* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Slide 1
Neonatal infection wikipedia , lookup
Dirofilaria immitis wikipedia , lookup
Leptospirosis wikipedia , lookup
Hospital-acquired infection wikipedia , lookup
Eradication of infectious diseases wikipedia , lookup
Brucellosis wikipedia , lookup
Schistosomiasis wikipedia , lookup
Hepatitis B wikipedia , lookup
African trypanosomiasis wikipedia , lookup
Diagnosis of HIV/AIDS wikipedia , lookup
Hepatitis C wikipedia , lookup
Johne’s Control: An Atlantic Canada Success Story Greg Keefe DVM MSc MBA Atlantic Veterinary College University of Prince Edward Island Overview of Disease Johne’s Disease (Yo-nees), Paratuberculosis Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) Chronic, Infectious Enteritis Milk production losses Premature culling Reduced fertility Diarrhea and emaciation Photos courtesy of www.johnes.org Calf Heifer High risk of infection Incubating Fecal oral infection Colostrum risk No outward signs Low risk of infection/shed No overt signs Lower production Infected cow Clinical cow May shed Shedding No overt signs Chronic weight loss Lower production Poor Reproduction Diarrhea Lower production Median age between infection and shedding is 5 years Most animals get culled for low production before clinical All Herds Infected Herds Infected Cows Infectious Cows Affected Cows JD research in Atlantic Canada 15 years ago estimated that the prevalence was 17% of herds and about 2.5% of cows Blood test of 30 cows in each of 90 herds Focus on diagnostic test evaluation Determined the limitations of blood or milk testing 20-40% of infectious cows 10-20% of infected cows Atlantic Johne’s Disease Initiative December 2009 industry meeting Economic Loss Cattle Movement Decreased milk production Culling and reproduction Infection reservoir cows Movement = spread Market Access Competitive advantage for local genetics Atlantic Johne’s Disease Initiative Program Pillars Education Infection control & prevalence reduction Research MQM lab is USDA proficiency tested for 5 Johne’s diagnostics Education Website (www.atlanticjohnes.ca) Mailings and media 47 certified veterinarians Delivering 1 on 1 farm specific management plan education to dairy producers Awareness Economics Biosecurity Heifers Control Program Herd Categorization Environmental Culture (EC) Voluntary Fully funded Risk Assessment & Management Plan (RAMP) Required if herd tested Fully funded Cow Testing Voluntary - EC positive herds eligible Partial funding Herd categorization procedures Environmental culture (USDA) Manure samples from 6 sites on farm Cheaper than testing every cow No immediate cow data Interpretation of cow data complex in low prevalence farms No risk of “false positive” Whole Herd Milk ELISA (Ontario) DHI milk samples Cow data to cull very high titre animals False positive results – culling unnecessarily Risk that farmers rely on culling rather than “management” Simulating Johne’s control Kudahl AB, Ostergaard S, Sørensen JT, Nielsen SS. A stochastic model simulating paratuberculosis in a dairy herd. Prev Vet Med. 2007 Feb 16;78(2):97-117. AJDI testing goals Minimize false test results Motivate farmers to take MANAGEMENT actions Ongoing herd and cow testing project Focus on low within herd prevalence herds Dr. Carrie Lavers (PhD) 0 80 60 40 20 5 10 Within Herd Test Prevalence (Fecal Culture) Sensitivity CI_high CI_low Environmental Culture Sensitivity 71.4% Specificity 98.6% (100%) 15 0 0 20 40 60 Sensitivity at the herd level (%) 80 100 100 Herd-level testing 0 2 4 6 Within-herd prevalence (%) Sensitivity (Herd level) 8 95% Confidence interval Milk ELISA (2% cutoff) Sensitivity 55.7% Specificity 95.8% 10 Atlantic Johne’s Disease Initiative 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 82.76% 40.00% 30.00% 