat as important risk factors for brucellosis transmission. [11] , who found that placental and fetal materials were frequently discarded in open fields or drainage systems. Likewise, Al-Homayani et al. (2023) [3] documented the disposal of aborted fetuses in open areas, while Ghugey et al. (2021) [8] reported open dumping of fetal waste among migratory livestock handlers in Maharashtra. Such practices facilitate the persistence and dissemination of Brucella spp. within livestock populations and increase the risk of zoonotic transmission. The present study also demonstrated poor adoption of personal protective measures during animal handling and management of reproductive disorders. Nearly 94% of the respondents reported that they did not use gloves, masks, or any other protective equipment while assisting parturition, handling aborted materials, or managing sick animals. These findings are consistent with those of Ghugey et al. (2021) [8] , who observed that none of the migratory livestock handlers used protective clothing during routine animal management activities. Similarly, Al-Homayani et al.

(2023) [3] and Alhazmi et al. (2022) [2] reported low levels of personal protective equipment usage among livestock owners and animal handlers. The absence of appropriate protective measures substantially increases occupational exposure to Brucella organisms, particularly among farmers, shepherds, veterinarians, and individuals involved in animal husbandry practices. Despite the generally poor awareness regarding brucellosis, a majority of respondents (62%) reported seeking veterinary assistance following the occurrence of abortion in their animals. This finding suggests that farmers recognize abortion as an important reproductive health problem requiring professional intervention, even though they may not be aware of its potential association with brucellosis. However, several high-risk practices were also identified. Approximately 24% of farmers reported selling aborted animals in livestock markets, while 4% sold such animals directly to butchers. Similar observations were made by Reddy et al. (2024) [15] , who reported that farmers with limited knowledge of zoonotic diseases often sold diseased animals without proper diagnosis or treatment. Singh et al.

(2023) [18] also noted that the sale of infected or sick animals contributed to the continued spread of brucellosis within livestock populations. These practices may facilitate disease transmission through the movement of infected animals and pose challenges to effective disease control. The demographic profile of the respondents was largely comparable with findings from previous studies. The majority of participants were male (82%) and belonged to young and middle-aged groups actively engaged in livestock farming. Similar demographic patterns have been reported by Banu et al. (2023) [4] , Xu et al. (2025) [19] , Ghugey et al.

(2022) [8] , and Reddy et al. (2024) [15] , where livestock husbandry activities were predominantly managed by men.

References

1. Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Ebrahimoghli R, Ebrahimnejad M, Gholizadeh N, Moradi-Asl E. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding brucellosis in a rural population: a cross-sectional study. Heliyon. 2024;10(6):e28041.
2. Alhazmi AH, Ammar AM, Arishi FH, Ali AA, Majrabi AH, Bahkali BI, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding brucellosis among general population: a cross-sectional study from Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research. 2022;9(4):761.
3. Al-Homayani FK, Altalhi FM, Almalki ZA, MA, Alfaifi HH, Alsaadi GK. Public knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding brucellosis in Taif City, Saudi Arabia. Cureus. 2023;15(6):e40014.
4. Banu MG, Lemecha AB, Wogayehu Y. Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to brucellosis among community in selected districts of West Shewa Zone, Oromia, Ethiopia. Annals of Epidemiology and Public Health. 2023;6(2):11-19.
5. Dadar M, Godfroid J. Main risk factors associated with small and large ruminant brucellosis. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2021;91(11):885-890.
6. Deka RP, Magnusson U, Grace D, Shome R, Lindahl JF. Knowledge and practices of dairy farmers relating to brucellosis in urban, peri-urban and rural areas of Assam and Bihar, India. Infection Ecology and Epidemiology. 2020;10(1):1769531.
7. Deka RP, Shome R, Dohoo I, Magnusson U, Grace D, Lindahl JF. Seroprevalence and risk factors of Brucella infection in dairy animals in urban and rural areas of Bihar and Assam, India. Microorganisms. 2021;9(4):783.
8. Ghugey SL, Setia MS, Deshmukh JS. The effects of health education intervention on promoting knowledge, beliefs and preventive behaviors on brucellosis among rural population in Nagpur district of Maharashtra State, India. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2022;11(8):4635-4643.
9. Hegazy Y, Elmonir W, Abdel-Hamid NH, et al. Seroprevalence and knowledge, attitudes and practices survey of endemic ovine brucellosis in Egypt. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 2015;58:1.
10. Lalrinzuala MV, Rotluanga V, Tamta S, Singh DK, Lalsangzuala C, Khawaskar D, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis on brucellosis seroprevalence in ruminants (1970-2020) of India. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2023;93(7):663-669.
11. Leahy E, Shome R, Deka RP, Sahay S, Grace D, Mazeri S, et al. Risk factors for Brucella spp. and Coxiella burnetii infection among small ruminants in Eastern India. Infection Ecology and Epidemiology. 2020;10(1):178309.
12. Madzingira O, Byaruhanga C, Fasina FO, Van Heerden H. Assessment of knowledge, attitudes and practices relating to brucellosis among cattle farmers, meat handlers and medical professionals in Namibia. Veterinary Medicine and Science. 2023;9(1):535-547.
13. Zhang N, Zhou H, Huang DS, Guan P. Brucellosis awareness and knowledge in communities worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2019;13(5):e00073679.
14. Njenga MK, Ogolla E, Thumbi SM, Ngere I, Omulo S, Muturi M, et al. Comparison of knowledge, attitude, and practices of animal and human brucellosis between nomadic pastoralists and non-pastoralists in Kenya. 2020.
15. Reddy KA, Baliga S, Bogolu R. Knowledge and practices among livestock owners regarding brucellosis: a cross-sectional study. National Journal of Community Medicine. 2024;15(10):812-822.
16. Rossetti CA, Maurizio E, Rossi UA. Comparative review of brucellosis in small domestic ruminants. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2022;9:887671.
17. Sibhat B, Adamu H, Benti T, Tuli G, Asmare K, Lindahl JF, et al. Brucella seropositivity and associated risk factors in pastoral livestock system in Northeastern Ethiopia. Veterinary Sciences. 2024;11(12):620.
18. Singh R, Marwari D, Singh A. A study of knowledge, attitude and practices associated with brucellosis among cattle keepers of Jalaun district, Uttar Pradesh, India. Biological Forum -An International Journal. 2023;15(4):434-439.
19. Xu Q, Amonsin A, Jeamsripong S. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of animal health staff and farmers towards brucellosis control in sheep and goat in China: a cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE. 2025;20(1):e0318270.