Application of the Nagoya Protocol to veterinary pathogens: concerns for the control of foot-and-mouth disease.

The Nagoya Protocol is an international agreement adopted in 2010 (and entered into force in 2014) which governs access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from their utilisation. The agreement aims to prevent misappropriation of genetic resources and, through benefit sharing, create incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. While the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources is a widely accepted concept, the way in which the provisions of the Nagoya Protocol are currently being implemented through national access and benefit-sharing legislation places significant logistical challenges on the control of transboundary livestock diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). Delays to access FMD virus isolates from the field disrupt the production of new FMD vaccines and other tailored tools for research, surveillance and outbreak control. These concerns were raised within the FMD Reference Laboratory Network and were explored at a recent multistakeholder meeting hosted by the European Commission for the Control of FMD. The aim of this paper is to promote wider awareness of the Nagoya Protocol, and to highlight its impacts on the regular exchange and utilisation of biological materials collected from clinical cases which underpin FMD research activities, and work to develop new epidemiologically relevant vaccines and other diagnostic tools to control the disease.

Determination of the intramammary dose of benzylpenicillin required to maintain an adequate concentration in the milk to inhibit Gram-positive bacteria in the clinically normal udder for 24 hr.

The aim of this study was to determine the intramammary dose of benzylpenicillin required to maintain a concentration in the milk above the MIC for the Gram-positive bacteria that cause mastitis. The product used in this study was a commercially available procaine benzylpenicillin in an oily suspension with micronized particles. Three dose levels were used: 200,000, 300,000, and 600,000 IU. Concentrations of benzylpenicillin in cow milk and plasma were determined after a single intramammary dose was administered into one quarter of each of the five cows in each treatment group. Samples were analyzed using an HPLC-MS/MS method, which was validated during the study. Concentrations in the milk were well above the MIC for the target pathogens for all doses tested. There was a linear dose-dependent increase in the mean AUCs of benzylpenicillin concentrations in plasma and milk. At the first milking, 12 hr after dosing, there was a significant difference between the mean milk benzylpenicillin concentrations in cows treated with a dose of 600,000 IU, and those treated with 200,000 or 300,000 IU. Although this study shows a linear relationship between the dose of procaine benzylpenicillin administered and the concentration in the milk in the healthy udder, it would be useful to conduct studies on cows with mastitis to define the optimum dose and duration of intramammary treatment with benzylpenicillin.

Addition of meloxicam to the treatment of bovine clinical mastitis results in a net economic benefit to the dairy farmer.

Recently, it has been shown that the addition of meloxicam to standard antimicrobial therapy for clinical mastitis (CM) improves the conception rate of dairy cows contracting CM in the first 120 d in milk. The objective of our study was to assess whether this improved reproduction through additional treatment with meloxicam would result in a positive net economic benefit for the farmer. We developed a stochastic bio-economic simulation model, in which a dairy cow with CM in the first 120 d in milk was simulated. Two scenarios were simulated in which CM cases were treated with meloxicam in conjunction with antimicrobial therapy or with antimicrobial therapy alone. The scenarios differed for conception rates (31% with meloxicam or 21% without meloxicam) and for the cost of CM treatment. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the biological and economic components of the model to assess the effects of a wide range of inputs on inferences about the cost effectiveness of meloxicam treatment. Model results showed an average net economic benefit of €42 per CM case per year in favor of the meloxicam scenario. Cows in the no-meloxicam treatment scenario had higher returns on milk production, lower costs upon calving, and reduced costs of treatment. However, these did not outweigh the savings associated with lower feed intake, reduced number of inseminations, and the reduced culling rate. The net economic benefit favoring meloxicam therapy was a consequence of the better reproductive performance in the meloxicam scenario in which cows had a shorter calving to conception interval (132 vs. 143 d), a shorter intercalving interval (405 vs. 416 d), and fewer inseminations per conception (2.9 vs. 3.7) compared with cows in the no-meloxicam treatment scenario. This resulted in a shorter lactation, hence a lower lactational milk production (8,441 vs. 8,517 kg per lactation) with lower feeding costs in the meloxicam group. A lower culling rate (12 vs. 25%) resulted in lower replacement costs in the meloxicam treatment scenario. All of the scenarios evaluated in the sensitivity analyses favored meloxicam treatment over no meloxicam. This study demonstrated that improvements in conception rate achieved by the use of meloxicam, as additional therapy for mild to moderate CM in the first 120 d in milk, have positive economic benefits. This inference remained true over a wide range of technical and economic inputs, demonstrating that use of meloxicam is likely to be cost effective across many production systems.