Footrot and contagious ovine digital dermatitis (CODD) are common causes of foot disease of sheep in the UK. The study reported here is a split flock randomised treatment trial undertaken on a group of 748 fattening lambs on a UK sheep farm affected by CODD and footrot. The sheep were randomly assigned to one of two treatment protocols. In protocol A, all sheep were given two doses of footrot vaccine (Footvax, MSD), plus targeted antibiotic therapy (long-acting amoxicillin, Betamox LA, Norbrook Pharmaceuticals) to sheep with foot lesions likely to be associated with a bacterial infection. In protocol B, the sheep only received targeted antibiotic therapy. Sheep were re-examined and foot lesions recorded five and nine weeks later. New infection rates in the footrot vaccinated group were lower compared with the vaccinated group for both CODD (18.2 per cent compared with 26.4 per cent, P=0.014) and footrot (12.55 per cent compared with 27.5 per cent, P<0.001). Recovery rates were unaffected for CODD (80.46 per cent compared with 70.97 per cent, P=0.14) but higher for footrot (92.09 per cent compared with 81.54 per cent, P=0.005) in sheep which received the vaccine. On this farm, a footrot vaccine efficacy of 62 per cent was identified against footrot and 32 per cent against CODD infection. An association between a sheep having footrot at visit 1 and subsequently acquiring CODD was identified (odds ratio [OR] 3.83, 95 per cent CI 2.61 to 5.62, P<0.001). These results suggest a role for infection with Dichelobacter nodosus in the aetiopathogenesis of CODD on this farm.
Lameness in the beef industry has received little attention in the UK, despite the fact that it is a well-recognised problem in the dairy industry. The aims of this study were to (i) compare UK beef farmers' estimates of lameness prevalence to that of researchers, (ii) explore beef farmers' attitudes towards lameness, and (iii) help identify farmer reported barriers to lameness control and treatment. Beef farmers (11 finishing units and 10 suckler farms) were recruited from England and Wales. Farmers were asked to estimate their lameness prevalence, before a researcher conducted locomotion scoring using a five point scale, and a Bland Altman analysis performed. Face to face interviews were also conducted using a semi structured interview script aimed at capturing information such as current approaches and protocols as well as their views of lameness importance. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. An inductive thematic analysis was performed. All but two farmers underestimated lameness prevalence on their farms when compared to the researcher. Farmers initially underestimated lameness prevalence compared to the researchers estimates, with a mean underestimate of 7% (95% CI 5–9%). This is an important barrier to lameness detection and treatment. Thematic analysis identified four major themes: (1). Perception of lameness prevalence, (2). Technical knowledge and skills, (3). Perception of the impact of lameness, and (4). Barriers to the treatment and control of lameness. This study highlights that some approaches to lameness treatment are likely to be causing harm, despite being done with the intention to help the animal. There were four key areas of concern identified: recognition of lameness, treatment approaches, the training provided to farmers and confusion over transport and slaughter options available to farmers. This suggests an urgent need for future work to quantify and address the problem, and to provide evidence to justify the role of prevention and potentially start to break down barriers to control and treatment of lameness.
Mastitis is one of the most costly diseases affecting the dairy industry, and identification of the causative microorganism(s) is essential. Here, we report the use of next-generation sequencing of bacterial 16S rRNA genes for clinical mastitis diagnosis. We used 65 paired milk samples, collected from the mastitic and a contralateral healthy quarter of mastitic dairy cattle to evaluate the technique as a potential alternative to bacterial culture or targeted PCR. One large commercial dairy farm was used, with one trained veterinarian collecting the milk samples. The 16S rRNA genes were individually amplified and sequenced using the MiSeq platform. The MiSeq Reporter was used in order to analyze the obtained sequences. Cattle were categorized according to whether or not 1 of the 10 most abundant bacterial genera in the mastitic quarter exhibited an increase in relative abundance between the healthy and mastitic quarters equal to, or exceeding, twofold. We suggest that this increase in relative abundance is indicative of the genus being a causative mastitis pathogen. Well-known mastitis-causing pathogens such as Streptococcus uberis and Staphylococcus spp. were identified in most cattle. We were able to diagnose 53 out of the 65 studied cases and identify potential new mastitis pathogens such as Sneathia sanguinegens and Listeria innocua, which are difficult to identify by bacterial culture because of their fastidious nature.
The present study is a randomised split-flock treatment trial, which compared the effect of foot bathing in a 1 per cent solution of chlortetracycline alone with a treatment protocol that added a single injection of a long-acting amoxicillin. Overall, the prevalence of contagious ovine digital dermatitis in the examined flock was 22 per cent, while 45.7 per cent of affected sheep had infections in two or more feet. Parenteral antibiotic treatment increased the odds of a recovery by 3.8 times (95 per cent confidence interval 1.05 to 14.0) (P=0.008). Moreover, the amoxicillin injection may also have had a preventative effect, reducing the rate of establishment of new infections from 2.5 per cent for foot bathing alone compared with 1.0 per cent with the addition of parenteral amoxicillin.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.