Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been described as a silent pandemic - one that is ever-present, ubiquitous and growing but often insidious and overlooked. A true One Health issue, AMR affects people, animals, plants, crops and the environment in complex and interconnected but poorly understood ways, and the impact will continue to increase. In animals, AMR affects animal health, welfare and production and is also considered a food safety, food security and substantial economic issue. This article describes recent advances in addressing AMR in bacteria from animals, focusing on surveillance, applied stewardship, new drug development and alternatives to antimicrobials, strengthening animal health systems, changes in global awareness, and obstacles to effective surveillance and stewardship.

Over the past few decades, the scope of animal welfare has expanded within the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). This article takes as its starting point the first issue of the Scientific and Technical Review dedicated to the subject in 1994, and compares it to the second of 2005, and to the situation today, almost 20 years later. Changes are grouped into three main areas. The first is the consolidation of animal welfare work within WOAH and the acceptance of it as a subject in its own right, linked to - but nevertheless separate from - animal health. The second is the broadening of the subject's scope from being mainly concerned with farm animal welfare to encompassing all categories of animals, domesticated and wild. The third is the increased contextualisation of animal welfare to account for different regional attitudes and needs around the globe. Changes in the scope of the subject of animal welfare within WOAH reflect the increase in research in the area and demonstrate that animal welfare is becoming integrated into other complex areas, such as sustainable development. The final part of this article looks forward, speculating on roles that WOAH might play in the future in the area of animal welfare.

H5Nx A/Goose/Guangdong/1/96 Eurasian lineage high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) viruses have been the main HPAI strains detected globally since 2005. These have spread around the world, causing a panzootic that has spanned six continents, with continual threat to not only wild and captive birds and poultry, but also wild, captive and domestic mammals and humans. The viruses' ecology and epidemiology - especially the 2.3.4.4b clade - have changed, with over 489 species of birds infected and spreading the virus over migratory routes. This results in the death of many birds, including endangered species, and serves as a source of transmission to poultry and mammals. Improved surveillance and sharing of HPAI virus sequences, metadata and viruses across the veterinary, public health, wildlife and environment sectors are needed to elucidate the population dynamics of the infections, which is crucial to addressing this complex One Health issue. The development of appropriate mitigation strategies or changes in husbandry, production and selling practices can reduce the risk of viruses being introduced into farms, as well as their amplification and viral evolution, and any spill-back to wild birds. Approaches to prevention and control of HPAI in countries where these 2.3.4.4b viruses remain entrenched in poultry, or places at risk of virus introduction via wild bird populations, involve measures to reduce the effects of the disease in poultry (including enhanced farm bio-security, vaccination, zoning and compartmentalisation). Their uptake reflects the difficulties encountered in relying solely on biosecurity for disease prevention and on stamping out alone for virus control and elimination. The World Organisation for Animal Health's Terrestrial Animal Health Code allows use of vaccination of poultry under specific conditions and without negatively impacting HPAI-free status if appropriate surveillance is conducted, thus supporting safe trade in poultry and poultry products. Nevertheless, concerns regarding loss of valuable export markets still interfere with greater utilisation of vaccination.

In the past 100 years, thanks to the discovery and development of antimicrobial therapies, human and veterinary medicine have made a leap forward in treating infectious diseases. However, resistance mechanisms quickly appeared and spread in all sectors - human, animal and environmental - throughout the world, thus jeopardising the progress made. Awareness has been raised only gradually but is now prominent at the global level, due in large part to the action of international organisations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), and antimicrobials are considered a global public health good to be preserved. Under the leadership of WOAH in particular, the actions undertaken in research, surveillance, information, training, awareness and communication are moving in the right direction towards responsible and prudent use of antimicrobials. In the next 100 years, the fight against antimicrobial resistance will undeniably remain a crucial challenge for public health, veterinary public health and agriculture. Concerted efforts and scientific innovations, such as in functional genomics and artificial intelligence, could offer solutions to mitigate the impact of this growing threat. A multidisciplinary and comprehensive One Health approach is necessary to successfully address antimicrobial resistance. International collaboration remains crucial, and international organisations such as WOAH, WHO, FAO and the United Nations Environment Programme must continue their essential role in coordinating these efforts.

