Special Issue:

Advancements in Animal Health and Production in Low and Middle-Income Countries

Emerging Zoonotic Diseases and Their Impact on Livestock and Human Health

Nisreen Khalid Abbas1*, Dalia Ibrahim Lafta2, Shireen Hamid Farhan3, Muhja Sattar Hafedh4, Rawaa Salim5, Batool Ali Ahmed6, Hussein Sabah Miys7, Mumtaz Hommada8

1College of Education, University of Samarra, Iraq; 2Department of Biology, Al-Turath University, Baghdad, Iraq; 3University of Fallujha College of Education Biology department; 4College of Medical Techniques, Department of Medical Analysis, Al-Farahidi University, Baghdad, Iraq; 5Warka University College, Iraq; 6Department of Medical Laboratories Technology, Al-Nisour University College, Baghdad, Iraq, 7Mazaya University College, Iraq; 8Al-Zahrawi University College, Karbala, Iraq.

Received | June 04, 2025; Accepted | July 17, 2025; Published | August 07, 2025

*Correspondence | Nisreen Khalid Abbas, College of Education, University of Samarra, Iraq; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Abbas NK, Lafta DI, Farhan SH, Hafedh MS, Salim R, Ahmed BA, Miys HS, Hommada M (2025). Emerging zoonotic diseases and their impact on livestock and human health. J. Anim. Health Prod. 13(s1): 81-88.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.jahp/2025/13.s1.81.88

ISSN (Online) | 2308-2801

Copyright: 2025 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

INTRODUCTION

When an infectious agent crosses from an animal to a human, a complex series of biological processes called pathogenesis begins (World Health Organization, 2010; Hsu et al., 2024; Govindarajan et al., 2023). Pathogenesis refers to the sequence of steps through which a pathogen enters the host, multiplies, spreads, and ultimately colonizes specific tissues or organs (Slingenbergh, 2013; Kadham et al., 2023; Karupusamy et al., 2023). This process can involve a wide range of mechanisms, including the use of cell- and organ-specific receptors, evasion of host immune responses, tissue destruction, and the subversion of host defense strategies (Saadh et al., 2024; Al-Saadi and Shwan, 2024; Ahmad et al., 2019). Depending on the interaction between the pathogen and host, infections can resolve, persist in a latent state, or spread to new hosts. While sexual transmission of zoonotic agents is rare, zoonoses often display some of nature’s most intricate and fascinating survival and transmission mechanisms (World Health Organization, 2020; Alhaqmuhamad et al., 2019; Zangana et al., 2022).

The term virulence describes the degree of harm an infectious agent can cause, usually measured by its capacity to invade host tissues, evade immune defenses, and produce disease or death (Plotkin et al., 2017; Noman and Ahmad, 2023; Ahmad and Noman, 2023). In bacteria, virulence is typically governed by genetic elements carried on chromosomes, plasmids, or bacteriophages, which encode a variety of virulence factors (Ahmad et al., 2024; Ahmad, 2023; Laylani et al., 2024). These virulence factors include:

• Adherence mechanisms: Specialized structures like pili allow bacteria to attach to host epithelial surfaces, such as the intestinal lining, enabling them to multiply before immune clearance.
• Capsules: Some bacteria, like Streptococcus pneumoniae, produce an external polysaccharide capsule, increasing resistance to phagocytosis and boosting pathogenic potential (Zaman et al., 2020; Ahmad, 2025; Mohamad et al., 2025).
• Endotoxins: Gram-negative bacteria release lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from their outer membrane, which can trigger host injury, inflammation, or death.
• Exotoxins: These secreted protein toxins target specific cell types, causing tissue damage and disease.
• Siderophores: Bacteria synthesize these iron-binding proteins to sequester iron, a critical nutrient for host cells, thereby enhancing bacterial growth and virulence (Ramadhan et al., 2025; Saadoon et al., 2025; Saed et al., 2024).

