A new study published on 22 September 2026 has provided one of the clearest national pictures yet of how reported foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreaks have moved across Nigeria over the past decade.

The study, published in Scientific Reports, analysed officially reported FMD outbreaks across Nigeria’s 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory between 2015 and 2025. Its findings show that the country’s reported FMD burden has not been evenly distributed over time or across geography. Instead, outbreaks have occurred in distinct surges, while the geographic concentration of reported outbreaks has progressively shifted towards the North-West.

By 2023, the North-West accounted for 71.3% of nationally reported FMD outbreaks, with Zamfara, Kebbi and Sokoto emerging as the core of a persistent hotspot.

The researchers say this pattern has implications for how veterinary surveillance, field investigation and disease-control resources are deployed across the country.

A decade of FMD data reveals an uneven pattern

Foot-and-mouth disease is endemic in Nigeria and remains one of the major transboundary animal diseases affecting livestock production.

The disease affects cloven-hoofed animals, including cattle, sheep, goats and pigs. Beyond the clinical disease itself, FMD can reduce productivity, disrupt animal movement and trade, and create significant costs for farmers and livestock-dependent communities.

Yet understanding where the disease burden is concentrated is not as straightforward as counting reported cases.

That is where the new study becomes significant.

Researchers Ayomikun A. Awoseyi, Ernest E. Onuiri, Ayodeji O. Olarinmoye, Mayowa M. Ademola and colleagues examined records from the World Animal Health Information System covering 2015–2025. They then applied exploratory spatial data analysis to identify patterns, clusters and changes in disease hotspots across the country.

Rather than presenting FMD as a uniformly distributed national problem, the analysis found a disease burden that changed substantially over both time and geography.

The national pattern was described as episodic, with major surges occurring in 2017 and 2021.

The 2021 surge was particularly important because the elevated level of reporting did not simply disappear after the peak. The study found sustained elevated reporting through 2024.

That distinction matters.

A single outbreak year may indicate a temporary event. A prolonged period of elevated reporting can point to a more persistent epidemiological challenge requiring stronger surveillance and response systems.

The hotspot moved from the North Central to the North-West

One of the study’s most important findings is the change in where reported FMD burden was concentrated.

In 2017, the strongest concentration was associated with the North Central region.

By 2023, however, the pattern had shifted towards the North-West, where the researchers identified a persistent configuration of higher reported outbreak burden.

Three states were particularly prominent:

Zamfara.
Kebbi.
Sokoto.

Together, the states formed what the researchers describe as a consolidated hotspot.

By 2023, the North-West accounted for 71.3% of all nationally reported FMD outbreaks in the dataset.

The researchers used several spatial statistical approaches, including Global Moran’s I, Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA) and the Getis-Ord Gi* statistic, to trace how these patterns evolved.

The analysis showed a progression from what was initially a more fragmented distribution of reported disease burden to a more consolidated hotspot centred around Zamfara, Kebbi and Sokoto.

This provides something that national outbreak totals alone cannot show: where the burden is becoming concentrated.

Low reporting does not automatically mean low risk

The study also identified persistent low-burden or “cold-spot” structures across parts of southern Nigeria.

At first glance, this could suggest that FMD poses a considerably smaller problem in those locations.

But the researchers caution against interpreting low reported burden as proof of low disease risk.

In particular, they highlight states with persistently low reporting that border areas where higher FMD burdens have been confirmed.

For these locations, the recommendation is not simply to assume that disease is absent. Instead, the researchers call for structured assessments of surveillance capacity.

That is an important distinction for animal health systems.

Disease reporting depends on more than disease occurrence. It also depends on whether farmers recognise clinical signs, whether cases are reported, whether veterinary officers can investigate suspected outbreaks, whether samples are collected and whether diagnostic systems are accessible.

Consequently, a low number of officially reported outbreaks can reflect genuinely lower transmission, weaker detection, lower reporting, or a combination of factors.

The study itself focuses on reported outbreak burden, rather than claiming to measure every FMD infection occurring in Nigeria. That limitation is important when interpreting the geographical differences.

What the North-West concentration could mean for veterinary deployment

The concentration identified by the study provides a potential basis for more geographically targeted animal-health planning.

The researchers specifically recommend that the Zamfara–Kebbi–Sokoto belt receive prioritisation for field investigation and veterinary deployment.

In practical terms, this could mean stronger outbreak investigation capacity, improved disease reporting, better access to diagnostic services and closer monitoring of livestock movements in and around identified hotspots.

For veterinary authorities, spatial information can also help answer a more operational question:

Where should limited resources be deployed first?

Veterinary personnel, diagnostic capacity, surveillance activities and disease-control interventions are rarely unlimited. Knowing where reported disease burden is repeatedly concentrated can help authorities move from broad national surveillance towards more risk-informed deployment.

But the study’s findings should not be interpreted as meaning that FMD control can be limited to three states.