60.77% 71.91% 73.30% 69.28% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% NB NL NS PE Total Program Launch: June 2011 Enrolled 459 unique herds EC Herd Prevalence Round 1 1/6 EC Sites Positive 23 (5.0%) 2/6 EC Sites Positive 13 (2.8%) Total Herds Tested 459 Total Herds EC Positive 88 (19.2%) 3/6 EC Sites Positive 4 (0.9%) 4/6 EC Sites Positive 7 (1.5%) 5/6 EC Sites Positive 4 (0.9%) EC Herd Prevalence 6/6 EC Sites Positive 37 (8.1%) EC Herd Prevalence Round 2 1/6 EC Sites Positive 23 (6.1%) 2/6 EC Sites Positive 9 (2.4%) Total Herds Tested 374 Total Herds EC Positive 84 (22.7%) 3/6 EC Sites Positive 10 (2.7%) 4/6 EC Sites Positive 8 (2.1%) 5/6 EC Sites Positive 6 (1.6%) EC Herd Prevalence 6/6 EC Sites Positive 29 (7.8%) .15 Predicting Within Herd Prevalence (Lavers research) .05 .1 6/6 positive 0 2/6 positive 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 Proportion Of Positive Environmental Cultures prev pub plb 1 Overall Prevalence Total herds tested positive over 2 years = 118 Cumulative prevalence = 25.7% Identified 75% of those in year 1 and 25% only after second round Very close to what would be predicted from Lavers research ! Benchmarking Atlantic Canada USDA study 2006 68% of herds positive on single round Alberta 26% positive in first round Higher rate in year 2 Different collection procedures Risk Assessment Scoring Proportion of Maximum Risk Score Risk Assessment Section EC (-) EC (+) Section 1: General Johne’s and Biosecurity 0.54 (0.51-0.57) 0.69 (0.63-0.74) Section 2: Calving Area 0.52 (0.50-0.54) 0.55 (0.51-0.60) Section 3: Pre-weaned Heifers 0.35 (0.34-0.37) 0.39 (0.36-0.43) Section 4: Weaned to First Calving Heifers 0.45 (0.42-0.47) 0.50 (0.45-0.54) Section 5: Dry Cows 0.38 (0.36-0.40) 0.42 (0.39-0.46) Section 6: Lactating Cows 0.39 (0.37-0.41) 0.44 (0.40-0.48) Proportion of Maximum Risk Score Section 1: Management Practices EC (-) EC (+) Access visitors have to cattle on the farm 0.78 (0.75-0.84) 0.81 (0.72-0.91) History of clinical Johne’s disease 0.25 (0.22-0.27) 0.63 (0.55-0.71) History of animal purchases 0.61 (0.56-0.66) 0.78 (0.69-0.87) Exposure to other farms, animals or manure 0.40 (0.35-0.45) 0.42 (0.34-0.53) Herd Management Plan Maximum of 3 Best Management Practices Rank recommendations in order of priority Agreement between producer and vet Management Plan by EC Result Recommendations for EC Negative Herds Freq. Rank 1 Animals are not purchased (closed herd) 51% 70% >90% of calves removed <30 minutes 33% 38% No visitors or require clean clothing 23% 42% Colostrum and milk bottle/bucket fed cleaning 21% 36% Non-saleable milk never fed to calves 16% 24% Recommendations for EC Positive Herds Freq. Rank 1 Animals are not purchased (closed herd) 43% 65% >90% of calves removed <30 minutes 31% 53% No more than a single cow in calving area 21% 15% Feed milk replacer/pasteurized milk 20% 42% Feed pasteurized/artificial colostrum 18% 45% Why “Success” Exceeded targets for participation Highest of all voluntary programs Hats off to program vets/industry steering group!!! Education/extension success One on one Prevalence moderate Lower than some regions (opportunity?) 9% of herds have substantial problem Can we build on this successful model? Special Thanks Collaborators AJDI & MQM Staff Drs Shawn McKenna, Marcelo Chaffer, Carrie Lavers, Emilie Laurin, Karen MacDonald Phillips Art Gennis, Norman Wiebe, MariaVasquez, Natasha Robinson and Theresa Andrews AJDI Steering Committee Reint Jan Dykstra, Bloyce Thompson, Phillip Vroegh, Dr. Pauline Duivenrooden , Dr. Frank Schenkels, Richard Van Oord, Doug Thompson, Brian Cameron and Harry Burden Check out this video bit.ly/HJhnjv Johne’s Disease in Canadian Dairy Herds -What is means to farmers By the U of Guelph MAP team – Steven Roche and Dave Kelton www.atlanticjohnes.ca