Survival of bovine digital dermatitis treponemes on hoof knife blades and the effects of various disinfectants.
Dairy cattle
Digital dermatitis
Disinfection
Hoof knives
Treponemes
Journal
The Veterinary record
ISSN: 2042-7670
Titre abrégé: Vet Rec
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0031164
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Jan 2020
18 Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
27
03
2019
revised:
19
08
2019
accepted:
17
10
2019
pubmed:
21
11
2019
medline:
23
9
2020
entrez:
21
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bovine digital dermatitis (BDD) is a painful infectious foot disease of cattle, and much evidence implicates a pathogenic role for treponemes. This study measured the survival of BDD treponemes on hoof knife blades and tested the efficacy of relevant disinfectants under laboratory conditions. Two strains of BDD treponemes were applied to hoof knife blades under aerobic conditions. Swabs were taken at different time points (10 minutes, one hour, two hours, four hours and 18 hours) and again after 20-second disinfection time with one of five disinfectants. Swabs were used directly for nested PCR to detect treponemes or inoculated for anaerobic growth, and subsequently examined using phase contrast microscopy and PCR. BDD treponeme DNA was detectable by nested PCR at all survival time points, and these organisms were culturable from hoof knives for two hours after exposure under aerobic conditions in the laboratory. Three of the five disinfectants-1 per cent volume per volume (v/v) FAM30 Treponeme viability of two hours under aerobic conditions suggests BDD treponemes could be transmitted between cows on hoof knives. It is therefore important to apply a disinfection protocol during foot-trimming; the authors have identified three common disinfectants that may be suitable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Bovine digital dermatitis (BDD) is a painful infectious foot disease of cattle, and much evidence implicates a pathogenic role for treponemes. This study measured the survival of BDD treponemes on hoof knife blades and tested the efficacy of relevant disinfectants under laboratory conditions.
METHODS
METHODS
Two strains of BDD treponemes were applied to hoof knife blades under aerobic conditions. Swabs were taken at different time points (10 minutes, one hour, two hours, four hours and 18 hours) and again after 20-second disinfection time with one of five disinfectants. Swabs were used directly for nested PCR to detect treponemes or inoculated for anaerobic growth, and subsequently examined using phase contrast microscopy and PCR.
RESULTS
RESULTS
BDD treponeme DNA was detectable by nested PCR at all survival time points, and these organisms were culturable from hoof knives for two hours after exposure under aerobic conditions in the laboratory. Three of the five disinfectants-1 per cent volume per volume (v/v) FAM30
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Treponeme viability of two hours under aerobic conditions suggests BDD treponemes could be transmitted between cows on hoof knives. It is therefore important to apply a disinfection protocol during foot-trimming; the authors have identified three common disinfectants that may be suitable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31744926
pii: vr.105406
doi: 10.1136/vr.105406
pmc: PMC7029245
doi:
Substances chimiques
Disinfectants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
67Informations de copyright
© British Veterinary Association 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Prev Vet Med. 1999 Jan 1;38(1):11-24
pubmed: 10022049
Vet Microbiol. 2008 Jul 27;130(1-2):141-50
pubmed: 18243592
Vet Microbiol. 2009 Apr 14;136(1-2):115-20
pubmed: 19081208
Vet J. 2018 Apr;234:91-95
pubmed: 29680401
Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Feb;11(2):271-7
pubmed: 15752446
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Jul;51(7):2212-9
pubmed: 23658264
Vet J. 2016 May;211:3-13
pubmed: 27061657
Vet Rec. 2017 Jul 22;181(4):89
pubmed: 28642342
J Dairy Sci. 2013 May;96(5):3034-8
pubmed: 23498015
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Mar;47(3):689-96
pubmed: 19144804
Vet Rec. 2014 Aug 30;175(8):201
pubmed: 24821857
J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Sep;40(9):3463-9
pubmed: 12202594