Review of a decade of fauna research in Côte d'Ivoire with insights into wildlife health and zoonotic transmissions

Abstract

Côte d'Ivoire has a strong relationship with wildlife, demonstrating both a commitment to conservation and a persistent wild animal products value chain. Given the increasing global risk of pathogens spillover and zoonotic disease transmission and the role of wildlife in this process, the current review examines studies on wildlife conducted in Côte d'Ivoire and published between 2012 and 2022. Focusing on wildlife health and pathogens, it analyzes research trends, identifies gaps and highlights perspectives for improving wildlife-human interactions to prevent zoonotic risks. Findings indicate that wildlife research in Côte d'Ivoire has expanded in recent years but remains discipline-specific, primary focused on conservation, with notable geographical and species-related disparities. While a wide range of pathogens has been studied, significant gaps persist in understanding pathogen dynamics at human-wildlife interfaces and the potential risks of spillover. There is a critical need for more integrated research and comprehensive surveillance in wildlife, particularly targeting species that frequently interact with humans at the buffer zones and through wild meat consumption. Surveillance efforts, especially in high-risk regions will be essential to anticipate and prevent emerging health threats.

1. Introduction

Wildlife management faces challenges due to the growing number and impact of emerging and re-emerging zoonotic diseases [1]. Evidence shows that wild animals constitute reservoirs of infectious pathogens affecting humans and domestic animals. As humans encroach on wild habitats for food, agriculture, and other purposes, direct or indirect contact with wildlife increases, exacerbated by climate change. The interconnections between wildlife, domestic animal and human environments can trigger disease outbreaks and facilitate pathogen spillover from wild animals to humans, and vice versa [2].

Wildlife diseases also pose a threat for both animal biodiversity and food security of populations. Côte d'Ivoire demonstrates a strong commitment to wildlife conservation, with more than 255 protected areas covering over 22 % of its territory [3]. The legal framework also currently maintains a nationwide hunting ban, although a new regulation foresees the introduction of periodic hunting seasons [4]. Nevertheless, its fauna remains threatened by the risk of outbreaks, such as the Ebola virus, which emerged in 1994 and killed about 25 % of individuals in a chimpanzee community within the Taï forest [5].

Wild animals and their products play a crucial role in the diets and livelihoods of both rural and urban populations. For communities that rely on wildlife for food, wild animal meat remains an important source of dietary protein [6,7]. In Côte d'Ivoire, 59.2 % of the rural population consume wild animal meat while only 7.4 % rely on it as their primary protein source [8]. Nevertheless, the wild meat trade and consumption continue thriving despite the existing regulations, constituting a major source of income for many people involved in hunting, marketing and restaurant activities — primarily in urban areas and often led by women, particularly those single or and widowed [9]. The significant use of wild meat sustains frequent human contact with wildlife, underscoring the need to address the associated pathogen exposure risks.

Research plays an important role in identifying potential disease hotspots and assessing zoonotic disease risks, supporting efforts to balance public health priorities with social and ecological needs [10]. Building on this role, and given the multiple interfaces of human relationships with wildlife —including shared ecosystems, conservation efforts, and the food system— where zoonotic transmission is a concern, wildlife research is increasingly adopting an integrated approach [11,12].

This review aims to map key trends in wildlife research, identify gaps in zoonotic disease knowledge, and highlight questions to strengthen surveillance systems. Focusing on wildlife health, it emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary approaches and provides insights to guide future research and sustainable public health strategies in Côte d'Ivoire.

2. Materials and methods

The study was conducted as a scoping review, covering ten years of studies on wildlife conducted in Côte d'Ivoire, published from 2012 to 2022. This period corresponds with the Ivorian post-conflict era, the West African Ebola crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic documentary search identified 486 publications through the Google Scholar and PubMed electronic databases, by using the following combination of key words:

• -“Wildlife OR wild animal OR Fauna” AND “Côte d'Ivoire OR Ivory Coast”.
• -“Wildlife OR wild animal OR Fauna” AND “health OR disease” AND “Côte d'Ivoire OR Ivory Coast”.
• -“Wildlife OR wild animal OR bushmeat OR wild meat OR Fauna” AND “health OR disease” AND “Côte d'Ivoire OR Ivory Coast”.