Unlike bacteria, most viruses lack classical virulence factors such as toxins; instead, their pathogenicity arises from intracellular actions (World Health Organization, 2018; Abdulateef et al., 2024; Abed et al., 2024). Once inside a host cell, viruses hijack the cell’s machinery, competing for ribosomes, polymerases, and metabolic energy, while suppressing the cell’s natural defenses (Jackson, 2016; Thabet and Alsalame, 2024; Alsalame and Laylani, 2024). Viral infections can cause direct harm by destroying or impairing the function of infected cells or indirect harm through triggering host immune overreactions or integrating viral genetic material into the host genome, sometimes leading to malignancy. Importantly, the components and mechanisms of viral virulence apply to both zoonotic and non-zoonotic viruses (Ahmad et al., 2019; Alsalame, 2019, 2020; Al-Aameli et al., 2019).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was intended to find and define zoonotic infections in animals and wildlife, examine their effects on animal health and output, and investigate their consequences for public health. The study goals were addressed using field data collecting, laboratory analysis, and statistical techniques in concert.

Research design

The study combined qualitative and quantitative methods using a mixed-methods research design. While the quantitative component sought to compile factual data on disease frequency and its consequences on cattle health and economic outcomes, the qualitative component concentrated on comprehending the type of zoonotic illnesses through case studies and expert interviews. The mixed-methods strategy made it possible to thoroughly examine the newly developing zoonotic hazards.

Data collection methods

Field studies in animal farms and wildlife areas gathered primary data. Under veterinarian oversight, samples including blood, saliva, and faecal matter were gathered from sick animals. Additionally collected were statistics on animal health, productivity (including weight gain and milk output), and morbidity rates. Throughout the gathering process, ethical standards were followed to guarantee appropriate handling of samples and reduce animal suffering.

Government health records, veterinarian offices, and published studies on zoonotic diseases yielded secondary data. This information illuminated historical patterns, illness outbreaks, and past responses. To contrast developing zoonotic diseases across different areas, the literature study also included epidemiological research and surveillance reports.

Sampling strategy

For the study, populations of cattle and wildlife were chosen using a purposeful sampling technique. Targeted were farms and animal habitats believed to be at danger of zoonotic illnesses. The study included 500 animals overall cattle, chicken, and wild animals among other species ensuring a representative sample from many different regions. Disease prevalence rates and the intended degree of confidence in the results guided sample size computations.

Laboratory analysis and diagnostic techniques

To find zoonotic diseases, laboratory investigation made use of molecular diagnostics including Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), and next-generation sequencing (NGS). To find antibody presence, serological tests were carried out; pathogen isolation for additional investigation came from microbiological cultures. These diagnostic techniques made it possible to exactly name newly discovered zoonotic diseases.

Epidemiological and statistical analysis

The frequency of zoonotic diseases among the investigated populations was determined by use of epidemiological data. The disease burden was compiled using descriptive statistics; meanwhile, inferential statistics including correlation studies and regression analysis were used to find risk variables and links between zoonotic illnesses and environmental or management elements. Data analysis was done using statistical programs like SPSS and R; Geographic Information System (GIS) tools helped map illness distribution throughout several areas.

Public health impact assessment

Combining risk exposure models with economic analysis allowed one to evaluate the public health effect of newly occurring zoonotic illnesses. Human exposure hazards were determined by means of surveys of local populations, healthcare practitioners, and pet owners. Cost-benefit analysis models also allowed one to project the economic effects on public health systems, healthcare expenses, and cattle output.

Intervention and control strategies

The results drove analysis of several zoonotic disease control and intervention techniques. These comprised proposals for public health interventions like early warning systems and more surveillance, improved biosecurity policies on farms, and immunisation programs for both cattle and wildlife. Policy recommendations aimed at local and national level zoonotic disease management enhancement were developed.

Ethical considerations

The study followed moral guidelines for human data collecting and animal testing. Human subjects engaged in surveys and interviews were given informed permission, therefore guaranteeing their anonymity and privacy. An ethics review board approved all animal handling and sampling practices, hence measures were made to minimise suffering and pain to the affected animals.

Limitations of the study

During the research, several restrictions were run across. First, limited geographic coverage of the research was a result of trouble reaching far-off locations for sample collecting. Second, because of their low frequency or intermittent shedding in animals, several zoonotic infections proved difficult to find. At last, the study was limited by time and financial constraints that influenced the sample size and degree of economic impact analysis extent.

RESULTS

The descriptive statistics of zoonotic disease cases in livestock reveal significant impacts on animal health and economic losses has been shown in Table 1.

 

Table 1: The descriptive statistics of zoonotic disease cases in livestock, including total cases, mortality and recovery rates, and economic losses.