The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) seeks to improve animal health by promoting safe trade in animals and their products, setting standards for diagnostic methods, detection of emerging diseases and confirmation of listed diseases in clinically affected animals and surveillance in healthy populations. WOAH launched the Aquatic Animal Health Strategy (AAHS) in 2021 in recognition of the growing importance of aquatic animal products in global food security. Disease is currently a major limiting factor in the sustainable growth and development of the aquaculture industry, impacting the industry's ability to increase yields to meet future food demands. A key aim of the AAHS is to ensure that scientifically sound standards are set to manage risks and facilitate safe trade, improve aquatic animal health and welfare, build capacity to strengthen aquatic animal health services provided by WOAH and ensure that responses to aquatic animal health issues are coordinated and timely, at both regional and global level. This article evaluates some of the latest scientific and policy advances, as well as obstacles for the implementation of the AAHS.

African swine fever (ASF) has become a major focus of research after spreading to four continents besides Africa. In its natural African ecosystem, the causative ASF virus (ASFV) is maintained by indigenous Suidae as natural reservoirs and hard tick vectors. However, in Sus scrofa domesticated breeds and wild boar, ASFV causes devastating disease, with mortalities reaching over 90%. This shift in geographical spread and hosts, and the resulting major impact on pig farming in some of the most productive pig producing regions, has resulted in drastically increased efforts to control and eventually prevent ASF. This article briefly reviews recent advances in understanding of ASFV molecular biology, epizootiology, pathogenesis and diagnosis to provide a state-of-the-art picture while also identifying challenges ahead.

Recent environmental change and biodiversity loss have modified ecosystems, altering disease dynamics. For wildlife health, this trend has translated into increased potential for disease transmission and reduced capacity to overcome significant population-level impacts, which may place species at risk of extinction. Thus, current approaches to wildlife health focus not on the absence of disease but rather on the concept of health promotion. That is, wildlife populations will be more resilient to disease if they have the basic requirements for survival, as well as functioning ecosystems, within an enabling socio-economic environment. In this context, animal health programmes must adapt to design and implement wildlife health programmes that bridge knowledge gaps and fully integrate conservation goals. This article proposes new pathways and additions to the animal health management toolbox, including new approaches to surveillance and information management, partnerships and new wildlife health management practices. Solely because of risks to domesticated animals and human health, the traditional approach to disease surveillance in wild animals has now been replaced by a drive to recognise the intrinsic value of wildlife and the extended benefits of actively pursuing ecosystem health and associated life-sustaining ecosystem services. In this context, it is paramount to transition to holistic health programmes that embrace One Health as a pathway to set the health of all on equal footing.

Rinderpest virus and peste des petits ruminants (PPR) virus are highly pathogenic viruses causing disease primarily in cattle and small ruminants, respectively. Although the post-eradication process for rinderpest has been largely successful, gaps in preparedness for a future rinderpest reappearance remain, and the virus is still held in some facilities that have not been registered or inspected, posing a threat to the global community. The PPR Global Eradication Programme will need to overcome significant hurdles to reach a world free of the disease by 2030. Achieving this goal will be easier if plans are based on the best research and tools available, with proper involvement of communities. Focusing research and development efforts on the important remaining gaps should increase the efficiency of control and surveillance strategies, provided research outputs are effectively transferred to decision-makers. Researchers, stakeholders and implementing bodies should build on the experience of rinderpest to prepare for a post-PPR world. The animal health community should also be vigilant regarding other viruses, including those yet unknown, that could emerge as the niches of the rinderpest and PPR viruses become vacant.

African swine fever (ASF) is currently the largest threat to world pork production. The complexity of the virus, its persistence in the environment, the particular immune response it elicits without significant neutralising antibodies, its capacity for transmission by several routes and the presentation of different clinical forms, from acute with high mortality to attenuated to chronic, all pose significant challenges. This article provides an overview of the epidemiological situation of ASF across five continents, the role of wild boar in virus transmission, the development of new immunological tools that aim to enhance protection against this complicated virus in wild boar, and the protection studies that are under way.

Rinderpest and peste des petits ruminants (PPR) are two closely related viral diseases caused by viruses belonging to the genus Morbillivirus and affecting ruminants. Both diseases are notifiable to the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) due to their high contagiosity and economic importance. International collaboration and scientific developments have led to the eradication of rinderpest, which was celebrated in 2011, 250 years after the first veterinary school was created in Lyon. In contrast, the geographical distribution of PPR has expanded to cover many regions of Africa, the Middle East and Asia. PPR now constitutes a major concern for small ruminants globally. Following the lessons learnt from the Global Rinderpest Eradication Programme, efforts have been initiated to control and eradicate PPR. The PPR Global Control and Eradication Strategy, established in 2015 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and WOAH, aims to eradicate PPR by 2030. The key factors in favour of PPR eradication are the virus's limited number of natural hosts, the absence of a vector, the availability of an effective vaccine and the availability of diagnostic tools. However, challenges remain, including resource mobilisation, developing a better understanding of the epidemiology, improving vaccines for differentiation between vaccinated and infected animals, and adapting diagnostic tests for atypical hosts. Eradicating PPR will not only represent a scientific milestone but also aligns with the broader sustainable development goals of poverty alleviation, zero hunger, food security and improved nutrition as well as promoting sustainable agriculture, health and well-being, and economic stability in regions heavily dependent on small ruminants.

