Robert Swanepoel* , Sheilagh B. Smit*, Pierre E. Rollin†, Pierre Formenty‡, Patricia A. Leman*, Alan Kemp*, Felicity J. Burt§, Antoinette A. Grobbelaar*, Janice Croft*, Daniel G. Bausch¶, Hervé Zeller#, Herwig Leirs††, L.E.O. Braack‡‡, Modeste L. Libande§§, Sherif Zaki†, Stuart T. Nichol†, Thomas G. Ksiazek†, Janusz T. Paweska*, and on behalf of the International ScientificTechnical Committee for Marburg Hemorrhagic Fever Control in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
Author affiliations: *National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Sandringham, Republic of South Africa; †Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA; ‡World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; §University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa; ¶Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; #Institut Pasteur, Lyon, France; **University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium; ††University of Aarhus, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark; ‡‡Conservation International, Cape Town, South Africa; §§Department of Health, Watsa, Democratic Republic of the Congo;
Figure 1. Marburg virus ELISA percent positivity (PP) values recorded on bat serum samples collected in 1999 in Durba, Democratic Republic of the Congo (n = 426), and from 1984 through 1994 in Kruger National Park, South Africa (n = 188). The cutoff PP value of 16.4 was fixed as 3 × (mean + 3 SD) of values observed in the Kruger National Park samples.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.