Cow- and herd-level risk factors for lameness in partly housed pasture-based dairy cows

Farm-level risk factors and treatment protocols for lameness in New Zealand dairy cattle

AIMS

To identify farm-level risk factors for dairy cow lameness, and to describe lameness treatment protocols used on New Zealand dairy farms.

METHODS

One hundred and nineteen farms from eight veterinary clinics within the major dairying regions of New Zealand were randomly enrolled into a cross-sectional lameness prevalence study. Each farmer completed a questionnaire on lameness risk factors and lameness treatment and management. Trained observers lameness scored cattle on two occasions, between October-December (spring, coinciding with peak lactation for most farms) and between January-March (summer, late lactation for most farms). A four-point (0-3) scoring system was used to assess lameness, with animals with a lameness score (LS) ≥2 defined as lame. At each visit, all lactating animals were scored including animals that had previously been identified lame by the farmer. Associations between the farmer-reported risk factors and lameness were determined using mixed logistic regression models in a Bayesian framework, with farm and score event as random effects.

RESULTS

A lameness prevalence of 3.5% (2,113/59,631) was reported at the first LS event, and 3.3% (1,861/55,929) at the second LS event. There was a median prevalence of 2.8% (min 0, max 17.0%) from the 119 farms. Most farmers (90/117; 77%) relied on informal identification by farm staff to identify lame animals. On 65% (75/116) of farms, there was no external provider of lame cow treatments, with the farmer carrying out all lame cow treatments. Most farmers had no formal training (69/112; 62%). Animals from farms that used concrete stand-off pads during periods of inclement weather had 1.45 times the odds of lameness compared to animals on farms that did not use concrete stand-off pads (95% equal-tailed credible interval 1.07-1.88). Animals from farms that reported peak lameness incidence from January to June or all year-round, had 0.64 times odds of lameness compared to animals from farms that reported peak lameness incidence from July to December (95% equal-tailed credible interval 0.47-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Lameness prevalence was low amongst the enrolled farms. Use of concrete stand-off pads and timing of peak lameness incidence were associated with odds of lameness.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Veterinarians should be encouraging farmers to have formal lameness identification protocols and lameness management plans in place. There is ample opportunity to provide training to farmers for lame cow treatment. Management of cows on stand-off pads should consider the likely impact on lameness.

Global losses due to dairy cattle diseases: A comorbidity-adjusted economic analysis

An economic simulation was carried out over 183 milk-producing countries to estimate the global economic impacts of 12 dairy cattle diseases and health conditions: mastitis (subclinical and clinical), lameness, paratuberculosis (Johne's disease), displaced abomasum, dystocia, metritis, milk fever, ovarian cysts, retained placenta, and ketosis (subclinical and clinical). Estimates of disease impacts on milk yield, fertility, and culling were collected from the literature, standardized, meta-analyzed using a variety of methods ranging from simple averaging to random-effects models, and adjusted for comorbidities to prevent overestimation. These comorbidity-adjusted disease impacts were then combined with a set of country-level lactational incidence and/or prevalence estimates, herd characteristics, and price estimates within a series of Monte Carlo simulations that estimated and valued the economic losses due to these diseases. It was estimated that total annual global losses are USD 65 billion (B). Subclinical ketosis, clinical mastitis, and subclinical mastitis were the costliest diseases modeled, resulting in mean annual global losses of approximately USD 18B, USD 13B, and USD 9B, respectively. Estimated global annual losses due to clinical ketosis, displaced abomasum, dystocia, lameness, metritis, milk fever, ovarian cysts, paratuberculosis, and retained placenta were estimated to be USD 0.2B, 0.6B, 0.6B, 6B, 5B, 0.6B, 4B, 4B, and 3B, respectively. Without adjustment for comorbidities, when statistical associations between diseases were disregarded, mean aggregate global losses would have been overestimated by 45%. Although annual losses were greatest in India (USD 12B), the USA (USD 8B), and China (USD 5B), depending on the measure of losses used (losses as a percent of GDP, losses per capita, losses as a percent of gross milk revenue), the relative economic burden of these dairy cattle diseases across countries varied markedly.

Sensitivity and specificity of mobility scoring for the detection of foot lesions in pasture-based Irish dairy cows