A total of 486 publications were collected and subsequently subjected subjected to three screening steps. First, 50 duplicate publications were removed based on titles. Second, by examining the abstracts and methodologies, 228 irrelevant reports were excluded as they were either not conducted in Côte d'Ivoire or did not consider wild animals in part or in full. Third, five review articles were removed during the full-text screening because the papers they discussed were already considered. Thus, 203 publications were finally included in the review process (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Flowchart diagram showing the study inclusion process in the scoping review.

For the data analysis, the following information were extracted from the literature: year, study area, main research domain, topic addressed, pathogen or disease investigated, and diagnostic tests used.

3. Results

3.1. Trend and key areas of the wildlife papers

The overall trend in published papers shows a rise in wildlife investigations between 2012 and 2022 (Fig. 2). The geographic distribution of investigations indicates that research was conducted primarily in the south and center of the country, as well as on the west with a strong focus on Taï National Park (Fig. 3).

Fig. 2.

Annual publications on wildlife between 2012 and 2022.

The red line indicates the overall trend of wildlife studies. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 3.

Map of Côte d'Ivoire showing the distribution of wildlife studies by focus area: health and disease transmission; meat consumption and trade; biodiversity and conservation.

The 203 papers included in the study were categorized into three main topics based on their primary focus: (i) health and disease transmission, (ii) meat consumption and trade, and (iii) biodiversity and conservation. Conservation-related studies predominated, accounting for 69 % of all publications, followed by health-focused research (21.3 %). Studies addressing the wild animal meat value chain represented 3.9 % of the total. Furthermore, 5.8 % of publications covered two of the three topics, with the most common overlapping between conservation and the wild meat value chain (3.9 %) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Proportion of publications by main topics in the wildlife research.

3.2. Wildlife health

3.2.1. Wild animals in the meat value chain

To understand the wild animal meat value chain, its key drivers have been assessed. Hunting is primarily driven by economic factors, and marketing is shaped by both economic and cultural drivers while consumption is influenced by cultural habits [9]. In rural settings, consumption is significantly higher among poorer households with lower annual incomes and more dependent children [13].

An estimated 12,000 animals are harvested annually in three localities surrounding the Dassioko Reserve in south-eastern Côte d'Ivoire [14]. The harvested wild species are diverse and include antelopes, reptiles, rodents, pangolin, primates, birds or bats. Rodents remain the most species found in markets and restaurants, with grasscutter species (Thryonomys swinderianus) followed by the Cricetomys sp. [[13], [14], [15], [16]]. About 77.8 % of the traded species have a “Least Concern” conservation status. The remaining species are threatened with more than 20 %, including locally rare species such as pangolins (Manis tricuspis, Phataginus tricuspis, Smutsia gigantea); primates (Cercopithecus petaurista, Procolobus badius) and antelopes (Cephalophus dorsalis) [13,16]. Traditionally, identification of species available in markets relies on morphological characteristics. This approach is increasingly being complemented by genetic typing, which minimizes misidentification and allow accurate determination of animal species diversity in both fresh and smoked meats sold at markets and restaurants [17,18].

The nutritional role of wild animal meat is highlighted by deficiencies that may arise from consumption bans when alternative protein sources are limited, as well as by the risks to food security posed by its sudden [8,19]. Rodents and wild ruminants contribute to 13 % of the animal protein consumed in rural households [13]. Wild frog consumption has also been reported, particularly among people from the western regions, where frogs, are embedded in local food habits and culture [20,21]. Nutritional and microbiological assessments highlighted its valuable protein content and essential dietary minerals, particularly when dried [22,23].

