Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Vet Sci ; 11: 1393289, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38655536

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Canine olfaction is a potential means for detection of respiratory disease in beef cattle. In a prior study, two dogs were trained to discriminate between nasal swabs from healthy cattle and cattle that developed Bovine Respiratory Disease. Dogs had some ability to identify samples from BRD-affected cattle, but results were ambiguous. The purpose of this study was to evaluate more dogs using better-controlled training and testing procedures. Methods: Nasal and saliva swabs were collected from 96 cattle before and after administering a vaccine to induce an inflammatory immune response. Samples were stored at -80°C for up to 11 months before use, and samples from animals with an elevated body temperature at baseline were omitted. An automated olfactometer apparatus was constructed to improve blinding procedures and reduce opportunities for odor contamination. Four dogs were trained to distinguish between swabs from healthy and sickness-model cattle, including the two dogs from the previous study ("Runnels" and "Cheaps") and two inexperienced dogs ("Molokai" and "Amy"). During a seven-month training period, dogs were exposed to samples from 28 animals. Dogs were tested on 59 sets of unfamiliar samples. Results: Performance varied among dogs (χ2 = 10.48, p = 0.02). Molokai's performance was above chance (0.73 ± 0.06, p = 0.0006), while Amy (0.44 ± 0.06, p = 0.43), Cheaps (0.53 ± 0.07, p = 0.79), and Runnels (0.56 ± 0.06, p = 0.43) did not respond correctly at a rate different from chance. Accuracy did not differ between nasal swabs (0.63 ± 0.08) and saliva swabs (0.53 ± 0.08, χ2 = 0.81, p = 0.37). Discussion: The results of this study indicate that canine olfaction may be an effective means of detecting illness in beef cattle. However, individual dogs' aptitude for this detection task varies.

2.
PLoS One ; 19(4): e0302172, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38662753

ABSTRACT

Clinical illness (CI) scoring using visual observation is the most widely applied method of detecting respiratory disease in cattle but has limited effectiveness in practice. In contrast, body-mounted sensor technology effectively facilitates disease detection. To evaluate whether a combination of movement behavior and CI scoring is effective for disease detection, cattle were vaccinated to induce a temporary inflammatory immune response. Cattle were evaluated before and after vaccination to identify the CI variables that are most indicative of sick cattle. Respiratory rate (H2 = 43.08, P < 0.0001), nasal discharge (H2 = 8.35, P = 0.015), and ocular discharge (H2 = 16.38, P = 0.0003) increased after vaccination, and rumen fill decreased (H2 = 20.10, P < 0.0001). Locomotor activity was measured via leg-mounted sensors for the four days preceding and seven days following vaccination. A statistical model that included temperature, steps, lying time, respiratory rate, rumen fill, head position, and excess saliva was developed to distinguish between scores from before and after vaccination with a sensitivity of 0.898 and specificity of 0.915. Several clinical illness signs were difficult to measure in practice. Binoculars were required for scoring respiratory rate and eye-related metrics, and cattle had to be fitted with colored collars for individual identification. Scoring each animal took up to three minutes in a small research pen; therefore, technologies that can automate both behavior monitoring and identification of clinical illness signs are key to improving capacity for BRD detection and treatment.


Subject(s)
Behavior, Animal , Cattle Diseases , Inflammation , Animals , Cattle , Cattle Diseases/diagnosis , Cattle Diseases/immunology , Biomarkers/analysis , Respiratory Rate , Vaccination/veterinary
3.
Front Vet Sci ; 9: 902151, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35847637

ABSTRACT

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in feedlot cattle and is a major welfare and economic concern. Identification of BRD-affected cattle using clinical illness scores is problematic, and speed and cost constraints limit the feasibility of many diagnostic approaches. Dogs can rapidly identify humans and animals affected by a variety of diseases based on scent. Canines' olfactory systems can distinguish between patterns of volatile organic compounds produced by diseased and healthy tissue. In this pilot study, two dogs ("Runnels" and "Cheaps") were trained for 7 months to discriminate between nasal swabs from cattle that developed signs of BRD within 20 days of feedlot arrival and swabs from cattle that did not develop BRD signs within 3 months at the feedlot. Nasal swabs were collected during cattle processing upon arrival to the feedlot and were stored at -80°C. Dogs were presented with sets of one positive and two negative samples and were trained using positive reinforcement to hold their noses over the positive sample. The dogs performed moderately well in the final stage of training, with accuracy for Runnels of 0.817 and Cheaps of 0.647, both greater than the 0.333 expected by chance. During a double-blind detection test, dogs evaluated 123 unique and unfamiliar samples that were presented as 41 sets (3 samples per set), with both the dog handler and data recorder blinded to the positive sample location. Each dog was tested twice on each set of samples. Detection test accuracy was slightly better than chance for Cheaps at 0.451 (95% CI: 0.344-0.559) and was no better than chance for Runnels at 0.390 (95% CI: 0.285-0.496. Overall accuracy was 0.421 (95% CI: 0.345-0.496). When dogs' consensus response on each sample set was considered, accuracy was 0.537 (95% CI: 0.384-0.689). Detection accuracy also varied by sample lot. While dogs showed some ability to discriminate between BRD-affected and healthy cattle using nasal swabs, the complexity of this task suggests that more testing is needed before determining whether dogs could be effective as a screening method for BRD.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL