RESUMO
BACKGROUND: With concerns over the development of anthelmintic resistance in cattle nematode populations, we must re-examine our approach to nematode control in cattle. Targeted selective treatments (TST), whereby individual animals are treated instead of entire groups, are being investigated as an alternative. The study objective was to determine if anthelmintic usage could be reduced using a TST-based approach to nematode control in spring-born suckler beef cattle over their first and second grazing seasons (SGS) without affecting performance. In the first grazing season (FGS), 99 calves with an initial mean (s.d.) calf age and live weight on day 0 (June 28(th) 2012) of 107 (23.1) days and 160 (32.5) kg, respectively, were used. The study commenced on day 0 when calves were randomised and allocated to one of two treatments; 1), standard treatment (control) and 2), TST. Control calves were treated subcutaneously with ivermectin on days 0, 41 and 82 in the FGS. All calves were treated with ivermectin on day 124 and housed on day 133. In the SGS, only heifer calves from the FGS were used and control heifers were treated with ivermectin on day 393. Animals were weighed, blood and faecal sampled every three weeks. The TST animals were treated with ivermectin if thresholds based on a combination of plasma pepsinogen concentrations, faecal egg count and/or the presence of Dictyocaulus viviparus larvae in faeces (FGS only) were reached. RESULTS: No TST calves reached the treatment threshold criteria in the FGS. The FGS average daily live weight gain (ADG ± s.e.m.) for control and TST group calves was 0.89 ± 0.02 kg and 0.94 ± 0.02 kg day(-1), respectively (P = 0.17). In the SGS, all heifers were treated with ivermectin on day 431 due to clinical signs of respiratory disease. The ADG for control and TST heifers from turnout on day 321 to day 431 was 0.90 ± 0.04 and 0.80 ± 0.04 kg day(-1), respectively (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Spring-born FGS suckler beef calves require minimal anthelmintic treatment to maintain performance. In contrast, clinical parasitic disease may develop in the SGS unless appropriate anthelmintic treatment is provided.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Calf output is a key element in determining the profitability of a suckler beef enterprise. Infectious agents such as Bovine Virus Diarrhoea (BVD) virus, colostrum management and parasitic challenge can all affect calf output. Prior to the national BVD eradication programme, there was little published information on either the prevalence or effect of BVD in Irish beef herds. There is little published information on colostrum management practices in Irish commercial beef herds and there have also been few studies published on the prevalence of liver fluke or rumen fluke infection in Irish beef herds. Sixteen farms participating in the Teagasc/Farmers Journal BETTER farm beef programme were used in this study. Fourteen herds were screened for the presence of BVD virus in 2010 using RT-PCR. In 13 herds, blood samples were collected from calves (2-14 days of age) in November 2011 - April 2012 to determine their passive immune status using the zinc sulphate turbidity (ZST) test, while in 12 herds, blood and faecal samples were taken in order to determine the level of exposure to gastrointestinal and hepatic helminths. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of BVD virus-positive cattle was 0.98% (range 0 - 3% per herd, range 0.6 - 3.0% per positive herd). Eighteen of the 82 calves (22%) sampled had ZST values less than 20 units (herd mean range 17.0 - 38.5 units) indicating a failure of passive transfer. The overall animal-level (herd-level) prevalence of liver fluke and rumen fluke infection in these herds was 40.5% (100%) and 20.8% (75%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The potential costs associated with the presence of animals persistently infected with BVD virus through the increased use of antibiotics; the rate of failure of passive transfer of colostral immunoglobulins and the high prevalence of liver fluke infection in these herds highlight that some Irish suckler beef farms may not be realizing their economic potential due to a range of herd health issues. The use of farm-specific herd health plans should be further encouraged on Irish suckler beef farms.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There have been few studies published internationally which document herd health management practices in suckler beef herds and no published Irish studies. The study objective was to document herd health status and management practices on sixteen Irish suckler beef herds over a two year period (2009-2010). The farms used in the study were part of the Teagasc BETTER farm beef programme. The mean (s.d.) herd size, stocking rate and farm size was 68 cows (27.6), 2.0 LU/ha (0.3) and 64.3 (21.6) adjusted hectares, respectively. Two questionnaires were designed; 1) a farmer questionnaire to collect information on farm background and current herd health control practices and 2) a veterinary questionnaire to collect information on the extent of animal health advice given by veterinarians to their clients and identification of any on-farm herd health issues. RESULTS: Dystocia, calf pneumonia, and calf diarrhoea, in that order, were identified as the primary herd health issues in these Irish suckler beef herds. In addition, substantial deficiencies in biosecurity practices were also identified on these farms. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study may serve as the focus for future research in animal health management practices in Irish suckler beef herds.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A number of in vitro assays are used to determine susceptibility of HSV to antiviral agents, but results from these in vitro assays do not necessarily correlate with treatment outcome. OBJECTIVES: A method with improved capability for identifying an isolate as acyclovir (ACV) or penciclovir (PCV) resistant when resistance is borderline could greatly improve the management of HSV disease. STUDY DESIGN: A comparative evaluation of four in vitro assays, plaque reduction (PRA), DNA hybridization, plating efficiency (PEA) and plaque autoradiography (PAR) was performed to accurately identify and measure resistance of a TK-altered clinical HSV isolate (HSV-1 N4) from a patient who was non-responsive to ACV treatment. Two established criteria for the prediction of antiviral resistance, IC(50)> or =2.0 microg/ml or an IC(50) greater than 10x above a sensitive virus IC(50), as well as testing in human (MRC-5) and nonhuman (Vero and CV-1 monkey kidney) cell lines were evaluated. RESULTS: The PRA and DNA hybridization assays accurately identified HSV-1 N4 as ACV(r) in human cells when using the 10x above sensitive virus IC(50) resistance criterion. Moreover, the PEA and PAR assays failed to classify HSV-1 N4 as drug resistant and indicate that these technologies alone are inadequate for identifying resistant virus. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented herein indicate that the PRA and DNA hybridization assays most accurately identified an otherwise borderline-resistant isolate as drug resistant: (i) when a sensitive virus is used within each individual assay as a control, (ii) when ACV and PCV susceptibility is evaluated in human cells, and (iii) when the 10x above sensitive IC(50) criterion is used to classify a virus as drug-resistant. Testing of additional clinical samples is warranted to further confirm these findings.