3.2.2. Pathogens detected in wildlife

Table 1 summarizes the pathogens and indicators, diagnostic methods, animal species reported in wildlife health, disease transmission and surveillance investigations. Pathogens investigated included viruses (38.1 %), bacteria (47.6 %) and parasites (14.3 %).

Table 1.

Investigated pathogens or indicators, related disease, animal species, diagnostic methods, interface and reference.

Category	Pathogen/or indicator	Related disease	Animal species	Diagnostic method	Interface	Reference
Virus	Orthohepadnavirus	Hepatitis	Diukers (Philantomba maxwellii)	PCR, Sequencing	Wildlife	[36]
	Polyomaviruses	Cancer	Primates	PCR, Phylogeny, Serology and Immuno Assay	Wildlife–Human	[35]
	Coltiviruses	Colorado tick fever	Free-tailed bats (Chaereophon aloysiisabaudiae)	Sequencing and Phylogeny	Wildlife-Human	[37]
	Monkeypox virus	Monkeypox	Sooty mangabeys	PCR and Whole-genome sequencing	Wildlife	[30]
	Monkeypox virus	Monkeypox	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	Next-generation sequencing	Wildlife	[31]
	Monkeypox virus	Monkeypox	Rodents	PCR	Wildlife	[32]
	Arenavirus	Hemorrhagic fever	Rodents (Hylomyscus sp. Mus (Nannomys) setulosus)	PCR, Sequencing, Phylogeny	Wildlife	[33]
	Lassa virus	Lassa fever	Rodents, Eulipotyphlans	PCR, Sequencing, Phylogeny	Wildlife	[34]
	Newcastle virus	Newcastle disease	Wild birds and Pigeons	PCR and Sequencing	Wildlife-Wildlife	[64]
	Retroviruses	Retrovirus diseases	Primates	Phylogeny	Wildlife-Wildlife	[24]
	Coronavirus OC43	Respiratory disease	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	PCR and Sequencing	Human–Wildlife	[27]
	Respiratory viruses	Respiratory disease	Great apes	Whole-genome phylogeny	Human–Wildlife	[26]
	Simian T-lymphotropic virus 1	NHP-borne STLV-1	Primates	Serology, PCR, Sequencing and Phylogeny	Wild animal meat value chain	[25]
	Cytomegaloviruses	Herpes	Primates	PCR, Sequencing and Phylogeny	Wildlife-Wildlife	[38]
	Herpes viruses	Herpes	Great apes and Monkeys	PCR and Phylogeny	Wildlife-Wildlife	[39]
	Parvoviruses	Parvovirus infections	Chimpanzees and Red colobus monkeys	PCR and Phylogeny	Wildlife–Human and Wildlife–Wildlife	[40]
	Various viruses	Zoonotic diseases	Various including bats, rodents	Modeling	Wildlife –Domestic animals–Human	[10]
Bacteria	Staphylococcus schweitzeri, Staphylococcus aureus	Staphylococcus infections	Humans, Domestic animals, and Wildlife	Isolation, MLST and Antimicrobial susceptibility	Wildlife –Domestic animals–Human	[62]
	Bacillus cereus anthracis	Anthrax	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	Sequencing, Genotyping	Wildlife–Wildlife	[42]
	Bacillus cereus anthracis	Anthrax	Monkeys, Chimpanzees and Duikers	Serology and ELISA	Wildlife	[41]
	Mycobacterium tuberculosis	Tuberculosis	Chimpanzees	PCR, Genome sequencing and Phylogeny	Human–Wildlife	[47]