Foot and mouth disease (FMD) is a highly contagious viral disease of cloven-hoofed animals. Together with other diseases highlighted in this special edition of the Scientific and Technical Review, the circulation of FMD virus in different parts of the world has shaped the work of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) over the past hundred years. In 2012, the Global Framework for the Progressive Control of Transboundary Animal Diseases, led by WOAH and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, established a joint FMD working group and a strategy for the control of FMD. Control of FMD requires political commitment to deliver the sustained investment and deploy the resources required to break the cycle of infection. This article highlights recent improvements in diagnostic and genomic tools, as well as new vaccine platform technologies that, if strategically deployed, have the potential to improve the control of this disease. The article also reflects on global and regional initiatives using the Progressive Control Pathway for FMD, which remains relevant and has wider positive benefits for the control of other transboundary animal diseases.

John Brooksby was an outstanding Scottish veterinary virologist who worked at the Pirbright Institute (Pirbright) for 40 years, including 16 as the institute's director. He devised quantitative methods for measuring neutralising antibodies and perfected a complement fixation test for the diagnosis, typing and strain differentiation of foot and mouth disease (FMD), especially when combined with neutralisation. He identified four of the seven types of FMD virus (FMDV) and many subtypes. Consequently, the institute was designated the World Reference Laboratory for FMD. As director, Brooksby also oversaw advances in the pathogenesis, epidemiology and aerobiology of FMD and other diseases. His advice on the prevention and control of FMD was widely sought by international organisations and individual countries. Fred Brown was an eminent English biochemist and molecular virologist. He joined the Biochemistry Department at Pirbright in 1955, became head of the department in 1964, and in 1980 became deputy director of the institute. Advances under his leadership included the use of aziridines as inactivating agents for vaccine production, purification of FMDV suitable for biochemical analyses, demonstration of the infectivity of isolated RNA, analysis of the genomic and antigenic structure of FMDV, solving of the atomic structure of FMDV and demonstration of the potential for synthetic peptide vaccines to protect animals against virus challenge.

In recent years, the importance of working holistically on the global One Health and One Welfare agendas has become evident. The success of these policies in addressing shared challenges depends on a science-based global strategy for animal welfare that allows local efforts to resolve conflicts related to how human beings take advantage of natural resources, including domestic and wild animals. These policies need to be developed jointly by the World Organisation for Animal Health, the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and in line with the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. They should be based on scientific evidence, gathered from existing information and through transdisciplinary research, to quantify synergies and trade-offs between environmental, social, economic and animal welfare criteria. This approach will make it possible to articulate and implement local policies and solutions associating animal welfare with efficient and sustainable livestock production, biodiversity conservation and disease prevention, mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, economic and rural development, biomedical research based on ethical principles, and responsible animal ownership.

A world free of dog-mediated human rabies by 2030 would be an outstanding achievement. This ambitious goal for a neglected tropical disease, set by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Global Alliance for Rabies Control together with partners and countries, has a clear and achievable pathway to success. In the 100 years since the inception of WOAH, many scientific tools have been developed to support the elimination of dog-mediated rabies. In addition to these tools, engaging communities and health workers to build awareness to prevent bite exposures, managing dog populations and ensuring herd immunity through dog vaccination are key to achieving the elimination goals. The provision of post-exposure prophylaxis and care for exposed victims are important interventions on the human side. Success in eradicating rabies will require applying a One Health approach, an integrative and systemic approach to health grounded in the understanding that human health is closely linked to animal and environmental health. Political commitment and availability of adequate resources are key to achieving the Zero by 2030 goal.

