Effect of Culling Management Practices on the Seroprevalence of Johne's Disease in Holstein Dairy Cattle in Central Italy.

Johne’s disease culling strategy paratuberculosis productive life seroprevalence

Journal

Veterinary sciences
ISSN: 2306-7381
Titre abrégé: Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101680127

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Mar 2022
Historique:
received: 10 03 2022
revised: 23 03 2022
accepted: 23 03 2022
entrez: 21 4 2022
pubmed: 22 4 2022
medline: 22 4 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

A study was performed in Umbria, central Italy, to find out whether different culling strategies adopted by farms to control Johne’s disease (JD) infection exerted effects on the seroprevalence in dairy cattle. Fifty Fresian dairy herds in the Perugia and Assisi districts were visited and an audit of herd management was conducted. Among the 50 herds, 20 were selected for the consistency of management practices and, according to the culling strategy, two groups were created: group A (aggressive culling protocol, with average herd productive life <1100 days) and group B (lower culling rate, with productive life greater than 1500 days). The presence of antibodies to Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (Map) in the serum was determined using a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit. It was found that 3.3% (n = 14) of the cows of group B (n = 422, from 17 herds) were positive for Map antibodies, in comparison with 5.7% (n = 21) of the cows from group A (n = 366, from three herds). The odds ratio from multiple logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio 2.446, 95% confidence interval 0.412 to 14.525) showed that Johne’s disease prevalence in herds with a greater productive life was not higher than in herds with typical modern management characterized by more aggressive culling. This is a significant finding, indicating that aggressive culling may not be necessary. Current JD control recommendations are derived from data obtained in high-prevalence paratuberculosis areas (northern Europe, including northern Italy), while methods of information transfer to dairy farms in low-prevalence areas should be reassessed to ensure that the correct measures, including basic calving management and calf-rearing practices, are thoroughly implemented. Using the manufacturer’s suggested cut-off for a positive ELISA test and the sensitivity and specificity claimed, the overall true prevalence in Umbria dairy cattle was calculated as 7% (95% confidence interval 5.2% to 8.8%).

Identifiants

pubmed: 35448660
pii: vetsci9040162
doi: 10.3390/vetsci9040162
pmc: PMC9025121
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

Vet Rec. 2010 Oct 9;167(15):577-8
pubmed: 21257421
J Dairy Sci. 2022 Mar;105(3):2499-2508
pubmed: 34998565
EFSA J. 2004 May 17;2(5):54
pubmed: 32313574
Microbiologyopen. 2019 Oct;8(10):e875
pubmed: 31420952
J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2003 Oct;50(8):372-7
pubmed: 14633206
Prev Vet Med. 2007 Jul 16;80(2-3):103-19
pubmed: 17350703
Sensors (Basel). 2021 Dec 14;21(24):
pubmed: 34960442
Prev Vet Med. 2007 Oct 16;81(4):306-17
pubmed: 17561292
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009 Jan;75(1):113-8
pubmed: 18978077
Prev Vet Med. 2007 Feb 16;78(2):118-29
pubmed: 17101188
Vet Rec. 2005 Jun 25;156(26):825-31
pubmed: 15980134
Reprod Domest Anim. 2020 Dec;55(12):1803-1807
pubmed: 32780888
Prev Vet Med. 2009 Jan 1;88(1):1-14
pubmed: 18817995
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2008 Dec 15;233(12):1920-6
pubmed: 19072610
Animals (Basel). 2021 Oct 14;11(10):
pubmed: 34680028
Prev Vet Med. 2006 Jul 17;75(1-2):92-122
pubmed: 16564101
Prev Vet Med. 2021 Jul;192:105389
pubmed: 34062370
J Dairy Sci. 2016 Feb;99(2):1449-1460
pubmed: 26686704
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Oct;103(10):9646-9655
pubmed: 32747104
BMC Vet Res. 2019 Jun 13;15(1):198
pubmed: 31196162
Vet Microbiol. 2000 Dec 20;77(3-4):387-98
pubmed: 11118724
Prev Vet Med. 2011 Oct 1;102(1):83-6
pubmed: 21807432
Vet Microbiol. 2005 Aug 30;109(3-4):147-58
pubmed: 15970402
Prev Vet Med. 2007 Dec 14;82(3-4):302-7
pubmed: 17628725
Vet Q. 2016 Dec;36(4):203-227
pubmed: 27356470
Vet J. 2019 Apr;246:59-65
pubmed: 30902190
Aust Vet J. 2005 Jan-Feb;83(1-2):85-90
pubmed: 15971827
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Aug;98(8):5019-39
pubmed: 26074241
J Theor Biol. 2008 Sep 7;254(1):135-46
pubmed: 18573505
Can Vet J. 2006 Sep;47(9):874-82
pubmed: 17017652
Animals (Basel). 2020 Oct 01;10(10):
pubmed: 33019502
Vet J. 2010 Apr;184(1):37-44
pubmed: 19246220
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 Dec 15;229(12):1912-9
pubmed: 17173528

Auteurs

Martina Crociati (M)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.
Centre for Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, University of Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.

Luca Grispoldi (L)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.

Athanasios Chalias (A)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.
European Food Safety Authority, EU-FORA Programme, 43126 Parma, Italy.

Maurizio Monaci (M)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.
Centre for Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, University of Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.

Beniamino Cenci-Goga (B)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.
Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort 0110, South Africa.

Lakamy Sylla (L)

Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Perugia, 06126 Perugia, Italy.

Classifications MeSH