	Mycobacterium lepra	Leprosis	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	PCR, and Phylogeny	Wildlife	[46]
	Treponema pallidum	Yaws	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	Whole-genome sequencing and Phylogeny	Wildlife	[44]
	Treponema pallidum	Yaws	Sooty mangabeys, Chimpanzees and western red colobus	PCR, Whole-genome sequencing and Phylogeny	Wildlife	[45]
	Mycobacteria ulcerans	Buruli ulcer	Rodents	PCR	Wildlife–Human	[54]
	Mycobacteria ulcerans	Buruli ulcer	Wild grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) and domesticated animals	PCR	Wildlife	[53]
	Mycobacteria ulcerans	Buruli ulcer	Wild grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus)	PCR	Human–Wildlife–Environment	[52]
	Leptospira	Leptospirosis	Wild grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus)	PCR and Sequencing	Wild animal value chain	[50]
	Leptospira	Leptospirosis	Rodents	PCR	Wildlife	[32]
	Leptospira sp.	Leptospirosis	Rodents	Serology	Human–Wildlife	[51]
	Streptococcus pneumoniae	Respiratory disease	Chimpanzees	Histology and PCR	Wildlife –Human	[48]
	Clostridium septicum	Necrotizing endometritis	Sooty mangabey	Histology and PCR	Wildlife	[65]
	Multiresistant ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli	Not specified	Primates, Mice, Cats, Dogs	Isolation, Antimicrobial susceptibility, Molecular typing, Spectrometry	Wildlife–Domestic animals–Human	[61]
	Staphylococcus aureus	Staphylococcus infections	Great apes and Lemurs	Isolation, Antimicrobial susceptibility and Genotyping	Wildlife–Wildlife	[63]
	Staphylococcus aureus	Staphylococcus infections	Monkeys and Great apes	Isolation, Antimicrobial susceptibility, Genotyping, and Phylogeny	Wildlife–Wildlife	[49]
Parasite	Plasmodium sp	Malaria	Chimpanzees	PCR	Wildlife	[55]
	Plasmodium sp	Malaria	Chimpanzees	PCR and Sequencing	Wildlife	[56]
	Gastrointestinal parasites	Endoparasite infections	Wild and domestic grasscutters (Thryonomys swinderianus)	Coproscopy	Wildlife–Domestic animal	[57]
	Gastrointestinal parasites	Gastroenteritis	Thryonomys swinderianus	Coproscopy	Wild animal value chain	[66]
	Enteric protist	Diarrhea	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	PCR and Sequencing	Wildlife–Human	[59]
Biomarker	Carrion flies	Infectious disases	Monkey (Cercopithecus campbelli), Chimpanzee	PCR, Phylogeny	Wildlife–Flies	[60]
	Flies	Anthrax, Yaws	Sooty mangabeys (Cercocebus atys atys) and Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	Whole genome sequencing	Wildlife–Flies	[43]
	Urinary neopterin	Not specified	Chimpanzees	ELISA	Wildlife	[67]
	Urinary cortisol	Respiratory diseases	Chimpanzees	Chromatography mass spectrometry	Wildlife	[28]
	Urinary neopterin	Not specified	Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus)	ELISA	Wildlife	[29]
	Urinary neopterin	Respiratory diseases	Chimpanzees	ELISA	Wildlife health	[55]
Other	Contact	Not specified	Primates	Contact assessment	Wildlife food chain	[68]