The evolution of wildlife disease management and surveillance, as documented in the World Organisation for Animal Health's Scientific and Technical Review, reflects a deepening understanding of the links between wildlife health, ecosystem integrity and human well-being. Early work, beginning with the World Assembly of Delegates in 1954, primarily focused on diseases like rabies. This focus expanded over time to include broader concerns such as the impacts of climate change, habitat loss and increased human-wildlife interactions on wildlife health. By the late 20th century, the emphasis had shifted towards improved practices for wildlife disease control and the development of advanced diagnostic methods and vaccines. Articles in the Review highlight the growing complexity of wildlife diseases and the need for holistic management strategies. The adoption in recent years of cutting-edge technologies like CRISPR-Cas systems and metagenomics points to a future of more proactive and integrated approaches to wildlife disease management. There is still a need to address not just the consequences of wildlife diseases but also their anthropogenic drivers. The latest perspectives advocate for nature-based solutions, expanded partnerships and systems-level thinking to effectively tackle 21st-century challenges in wildlife and biodiversity conservation.

Since its creation in 1924, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) has led animal rabies control efforts and is responsible for several of the most impactful advances in rabies diagnostics, surveillance and animal vaccination of the 20th and 21st centuries. Primarily advancing rabies control through its formalised country partnerships, WOAH is responsible for the validation and recognition of official rabies tests and has developed the largest rabies vaccine bank in use in Africa and Asia. WOAH has also fostered technical collaborations and provided modern-day guidance through the creation of the WOAH Rabies Reference Laboratory Network, also known as RABLAB. While rabies is among the deadliest of all zoonotic pathogens, future efforts to control and eliminate the virus hinge on improvements in coordination among partners, financial commitments from international organisations and governments, and advances in diagnostic and vaccination methods. WOAH has a long-standing history of driving these changes and is positioned to lead many new advances in the coming years.

Aquaculture stands as the fastest-growing food fish sector, expected to satisfy global demand for aquatic products. However, its expansion has led to disease emergence, adversely affecting both production and biodiversity. In response, since the mid-1990s the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) has developed initiatives, notably the Aquatic Animal Health Code and the Manual of Diagnostic Tests for Aquatic Animals, aimed at harmonising health standards for international trade in aquatic animals. With advances in aquaculture came the global spread of pathogens, resulting in significant disease outbreaks and economic losses. Efforts to curb these events led to the establishment of emergency programmes and conferences emphasising surveillance, preparedness and response, and fostering increased collaboration among stakeholders. As aquatic animals grow in importance for global nutrition and food security, the emergence of new pathogens poses a threat. Understanding disease mechanisms and main drivers becomes pivotal for disease prevention. Collaboration across sectors, including government, industry, science and stakeholders, is vital for implementation of effective biosecurity measures to mitigate disease risks. The Aquatic Animal Health Strategy, introduced by WOAH in 2021, reflects the recognition of the growing significance of aquatic animal health and its relevance in food security and outlines a strategic approach to management of aquatic animal health worldwide. Emphasising standards, capacity building, resilience and leadership, this Strategy aims to address critical challenges in aquatic animal health and welfare. Looking forward, the One Health approach will become imperative in confronting global health risks. In this holistic approach to ensuring sustainable aquaculture, it is important to recognise the great value of the people working in aquaculture and their contribution to global food security.

Avian influenza is not a new disease, but the emergence of high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) viruses of the A/Goose/Guangdong/1/96 lineage (Gs/GD) has necessitated fundamental changes to prevention and control strategies for this disease. No longer just an avian disease, avian influenza is capable of causing severe disease in humans and is considered a potential human pandemic threat requiring One Health approaches. In addition, Gs/GD HPAI viruses have developed the capacity to be carried across and between continents by migratory birds. Given the persistence of the current A(H5N1) clade 2.3.4.4b viruses in wild birds, enhanced measures to prevent and control infection will be needed. In most countries, infection in poultry can be eliminated, although questions will remain about the sustainability of repeated stamping out. Systematic preventive vaccination should be seriously considered as a method for reducing the number of outbreaks. HPAI will not be eliminated from countries where Gs/GD viruses remain enzootic until major changes are made to the way that poultry are reared and sold, vaccination is improved and other factors that inhibit reporting and response are overcome. Currently, focus lies on Gs/GD HPAI, yet control of low pathogenicity avian influenza viruses also requires attention, including the development of vaccines that are appropriately matched to circulating strains of virus.

Estimates of livestock biomass can be used as denominators in disease burden estimates, in addition to informing assessments of resource use and environmental impacts. This article explores the challenges of accurately estimating biomass across different scales and data ecosystems, with a particular focus on the use of biomass in the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme. The greatest of these challenges is a lack of subgroup (breed, age, sex)-specific data on populations and liveweights at national and subnational level. This can be overcome by using global datasets and generic estimates of liveweight for each species, though this approach fails to account for the diversity of livestock systems.