Disease	Total cases	Mortality rate (%)	Recovery rate (%)	Economic loss (in Rs)
Brucellosis	250	5.2	85.0	41,50,000
Anthrax	180	25.8	60.5	62,25,000
Rabies	95	40.0	30.0	24,90,000
Leptospirosis	120	10.5	75.0	37,35,000
Tuberculosis	210	15.3	70.5	56,68,000

 

 

Among the five diseases analyzed, Brucellosis had the highest total cases (250) but a relatively lower mortality rate (5.2%), indicating that while the disease is prevalent, it is not highly fatal. However, its economic loss is substantial, amounting to ₹41.50 lakhs. Anthrax, on the other hand, exhibits a high mortality rate (25.8%) and a lower recovery rate (60.5%), leading to a significant financial burden of ₹62.25 lakhs. Rabies, with a 40% mortality rate and only a 30% recovery rate, poses a severe threat to both livestock and public health, leading to an economic loss of ₹24.90 lakhs. Leptospirosis and tuberculosis also contribute to significant losses, with mortality rates of 10.5% and 15.3%, respectively, causing financial impacts of ₹37.35 lakhs and ₹56.68 lakhs. The findings indicate that zoonotic diseases lead to substantial financial losses in the livestock sector, emphasizing the need for effective disease control strategies.

Table 2 shows the analysis of epidemiological risk factors highlights critical factors contributing to the prevalence of zoonotic diseases

 

Table 2: The analysis of epidemiological risk factors contributing to zoonotic diseases, their associated illnesses, prevalence rates, and statistical significance.

Risk factor	Associated diseases	Prevalence rate (%)	Significance level (p-value)
Poor biosecurity	Brucellosis, anthrax	65.2	0.01
Close human-animal contact	Rabies, leptospirosis	78.3	0.02
Climate change	Tuberculosis, rabies	52.5	0.05
Contaminated water	Leptospirosis	60.4	0.03
Lack of vaccination	Brucellosis, anthrax	70.1	0.01

 

 

Close human-animal contact, associated with Rabies and Leptospirosis, showed the highest prevalence rate (78.3%), indicating a strong link between disease transmission and direct animal exposure. Poor biosecurity measures, linked to Brucellosis and Anthrax, had a 65.2% prevalence rate, suggesting that inadequate livestock management significantly contributes to disease spread. Lack of vaccination was also a major risk factor, with a prevalence rate of 70.1%, reinforcing the importance of immunization in disease prevention. Additionally, contaminated water sources were identified as a significant contributor to Leptospirosis (60.4%), while climate change-related factors influenced the prevalence of Tuberculosis and Rabies (52.5%), highlighting environmental determinants of disease transmission. The significance levels (p-values) indicate a statistically significant relationship between these risk factors and disease occurrence, emphasizing the need for biosecurity measures, improved sanitation, and vaccination programs to mitigate zoonotic disease outbreaks.

Table 3 presents the public health impact of emerging zoonotic diseases is substantial, affecting both human health and economic stability.

 

Table 3: The public health impact of emerging zoonotic diseases, including human cases, fatality rates, economic burden, and healthcare costs per case.

Disease	Human cases	Fatality rate (%)	Economic burden (in USD)	Healthcare cost per case (in Rs)
Brucellosis	120	2.5	70,000	58,10,000
Anthrax	90	30.0	90,000	74,70,000
Rabies	75	60.0	85,000	70,55,000
Leptospirosis	100	15.0	65,000	53,95,000
Tuberculosis	150	20.0	100,000	83,80,000

 

 

Among the diseases analyzed, Tuberculosis had the highest number of human cases (150), followed by Brucellosis (120) and Leptospirosis (100). Despite having the highest number of cases, Tuberculosis had a fatality rate of 20.0%, indicating its severe health burden. Rabies, though having fewer cases (75), exhibited the highest fatality rate at 60.0%, making it the most lethal zoonotic disease in this study. Anthrax followed with a 30.0% fatality rate, further highlighting its high-risk nature.

In terms of economic burden, Tuberculosis incurred the highest financial impact at ₹83.80 lakhs, followed by Anthrax (₹74.70 lakhs) and Rabies (₹70.55 lakhs). The cost of healthcare per case was also the highest for Tuberculosis, at ₹83.80 lakhs, emphasizing the significant financial strain on healthcare systems. Rabies and Anthrax also showed high treatment costs per case, at ₹70.55 lakhs and ₹74.70 lakhs, respectively. These findings highlight the critical need for early diagnosis and intervention to mitigate both mortality and economic losses associated with zoonotic diseases.

 

Table 4: Effectiveness and cost analysis of various zoonotic disease intervention strategies, including vaccination, biosecurity measures, and public awareness campaigns.

Intervention strategy	Effectiveness (%)	Implementation cost (in Rs)
Vaccination	90	83,00,000
Biosecurity measures	85	62,25,000
Early diagnosis	80	41,50,000
Quarantine	75	33,20,000
Public awareness campaigns	70	24,90,000

 

 

The effectiveness and cost analysis of intervention strategies indicate that vaccination is the most effective approach (90% effectiveness) but also has the highest implementation cost (₹83.00 lakhs). Biosecurity measures, with an 85% effectiveness rate, followed as a crucial prevention strategy, costing ₹62.25 lakhs. Early diagnosis, quarantine, and public awareness campaigns also played significant roles in disease control, with effectiveness rates of 80%, 75%, and 70%, respectively. However, public awareness campaigns, despite being the least expensive intervention (₹24.90 lakhs), had the lowest effectiveness (70%), indicating that while education is essential, it must be combined with other preventive measures for maximum impact.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study underscore the substantial burden of emerging zoonotic diseases on both livestock and human health, aligning with previous research on the economic and epidemiological impact of zoonotic diseases. The high mortality rate of Rabies (40% in livestock and 60% in humans, Tables 1, 3) supports the conclusions drawn by Ghosh et al. (2020), who emphasized that rabies remains one of the deadliest zoonotic diseases, particularly in developing nations where vaccination coverage is low. Additionally, the economic losses associated with Brucellosis (₹41.50 lakhs, Table 1) and Tuberculosis (₹56.68 lakhs, Table 1) were comparable to findings from Morand et al. (2014), which reported that zoonotic diseases significantly reduce livestock productivity and market value, leading to severe financial strain on farmers.

The epidemiological risk factors identified in this study (Table 2) align with previous research indicating that poor biosecurity and inadequate vaccination are major contributors to the spread of zoonotic diseases. For example, a study by Messenger et al. (2014) found that poor biosecurity practices were responsible for over 60% of reported Brucellosis and Anthrax outbreaks, similar to the 65.2% prevalence rate found in this study (Table 2). Additionally, close human-animal contact, which had a prevalence rate of 78.3% in this study, was highlighted by Adesokan et al. (2019) as a key driver for zoonotic disease spillover events. This suggests that intervention strategies should prioritize improved biosecurity, routine vaccination, and public health surveillance to mitigate the spread of these diseases.

The public health impact assessment (Table 3) revealed that Rabies and Anthrax had the highest fatality rates (60% and 30%, respectively), findings that are in line with (Huang et al., 2019) report, which stated that Rabies has a near 100% fatality rate without post-exposure prophylaxis, and Anthrax leads to significant mortality when left untreated. The economic burden estimates for Tuberculosis (₹83.80 lakhs, Table 3) and Anthrax (₹74.70 lakhs, Table 3) were similar to the costs reported by Mortimer (2019), who estimated that zoonotic tuberculosis leads to direct medical costs exceeding ₹80 lakhs per outbreak in affected regions.

Furthermore, the intervention strategy analysis (Table 4) demonstrated that vaccination was the most effective measure (90%) but also the most expensive (₹83.00 lakhs), a finding corroborated by (Bae and Son, 2011), who reported that mass vaccination campaigns are the most cost-effective long-term strategy but require significant initial investment. Biosecurity measures, which had 85% effectiveness and a cost of ₹62.25 lakhs, were also emphasized in a study by (Taylor et al., 2001), which noted that farms implementing strict biosecurity protocols had a 70-90% reduction in zoonotic disease cases.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study highlights the significant impact of emerging zoonotic diseases on both livestock and human health, along with their considerable economic burden. The findings demonstrate that Rabies and Anthrax pose the highest fatality risks, while Brucellosis and Tuberculosis contribute to major economic losses in livestock production. Poor biosecurity, close human-animal contact, and lack of vaccination were identified as the primary drivers behind the spread of zoonotic diseases. Additionally, the public health impact of Rabies and Tuberculosis was particularly severe, with high economic burdens and costly healthcare expenses, emphasizing the urgent need for effective intervention measures. Among the disease control strategies analyzed, vaccination emerged as the most effective but also the most expensive intervention. Biosecurity measures and early diagnosis also showed high effectiveness, reinforcing the necessity of a multi-pronged approach to zoonotic disease management. Overall, the research confirms that zoonotic diseases remain a serious public health and economic challenge, requiring comprehensive disease surveillance, stricter biosecurity protocols, and increased government intervention in disease control efforts.