3.2.2.1. Viruses

Most of the studies on viruses detected in wildlife were conducted in Taï National Park (TNP). High prevalences of retroviruses were observed in primates, up to 82 % and 50 % respectively for simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and T-lymphotropic virus 1 (STLV-1), in the red colobus (Piliocolobus badius). The prevalence is facilitated by the cross-species transmission of primate retroviruses [24]. HTLV-1 sequences were found in 0.7 % of human population living in the villages nearby TNP. Phylogenetic analyses revealed a close relationship between virus sequences detected in both primate and human, providing evidence of zoonotic transmission between primates and humans [25]. Conversely, human-introduced respiratory viruses, including the human coronavirus OC43 which have caused several outbreaks among chimpanzees and other great apes [26,27]. Indeed, the chimpanzee population in TNP is consistently affected by infectious agents including respiratory pathogens, as indicated by biomarkers such as neopterin and cortisol in several studies [28,29].

The first case of Monkeypox virus (MPXV) was isolated in an infant mangabey (Cercocebus atys) found dead in TNP in 2012. Phylogenetic analysis classified the strain as belonging to the less virulent West African clade of MPXV [30]. In addition, health monitoring of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) population showed that besides the typical skin eruption symptoms, monkeypox disease can manifest as severe respiratory illness without a widespread rash. The lack of rodent consumption, the presumed reservoir, in the chimpanzees' diet also suggested that the emergence of MPXV in this population was probably due to changes in the ecology of the virus itself [31]. In addition to primates, a comprehensive study examined the virus in rodents and small insectivores across nine sites—including peri-urban, peri-rural, and protected areas nationwide—but did not detect its presence [32].

Rodents were also investigated for arenaviruses. Two novel species were identified, one of which was closely related to Lassa virus [33]. The Lassa virus was detected in four out of 18 Mastomys natalensis specimens captured around Korhogo in the northern region. The identified virus sequences formed a robust clade with those from a strain found in a tourist, suggesting wildlife-to-human transmission [34].

The TNP has been the primary site of novel virus discoveries in wild animals. Twenty new nonhuman primate polyomaviruses (PyVs) were identified. Several of these newly discovered PyVs were genetically and serologically related to PyVs circulating within the human population [35]. Beyond primates, a novel orthohepadnavirus, which causes hepatitis B was identified in Maxwell's Duiker (Philantomba maxwellii) [36]. Additionally, a new reovirus, designated Taï Forest reovirus, was isolated from the blood of free-tailed bats (Chaereophon aloysiisabaudiae) and described for the first time. This novel reovirus was capable of infecting human cell lines in vitro and was the first coltivirus identified on the African continent, alongside Colorado tick fever virus and Eyach virus, the only two previously known coltiviruses [37].

Furthermore, some investigations have shown no evidence of zoonotic or interspecies disease transmission. Cytomegaloviruses, responsible for herpes in mammals, have been detected in various primates, with newly identified strains. Nevertheless, results indicated that these viruses are host-specific with no cross-species transmission within primate species [38,39]. Similarly, although partetraviruses infect monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans, no evidence of interspecies or zoonotic transmission has been found [40].

3.2.2.2. Bacteria

Bacillus cereus biovar anthracis (Bcbva), the pathogen responsible for anthrax, is persistent in Taï National Park (TNP), exhibiting high virulence among primates and Maxwell's duikers (Cephalophus maxwellii) [41]. Long-term data and samples collected over three decades predict that Bcbva will accelerate the decline of Pan troglodytes verus populations [42]. Fly-based monitoring has also confirmed the viability and risk of transmission of Bcbva in mangabeys [43].

Several human bacteria pathogens have also emerged in primates within TNP. Treponema pallidum, the bacterium responsible for yaws in humans, is circulating in sooty mangabeys (Cercocebus atys) [44]. Additionally, the chimpanzee species Pan troglodytes verus and the western red colobus (Piliocolobus badius) have been identified as novel hosts of this bacterium [45]. Mycobacterium leprae, the causative agent of leprosy in humans, has been detected in chimpanzees, with evidence suggesting a spillover from humans or other unknown environmental sources [46]. A novel strain of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) closely related to a human-associated lineage, was discovered in a deceased wild chimpanzee [47]. Apart from MTB, causing respiratory syndrome, Streptococcus pneumoniae has been involved in multiple outbreaks of respiratory disease among chimpanzees and great apes [48]. Furthermore, in addition to the classical human Staphylococcus aureus strains, phylogenetic analysis identified another highly divergent clade, was primarily detected in monkeys (Pantroglodytes badius) [49].

