Associations between paratuberculosis ELISA results and test-day records of cows enrolled in the Irish Johne's Disease Control Program.

The effect of the Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis (MAP) ELISA status on test-day milk performance of cows from Irish herds enrolled in the pilot national voluntary Johne's disease control program during 2013 to 2015 was estimated. A data set comprising 92,854 cows and 592,623 complete test-day records distributed across 1,700 herds was used in this study. The resulting ELISA outcome (negative, inconclusive, and positive) of each cow within each year of the program was used to allocate the cow into different scenarios representing the MAP status. At MAPscenario1, all cows testing ELISA nonnegative (i.e., inconclusive and positive) were assigned a MAP-positive status; at MAPscenario2 only cows testing ELISA-positive were assigned a MAP-positive status; at MAPscenario3 only cows testing ELISA nonnegative (inconclusive or positive) and gathered exclusively from herds where at least 2 further ELISA nonnegative (inconclusive or positive) cows were found were assigned a MAP-positive status; at MAPscenario4 only cows testing ELISA-positive that were gathered exclusively from herds where at least 2 further ELISA-positive cows were found were assigned a MAP-positive status. Milk outputs based on test-day records were standardized for fat and protein contents (SMY) and the effect of MAP ELISA status on the SMY was estimated by a linear mixed effects model structure. The SMY mean difference recorded at test day between cows with a MAP-positive status and those with a MAP-negative status within MAPscenario1 was estimated at -0.182 kg/test day; the mean difference was -0.297 kg/test day for MAPscenario2; for MAPscenario3 mean difference between MAP-positive status and MAP test-negative cows was -0.209 kg/test day, and for MAPscenario4, the difference was -0.326 kg/test day.

Predicted costs and benefits of eradicating BVDV from Ireland.

Bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) causes an economically important endemic disease (BVD) of cattle in Ireland and worldwide. Systematic eradication by detection and removal of infectious (BVDV carrier) cattle has been successful in several regions. We therefore assessed the benefits (disease losses avoided) and costs (testing and culling regime) of a potential eradication programme in Ireland. Published bio-economic models of BVDV spread in beef suckler herds and dairy herds were adapted to estimate potential benefits of eradication in Ireland. A simple model of BVDV spread in beef finisher herds was devised to estimate the benefits of eradication in this sector. A six year eradication programme consisting of 5 inter-related virological and serological testing programmes is outlined and costed. We found that the annualised benefits of BVDV eradication in Ireland exceeded the costs by a factor of 5 in the beef suckler sector and a factor of 14 in the dairy sector. Corresponding payback periods were 1.2 and 0.5 years respectively. These results highlight the significant economic impact of BVDV on the Irish cattle industry and suggest a clear economic benefit to eradication using the proposed approach. This type of cost-benefit analysis is considered an essential prerequisite prior to undertaking an eradication campaign of this magnitude.

Considerations on BVD eradication for the Irish livestock industry.

Animal Health Ireland has produced clear guidelines for the control of Bovine Viral Diarrhoea (BVD) infection in Irish cattle herds. In the course of developing these guidelines it was clear that a framework for regional and/or national BVD control would be required to increase the uptake of BVD control at farm level and reduce the overall prevalence of the disease. This paper assessed the economic impact of BVD, epidemiological aspects of the disease to its control, models of BVD control, international experiences of BVD control programmes. The technical knowledge and test technology exists to eradicate BVD. Indeed, many countries have successfully and others are embarking on control of the disease. The identification and prompt elimination of PI cattle will form the basis of any control programme. The trade of such animals must be curtailed. Pregnant and potentially pregnant carrying PI foetuses pose a significant threat. International experience indicates systematic, well coordinated programmes have the most success, while voluntary programmes can make good initial progress but ultimately fail. The farming community must buy into any proposed programme, and without their support, failure is likely. To buy into the programme and create such a demand for BVD control, farmers must first be well informed. It is likely that stemming economic loss and improving productivity will be the primary motivator at individual farm level.

Setting priorities for non-regulatory animal health in Ireland: results from an expert Policy Delphi study and a farmer priority identification survey.

Agriculture is a very important contributor to the Irish economy. In Ireland, national animal health services have been a government, rather than an industry, responsibility. In 2009, Animal Health Ireland (AHI) was established to provide a partnership approach to national leadership of non-regulatory animal health issues (those not subject to national and/or EU regulation). The objectives of this study were to elicit opinion from experts and farmers about non-regulatory animal health issues facing Irish livestock industries, including prioritisation of animal health issues and identification of opportunities to maximise the effective use of AHI resources. The study was conducted with experts using Policy Delphi methodology over three rounds, and with farmers using a priority identification survey. Non-regulatory bovine diseases/conditions were prioritised by both experts and farmers based on impact and international competitiveness. For each high-priority disease/condition, experts were asked to provide an assessment based on cost, impact, international perception, impediment to international market access and current resource usage effectiveness. Further information was also sought from experts about resource allocation preferences, methods to improve education and coordination, and innovative measures to improve prevention and management. There was close agreement between responses from experts and dairy farmers: each gave highest priority to 3 diseases with a biosecurity risk (subsequently termed 'biosecure diseases') (bovine viral diarrhoea [BVD], infectious bovine rhinotracheitis [IBR], paratuberculosis) and 4 diseases/conditions generally without a biosecurity risk ('non-biosecure diseases/conditions') (fertility, udder health/milk quality, lameness, calf health). Beef farmers also prioritised parasitic conditions and weanling pneumonia. The adverse impact of biosecure diseases is currently considered relatively minor by experts, but would increase substantially in time. There are already substantial costs to farms and agribusiness from non-biosecure diseases/conditions. Experts preferred an equal allocation of resources between these biosecure and non-biosecure diseases/conditions, with emphasis on adopting/adapting international models, education and awareness-raising. The results from this study provide robust insights about non-regulatory animal health priorities in Ireland, as perceived by experts and farmers, using methodologies that are both transparent and inclusive. They have already been extremely influential in shaping national policy, as a foundation for interdisciplinary (and multi-agency) cooperation, as a contribution to efforts to encourage stakeholder responsibility-taking, and to ongoing development of postgraduate and undergraduate veterinary education in Ireland.