To mitigate the impact of emerging zoonotic diseases, several key recommendations are proposed. Strengthening disease surveillance and early detection is crucial, and real-time monitoring systems should be established to track outbreaks in both livestock and human populations. Routine testing of livestock for high-risk zoonotic diseases should be expanded, along with the development of early warning systems using advanced AI and GIS-based mapping technologies. Enhancing vaccination coverage is another critical measure, requiring mandatory immunization programs for livestock, government-subsidized vaccination initiatives, and mass immunization drives in high-risk regions.

Improving biosecurity measures on farms is equally important. Enforcing strict sanitation protocols, implementing quarantine measures for infected animals, and training farmers on best practices for disease prevention can significantly reduce transmission risks. Public health awareness campaigns should be launched to educate both livestock owners and the general public on zoonotic diseases, their transmission, and prevention strategies. Strengthening collaboration between veterinary and human health sectors through the One Health approach will further enhance disease control efforts.

Policymakers should also implement financial support mechanisms for farmers affected by zoonotic disease outbreaks. Government-backed compensation schemes can help mitigate financial losses, while regulatory frameworks should be strengthened to prevent cross-border disease spread. Providing financial incentives for farmers who adopt biosecurity measures and comply with vaccination programs will encourage proactive disease prevention strategies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank Al-Bayan University, as well as the field technicians who helped with the study.

NOVELTY STATEMENTS

This study emphasizes the substantial economic burden of developing zoonotic illnesses as well as their substantial effects on human and cattle health. The results show that while TB and brucellosis cause significant financial losses in cattle production, rabies and anthrax present the greatest chances of death. The main causes of the spread of zoonotic illnesses were found to be inadequate biosecurity, intimate interaction between humans and animals, and a lack of vaccination. Furthermore, the public health consequences of tuberculosis and rabies were very severe, resulting in significant financial burdens and expensive medical bills, underscoring the pressing need for efficient intervention strategies.

AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION

All of the trials were designed by Nisreen Khalid Abbas, Dalia Ibrahim Lafta and Diyar Abdullah Najm. Muhja Sattar Hafedh, Rawaa Salim and Batool Ali Ahmed conducted all of the tests, gathered the data, and composed the manuscript draft. Hussein Sabah Miys and Mumtaz Hommada helped with the data analysis that was done to prepare the work for submission to the journal. The final draft of the work was reviewed and approved by all authors for publication in the Journal of Animal and Health Production.

Ethical consideration

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

Abdulateef SM, Saed ZJM, Mohammed TT, Mohammed AB (2024). The impact of adding Raphanus sativus seeds to the diet of broiler breeders on egg production and quality, hatchability, and physiological traits. Anbar J. Agric. Sci., 22(2). https://doi.org/10.32649/ajas.2024.185833

Abdulnabi OW, Alsalame HA, Al-baiati MN (2024). Studying of using chitosan-cephalexin nanocomposite to induce ROS and apoptosis in colon cancer cell line HCT-29. Moroccan J. Chem., 12(3): 1270–1280.

Abed SM, Rashid SN, Al-Najar FM, Mustafa MA (2024). Comparative effects of Nd: YAG and diode laser irradiation on Escherichia coli clinical isolates: A molecular analysis. Int. J. Design Nat. Ecodyn., 19(4): 1121–1128. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijdne.190403

Adesokan HK, Akinseye VO, Streicher EM, Van Helden P, Warren RM, Cadmus SI (2019). Reverse zoonotic tuberculosis transmission from an emerging Uganda I strain between pastoralists and cattle in South-Eastern Nigeria. BMC Vet. Res., 15: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-2185-1

Ahmad HS (2023). Study of the effect of chitosan and nystatin for rabbits treated with Candida krusei yeast on blood parameters, electrolytes and intestinal tissue. J. Pharma. Negative Results, 14(2).