The potential role of rodents as reservoirs, as well as the role of the food value chain in the transmission of Leptospira sp. and Mycobacterium ulcerans to humans, has been assessed. Leptospira interrogans was identified as the most frequently occurring species among rodents and small mammals living in peri-urban, peri-rural, and protected areas. Infected animal species included Lophuromys sp. (36 %), Praomys sp. (20.8 %), Rattus sp. (16.7 %), Mastomys sp. (12.0 %), Mus sp. (9.5 %) and Crocidura sp. (3.8 %) [32]. Both Leptospira interrogans and Leptospira borgpetersenii were also found in 2 out of 50 (4 %) wild grasscutters (Thryonomys swinderianus) sold to restaurants [50]. A same prevalence of Leptospira sp. (4 %) was detected in house-dwelling rodents in an urban neighborhood, involving mainly L. icterohemorrhagiae [51].

Regarding Mycobacterium ulcerans, the causative agent of Buruli ulcer (BU)—a chronic, disabling skin disease endemic in Côte d'Ivoire—studies suggest that its transmission may involve a food chain starting in the rhizosphere. The detection of M. ulcerans-positive plant material in the rectal content of infected wild T. swinderianus (grasscutters) supports this hypothesis [52]. Thryonomys swinderianus and Mastomys natalensis, have been identified as potential reservoirs for M. ulcerans transmission to humans since they demonstrated asymptomatic gut carriage of the bacterium [53,54].

3.2.2.3. Parasites

A long-term assessment of Plasmodium sp., the parasite responsible for malaria indicated seasonal fluctuations in infection rates among chimpanzees in Taï National Park (TNP) with highest prevalence occurring during the wet season and reaching up to 43 % [55]. Young and pregnant chimpanzees are significantly more susceptible [55,56].

The diversity of gastrointestinal parasites and protozoa was investigated in primates and wild grasscutters. Polyparasitism including zoonotic pathogenic parasites was detected in faecal samples of wild grasscutters collected from restaurants and markets in central-western and southern Côte d'Ivoire [16,57]. Similar findings have been reported in various primates in TNP [58] and in Comoé National Park located in the north-eastern [59].

3.2.3. Wildlife health monitoring

Attempts at wild animal health monitoring have generally used flies for pathogens screening in mammals [24,31,60]. Adenovirus sequences were detected in 4.2 % of flies associated with primates and murine species. However, the fly-based monitoring proved to be little cost-effective for the routine wildlife diseases surveillance but this approach may be useful in cases of outbreaks or mass mortality [60].

3.2.4. Antimicrobial resistance in wildlife

Research on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in wildlife remains limited. A study on Escherichia coli resistant to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance found no such bacteria in chimpanzees within Taï National Park [61]. A low prevalence (2.9 %) of penicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was detected in primates across multiple antibiotic classes examined [49]. Similarly low methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) was found in monkeys [62]. In contrast, AMR were not detected in S. schweitzeri from primates, highly divergent clade has been described in bats, monkeys and great apes in sub-Saharan Africa [62]. Regarding virulence factors, no genes encoding S. aureus penicillin resistance linked to human diseases were found in primates among those tested [62,63].

4. Discussion

This review examined wildlife studies conducted in Côte d'Ivoire and published between 2012 and 2022. It highlights a growing number of publications, with a predominant focus on primate conservation. However, this emphasis on primates has led to the neglect of other species, particularly those most frequently encountered in the meat value chain and involved in frequent human interactions. For instance, rodents are among the most consumed species in Côte d'Ivoire. Highly adapted to diverse habitats—including wild, domestic, peri-domestic, urban, and rural environments—these ubiquitous invaders of human and livestock settings may play a significant role in pathogen circulation [[69], [70], [71]]. Several authors on pathogens for which rodents are known or potential reservoirs have emphasized the need for further investigations to better understand their epidemiology, and assess their transmission to other species and humans [34,51,54]. Although a variety of wildlife pathogens have been studied, data remain scarce and their impact on public health is not yet fully understood or considered, yet the widespread adoption of advanced molecular diagnostic techniques and modeling offers a promising avenue for improving pathogen investigations.