The researchers specifically draw attention to neighbouring low-burden areas that may require stronger surveillance assessment. The risk is that an apparent boundary between high- and low-reporting areas could be mistaken for a true epidemiological boundary.

Livestock movement does not stop at state borders.

Why livestock movement remains relevant

FMD is a transboundary animal disease, meaning its epidemiology is closely connected to the movement of animals and animal products across administrative and national boundaries.

This makes the location of a hotspot important, but the connections around that hotspot are equally important.

Cattle and other livestock move through markets, production areas, grazing routes and trading networks. A state with relatively few reported outbreaks may still be connected to a high-burden area through livestock movement.

That makes surveillance at borders and along movement corridors particularly relevant.

The study’s recommendation for structured surveillance assessment in low-burden states bordering confirmed high-burden areas reflects this concern.

The value of looking at disease through maps

One of the strongest aspects of the research is that it demonstrates what epidemiological mapping can add to conventional disease reporting.

A national number can tell authorities how much disease has been reported.

A time series can show when reporting increased.

Spatial analysis can begin to show where those increases are concentrated and how that concentration changes over time.

In this study, the combination of temporal analysis and spatial clustering revealed that Nigeria’s FMD picture was neither static nor evenly distributed.

The country moved from a pattern in which North Central areas featured prominently in 2017 towards a more persistent North-West concentration by 2023.

That kind of information can support more targeted surveillance strategies.

It can also help researchers and policymakers ask better questions about why particular areas repeatedly emerge as hotspots.

But the map is the starting point, not the explanation

The study identifies where reported FMD burden has concentrated. It does not, by itself, establish all the reasons behind that shift.

That distinction is important.

The researchers analysed outbreak records and spatial patterns. Their findings identify areas that warrant greater attention, but additional field and epidemiological studies would be needed to determine the relative contribution of factors such as livestock movement, production systems, animal density, surveillance intensity, reporting behaviour, vaccination practices, ecological conditions and cross-border transmission.

In other words, the map tells us where to look more closely.

It does not eliminate the need for investigation on the ground.

What this means for Nigeria’s animal-health system

The new findings arrive at a time when Nigeria’s livestock sector is under increasing pressure to improve productivity, strengthen disease control and support a growing demand for animal-source foods.

For FMD, the challenge is particularly relevant because controlling the disease is not only a veterinary objective.

Outbreaks can affect milk production, weight gain, animal productivity and livestock trade. The consequences can extend from individual farmers to markets and wider livestock value chains.

The study therefore offers a useful evidence base for thinking about FMD control as a resource-allocation problem as much as a disease-reporting problem.

If some locations consistently account for a disproportionate share of reported outbreaks, surveillance and response systems need to be capable of reflecting that difference.

At the same time, low-reporting areas cannot simply be removed from the equation.

They need enough surveillance capacity to distinguish between genuinely low disease occurrence and limited detection.

A more targeted approach to FMD surveillance

The findings point towards a surveillance model built around three complementary priorities.

First, intensify investigation in established hotspots.

The Zamfara–Kebbi–Sokoto belt has emerged from the study as a priority area for field investigation and veterinary deployment.

Second, strengthen surveillance around hotspot boundaries.

Neighbouring states with comparatively low reported burdens should not necessarily be treated as low-risk zones. Surveillance capacity in these areas needs to be assessed so that emerging transmission is detected early.

Third, continue national-level monitoring.

The geographic concentration of recent reports does not remove the need for nationwide surveillance. FMD patterns have changed over the study period, demonstrating that today’s hotspot is not necessarily tomorrow’s hotspot.

The 2017-to-2023 shift identified by the researchers is evidence of precisely that point.

The bigger lesson from a decade of FMD data

Perhaps the most important message from this research is that Nigeria’s FMD problem cannot be fully understood by looking at individual outbreaks in isolation.

The disease has a geography.

It has a history.

And that geography has changed.

The analysis of 2015–2025 records shows major reporting surges in 2017 and 2021, sustained elevated reporting after the 2021 peak, and a shift from North Central concentration towards a persistent North-West hotspot. By 2023, the North-West accounted for 71.3% of nationally reported outbreaks, with Zamfara, Kebbi and Sokoto forming the core of the identified hotspot.

For Nigeria’s veterinary and livestock systems, the value of the study is therefore not simply in identifying three states.

It is in demonstrating how disease data can be used to identify changing patterns and guide questions about where surveillance and veterinary capacity are most needed.

The next step is translating that evidence into field action: verifying what is happening within identified hotspots, understanding the drivers of transmission, strengthening reporting around their boundaries and ensuring that low reporting is not automatically interpreted as low risk.

For an endemic disease such as FMD, better control begins with knowing where the burden is concentrated.

This study gives Nigeria a clearer map of that burden.

The task now is to use it.

Source: Awoseyi, A.A., Onuiri, E.E., Olarinmoye, A.O. et al. Spatio-temporal dynamics, clustering, and hotspot evolution of reported foot-and-mouth disease outbreak burden in Nigeria, 2015–2025. Scientific Reports, published 22 September 2026.