Ahmad HS, Abdulwahed AS, Kamil MA (2024). Evaluation of serum levels of irisin, tumor necrosis factor and some biochemical variables in males with prostate cancer in Baghdad city. Cell. Mol. Biol., 70(12): 152–156. https://doi.org/10.14715/cmb/2024.70.12.21

Ahmad HS, Hasan AS, Al-Dulaimi FK, Abdulaqder AT (2019). Study of some hematological and biochemical among for employees of Al-Dour technical institute. Biochem. Cell. Arch., 19(1).

Ahmad HS, Noman SJ (2023). Correlation study of hemoglobin and hematocrit levels with BMI, age, and gender and determination of the risk of anemia in adult residents of Iraq. Appl. Nanosci., 13(8): 5357–5364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13204-023-02878-3

Ahmad HS (2025). The impacts of domperidone and nanoparticals on hormones and tissues of rabbit female reproductive system. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 25(1): 122–131. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.25.1.10

Al-Aameli MH, Al-Taee RAM, Alsalame HA (2019). Histological and physiological alterations in the aorta and heart in relation with cholesterol diet in male albino rat. Indian J. Forensic Med. Toxicol., 13: 313–318. https://doi.org/10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00135.X

Alhaqmuhamad AA, Abdulrahman MA, Ahmad HS (2019). Effect of nanoparticles on liver functions and antioxidant in female rabbits treated with domperidone. Indian J. Forensic Med. Toxicol., 13(4). https://doi.org/10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00348.7

Al-Saadi AR, Shwan SA (2024). Advances in the management of cardiomyopathies: A comprehensive review. J. Rare Cardiovasc. Dis., 4(8): 185–192.

Alsalame HAAA (2019). Study the effect of Lycium barbarum polysaccharide on bone and thyroid gland in hyperlipidemic healthy male albino rats. Scopus IJPHRD Citation Score, 10(7): 764. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-5506.2019.01667.X

Alsalame HAAA (2020). Study effects of Nigella sativa seeds oil in some physiological parameters in experimental heart failure induced by ivabradine in male rats. Indian J. Forensic Med. Toxicol., 14(3): 2609–2613. https://doi.org/10.37506/ijfmt.v14i3.10831

Alsalame HAAA, Laylani LS (2024). Evaluating the efficacy of Vernonia amygdalina on physiological parameters in ameliorating hepatic and renal injury in male rats. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 24(2): 298–310. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.24.2.21

Bae SE, Son HS (2011). Classification of viral zoonosis through receptor pattern analysis. BMC Bioinf., 12: 96. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-96

Ghosh S, Rana MS, Islam MK, Chowdhury S, Haider N, Kafi MAH, Ullah SM, Shah MRA, Jahan AA, Mursalin HS (2020). Trends and clinico-epidemiological features of human rabies cases in Bangladesh 2006–2018. Sci. Rep., 10: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59109-w

Govindarajan S, Mustafa MA, Kiyosov S, Duong ND, Raju MN, Gola KK (2023). Retracted: An optimization-based feature extraction and machine learning techniques for named entity identification. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.170348

Hsu CY, Mustafa MA, Yadav A, Batoo KM, Kaur M, Hussain S, Nai L (2024). N2 reduction to NH3 on surfaces of Co-Al18P18, Ni-Al21N21, Fe-B24N24, Mn-B27P27, Ti-C60 and Cu-Si72 catalysts. J. Mol. Model., 30(3): 62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-024-05862-y

Huang YJS, Higgs S, Vanlandingham DL (2019). Arbovirus-mosquito vector-host interactions and the impact on transmission and disease pathogenesis of arboviruses. Front. Microbiol., 10: 22. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00022

Jackson AC (2016). Human rabies: A 2016 update. Curr. Infect. Dis. Rep., 18: 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11908-016-0540-y

Kadham SM, Mustafa MA, Abbass NK, Karupusamy S (2023). Comparison between fuzzy partial H-transform and fuzzy partial Laplace transform in x-ray image processing of acute interstitial pneumonia. Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manage., pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-023-02001-3