The geospatial distribution of studies reveals notable disparities, with research in the northern region remaining underrepresented. This gap is likely linked to the absence of parks and reserves that typically facilitate access for wildlife research. Yet, the absence of protected areas does not equate to an absence of wild meat consumption, as wild meat practices persist despite legal restrictions. This pattern highlights both logistical challenges for conducting studies and the need to better capture wild meat dynamics beyond areas surrounding protected areas. Importantly, the diversity of research sites across the country—including both protected and non-protected areas—represents a strategic opportunity to establish sentinel sites for monitoring zoonotic disease emergence and transmission.

The northern region, dominated by transhumant pastoralism, warrants particular attention given the health risks at the wildlife–livestock–human interface. While most zoonotic research in Côte d'Ivoire has focused on human–wildlife interactions, the seasonal movement of transhumant herds sustains the circulation of diseases such as brucellosis [72] and bovine tuberculosis [73]. Evidence of brucellosis in wildlife [74,75], with wild buffalo identified as reservoirs [76], further emphasizes the importance of investigating disease dynamics in this region.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) also emerged as an underexplored issue. Studies have reported low resistance levels and identified human contact as a possible driver of AMR introduction in wild animal environments [61]. Elsewhere, data suggest alternative transmission pathways unrelated to anthropogenic factors, rising concerns about the potential spread of virulent and resistant strains to humans [77]. In particular, the potential influence of plants and their bacteriostatic compounds on the gut microbiota of wild animals—and consequently on AMR dynamics—remains largely unexplored, highlighting a need for further research within wildlife populations [78]. Developing AMR surveillance in wildlife is essential to elucidate transmission dynamics and associated risk factors.

Research findings revealed surveillance as a key challenge in both wildlife and human health. Over the past decade covered by this review, few surveillance initiatives have been undertaken. Some innovative approaches were explored, such as DNA typing of wild animal meat in the value chain [17,18] and fly-based monitoring [60]. However, concerns remain about the cost-effectiveness of these methods, highlighting the high costs of the surveillance and the broader issue of limited research funding and health expertise and capacity in wildlife sector. The lack of financial resources for pathogen surveillance in wildlife is recognized as a major global challenge [79].

Wildlife surveillance is essential for understanding human–animal–environment interactions and the potential spillover or spread of pathogens [80]. An integrated approach is necessary not only to better assess pathogens across multiple interfaces but also to leverage funding from other sectors, such as wildlife conservation. This review found less than 6 % of research is multidisciplinary, underscoring the need to strengthen cross-sectoral collaboration and health capacity development in the wildlife sector.

An integrated surveillance system across multiple interfaces would enhance the understanding of zoonotic transmission risks and pathogen circulation. For example, Lassa virus is present in Côte d'Ivoire, with evidence suggesting that the northern and western regions are likely the most at risk. The country is part of the Lassa virus belt, and the virus has been detected near Korhogo in the north in Mastomys natalensis [34], its primary reservoir. This species is the most abundant rodent (39 %) in urban areas in the west of the country [81], where Lassa virus has also been detected in humans, both through IgG antibodies with a prevalence of 26 % [82] and by PCR [83]. A previous infectious case, potentially originating from Côte d'Ivoire, was also reported in a tourist [84], further confirming the circulation of Lassa virus in the country [85]. However, epidemiological data at these human–wildlife–environment interfaces, along with accurate estimates of disease burden, remain major gaps, despite recent evidence suggesting shifting patterns of Lassa virus transmission [86].

Following the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, multiple studies were conducted, but they primarily focused on humans and preventive measures [87,88]. No studies examining the disease in wildlife was recorded between 2012 and 2022, and the same applies for COVID-19 [89,90]. The impact of epidemics on wildlife or its potential role in the epidemics have thus remained unexamined. Conversely, since July 2024, Côte d'Ivoire has been facing a Mpox outbreak, with new human cases reported nationwide at the time of writing. Between 2014 and the current 2024 global outbreak, only three studies examined the Mpox virus in rodents and primates, and none in humans, despite previous Mpox outbreaks among primates in Taï National Park [30,31]. The interdependence of human and animal health is well established thus public health prevention must have a systemic approach. Research has a critical role in addressing the zoonotic knowledge gaps in Côte d'Ivoire's integrated surveillance capacity, given the growing need for disease surveillance data to strengthen both veterinary and public health prevention efforts.

Hunting and markets have been identified as key interfaces for disease surveillance in wildlife [79]. Participatory methods have proven effective in engaging stakeholders in the wild animal meat value chain. For instance, hunters have been involved in health surveillance systems as first-line wildlife observers through interactive games [91]. Similarly, traders have been engaged in mitigating wild animal meat-related risks through education initiatives. If the meat value chain is structured effectively, integrating actors into surveillance efforts could also contribute to the protection of vulnerable species and promote sustainable alternatives, such as the controlled domestication of certain wildlife species. This approach would not only enhance conservation efforts but also improve food security and health for rural populations [92].

While the risks of zoonotic spillover from wildlife to humans are well documented, emerging evidence highlights the bi-directional nature of pathogen transmission at the human–wildlife interface. This is particularly relevant in protected areas, where research activities, tourism, and habitat encroachment increase close contact with wild primates. For instance, repeated outbreaks of respiratory disease in wild chimpanzee populations in Taï National Park have been attributed to reverse zoonotic transmission of human respiratory pathogens such as coronavirus OC43 and Streptococcus pneumoniae, with molecular evidence supporting human origin [25,26,47]. These findings emphasize the need for surveillance strategies that not only monitor zoonoses but also mitigate human-origin pathogen threats to vulnerable wildlife populations. Incorporating reverse zoonosis into One Health frameworks will be essential for the development of holistic disease prevention strategies that protect both human and animal health.

5. Conclusions

The review indicates a growing body of research on wildlife in Côte d'Ivoire from 2012 and 2022, highlighting a broad range of pathogens and animal species studied and the use of increasingly advanced detection techniques. Despite these advancements, the available data remains insufficient to fully understand the zoonotic risks, and the epidemiology of pathogen transmission between wildlife, human, and domestic animal populations. Significant disparities exist in the geographical distribution of studies and the animal species investigated, highlighting the need for more comprehensive research on wildlife pathogens and their potential transmission across the various interfaces. This is particularly urgent given the continuous discovery of several novel pathogens in wildlife, which underscore the dynamic and evolving nature of zoonotic threats. In addition, global challenges such as antimicrobial resistance and the surveillance of infectious diseases at the human-wildlife-livestock interface stand out as insufficiently addressed issues.

The skill development and wildlife health workforce towards sectors collaboration and full integrated approach are necessary to address the critical lack of data on pathogen circulation, transmission risks, and their broader public health implications [93]. The low number of interdisciplinary studies also underscore an opportunity to strengthen collaboration across scientific fields. By leveraging synergies between wildlife conservation, disease ecology, and food security more holistic solutions can be developed. Moving forward, future research within a One Health framework should prioritize enhanced surveillance—including of antimicrobial resistance— and expand efforts to better elucidate zoonotic transmissions at interfaces including between wildlife and livestock.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Arlette Olaby Dindé: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Elizabeth Anne J. Cook: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Conceptualization. Zelalem Terfa: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology, Conceptualization. Dofara Soro: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization. Hung Nguyen-Viet: Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Bernard Bett: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Bassirou Bonfoh: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization.

Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process

During the preparation of this manuscript the authors used the OpenAI ChatGPT tool to improve the clarity and readability of the English language. After using this tool, the authors carefully reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for the publication.

Funding

This research was supported by the CGIAR Initiative on One Health (Protecting human health through a One Health approach) and the CGIAR Fund Donors (https://www.cgiar.org/funders). This research was also partially funded by Afrique One-REACH [Del-22-011].

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.