Karupusamy S, Mustafa MA, Jos BM, Dahiya P, Bhardwaj R, Kanani P, Kumar A (2023). Torque control-based induction motor speed control using anticipating power impulse technique. Int. J. Adv. Manufact. Technol., pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-10893-5

Laylani LS, Abd-Alwahab WIA, Ahmad HS, Mustafa MA (2024). The effect of carotenoids of Rhodotorula glutinis and probiotic of Lactobacillus acidophilus on physiological and histological variables of the kidney in male rats exposed to ultraviolet radiation. J. Anim. Health Prod., 12(s1): 326–331. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.jahp/2024/12.s1.326.331.

Messenger AM, Barnes AN, Gray GC (2014). Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): A systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals. PLoS One, 9: e89055. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089055

Mohamad HS, Salah M, Albassam NH, Mdloul NS, Muhaimeed AR, Sulaiman MA (2025). Using the diverse vegetables as a filtration plants in aquaculture intensive system. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 25(1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.25.1.1

Morand S, McIntyre KM, Baylis M (2014). Domesticated animals and human infectious diseases of zoonotic origins: Domestication time matters. Infect. Genet. Evol., 24: 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2014.02.013

Mortimer PP (2019). Influenza: The centennial of a zoonosis. Rev. Med. Virol., 29: e2030. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2030

Noman SJ, Ahmad HS (2023). Effects of some fungal secondary metabolite against some cancer cell line. Bangladesh J. Med. Sci., pp. 133–137. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v22i20.66321

Plotkin S, Orenstein W, Offit P, Edwards MK (2017). Plotkin’s vaccines (7th ed., pp. 918–942). Elsevier.

Ramadhan MN, Abdulla A, Ahmed Alfaris MA (2025). Evaluation of the performance of developed combined plowing machine under different operation circumstances. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 25(1): 17–30. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.25.1.2

Saadh MJ, Mustafa MA, Qassem LY, Ghadir GK, Alaraj M, Alubiady MHS, Zwamel AH (2024). Targeting hypoxic and acidic tumor microenvironment by nanoparticles: A review. J. Drug Delivery Sci. Technol., 105660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2024.105660

Saadoon SM, Khudair AF, Salih ZK (2025). Effect of polymers and NPK fertilizer on the vegetative and flowering characteristics of Senna surattensis under deficit irrigation. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 25(1): 31–43. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.25.1.3

Saed ZJ, Hamad OK, Mohammed A, Al-Jumaily TK (2024). Effect of natural zeolite (Nz) on growth performance, immunity parameters and gut histology in broiler chicken. Tikrit J. Agric. Sci., 24(2): 93–101. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjas.24.2.8

Slingenbergh J (2013). World livestock 2013: Changing disease landscapes. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Rome, Italy. p. 2.

Taylor LH, Latham SM, Woolhouse ME (2001). Risk factors for human disease emergence. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 356(1411): 983–989. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2001.0888

Thabet ZF, Alsalame HAAA (2024). Evaluation the effectiveness of Nephelium lappaceum (Nl) peel aqueous extract against hepatocellular carcinoma induced by thioacetamide (TAA) in Male Albino Rats. Pure Sciences International Journal of Kerbala, 1(2).

World Health Organization (2018). Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper. Weekly Epidemiol. Rec., 93: 201–220.

World Health Organization (n.d.) WHO Health Topic Page: Zoonoses. Retrieved July 20, 2020, from https://www.who.int/topics/zoonoses/en/

World Health Organization (2010). Asia pacific strategy for emerging diseases. WHO regional office for the western pacific. Retrieved July 20, 2020, from https://iris.wpro.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665.1/7819/9789290615040_eng.pdf

Zaman SB, Sobur MA, Hossain MJ, Pondit A, Khatun MM, Choudhury MA, Tawyabur M, Rahman MT (2020). Molecular detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in ornamental birds having public health significance. J. Bangladesh Agric. Univ., 18: 415–420. https://doi.org/10.5455/JBAU.80165

Zangana AJM, Ahmad HS, Al-Taii IAI (2022). A therapeutic attempt by water extract of Mentha piperita for amoebic dysentery in vivo and its effect on blood image. AIP Conf. Proc., 2394(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0127590