Lameness is an important production disease in dairy cows worldwide and has detrimental effects on cows' welfare, production, and reproductive performance, thus affecting the sustainability of dairy farming. Timely and effective detection of lameness allows for effective treatment, minimizing progression of disease, and maximizing the prognosis of recovery. Mobility scoring (MSc) is a 4 point (0-3) visual lameness scoring system that is the industry standard in several countries. However, few studies have examined the sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of MSc to detect foot lesions. The aim of this observational study was to determine the Se and Sp of MSc to detect foot lesions in dairy cattle in a pasture-based system. Five hundred ninety-five primi- and multiparous cows were randomly selected from 12 commercial Irish dairy farms and recruited for the study. Recruited cows were mobility scored and passed through a foot-paring crate where all 4 feet were lifted for examination. The team recorded the anatomical location and severity of any foot lesions present based on appearance only. Then, based on the type and severity of the lesions present, cows were classified according to 3 case definitions case definition 1: Any lesion present; case definition 2: Moderate lesions present (excluding minor lesions expected to have a low probability of affecting gait); and case definition 3: Severe lesions present (only including lesions most likely to result in a detectable gait abnormality). Sensitivity and Sp of MSc was calculated based on a threshold of MSc ≥2, defined as impaired (MSc = 2) or severely impaired (MSc = 3) mobility for each of the 3 case definitions, at the overall level and disaggregated by parity. The overall cow-level lesion prevalence based on the case definition 1 was 0.54 with significant between-herd variation. The overall Se and Sp of MSc for the detection of foot lesions were 0.18 and 0.96, 0.35 and 0.94, 0.43 and 0.94 for the case definitions 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Our findings showed poor Se, but high Sp of MSc for the detection of cows with foot lesions in a pasture-based system.

Body conformation traits in early-lactation associated with clinical mastitis and lameness in lactating Chinese holstein cows

BACKGROUND

Comprehending the correlation between body conformation traits of cows at the early stages of lactation and prevalent lactation diseases might facilitate the execution of selection and feeding strategies that prioritize cow health. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of body conformation traits on the incidence of clinical mastitis and lameness in Chinese Holstein cows. From a pasture herd of 1472 early lactating Chinese Holstein cows, we evaluated 20 body conformation traits. During lactation, this pasture herd was visited weekly to gather clinical mastitis and lameness data. A nine-point scale was used to determine the conformation traits of cows to clarify their linear characters, including frame capacity, rump (RU), feet and leg (FL), mammary system (MS), and dairy character. A longitudinal binary disease (0 = healthy; 1 = diseased) data structure was created by allocating disease records to adjacent official test dates. The impact of body conformation traits on the risk of developing diseases (clinical mastitis and lameness) was analyzed using the logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Compared to cows with low total scores (75-79 points), those with high total scores (80-85 points) of body conformation traits had a significantly lower risk of mastitis (P < 0.001). The disease status (0 or 1: binary variable) of clinical mastitis in lactating cows was significantly impacted negatively by age (P < 0.05). The fore udder attachment (FUA), angularity, rear attachment height (RAH), and rear teat placement (RTP) were all significantly associated with clinical mastitis during lactation (P < 0.05). The rear leg-rear view (RLRV) was significantly correlated with correlated considerably (P < 0.05) with lameness during lactation. An ideal score of four points on the lameness risk dimension of the RLRV may indicate a low risk of lameness. Since the risk of mastitis decreased as this trait score increased, the RTP may be an ideal marker for mastitis risk.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the study, clinical mastitis and lameness risks in cows can be estimated using their body conformation traits. Cows with more centrally located rear teats have a lower risk of mastitis. These results may help dairy farmers identify cows at high risk of disease early in lactation and aid in breeding for disease resistance in cows.

Prevalence of lameness in dairy cows: A literature review

Lameness in dairy cows has major negative impacts on animal welfare and production economy. While previous studies have evaluated the prevalence of lameness in single countries, the present literature review is the first overview of the prevalence of lameness in dairy cows globally. This literature review identified 53 studies reporting prevalence of lameness among representative samples of dairy cows and fulfilling a number of specified inclusion criteria (e.g., at least 10 herds and 200 cows, and locomotion scoring by trained observers). A total of 414,950 cows from 3945 herds were included in these 53 studies, which spanned a 30-year period (1989-2020) and included herds from six continents, with the majority from Europe and North America. Across the studies, the mean prevalence of lameness (typically defined as score 3-5 on a 1-5 scale) was 22.8% with a median of 22.0% and a range between studies from 5.1% to 45%, and a within herd range from 0% to 88%. The mean prevalence of severely lame cows (typically defined as score 4-5 on a 1-5 scale) was 7.0% with a median of 6.5% and a range between studies from 1.8% to 21.2%, and a within herd range from 0% to 65%. Over time, it appears that the prevalence of lameness has changed very little. Several different locomotion scoring systems and definitions of (severe) lameness were used across the 53 studies, and this may have affected the reported lameness prevalence. Sampling of herds and cows, inclusion criteria and representativeness also differed between studies. This review offers recommendations for the future capture of information on lameness in dairy cows and identifies potential knowledge gaps.

The Combined Use of Automated Milking System and Sensor Data to Improve Detection of Mild Lameness in Dairy Cattle

This study aimed to develop a tool to detect mildly lame cows by combining already existing data from sensors, AMSs, and routinely recorded animal and farm data. For this purpose, ten dairy farms were visited every 30–42 days from January 2020 to May 2021. Locomotion scores (LCS, from one for nonlame to five for severely lame) and body condition scores (BCS) were assessed at each visit, resulting in a total of 594 recorded animals. A questionnaire about farm management and husbandry was completed for the inclusion of potential risk factors. A lameness incidence risk (LCS ≥ 2) was calculated and varied widely between farms with a range from 27.07 to 65.52%. Moreover, the impact of lameness on the derived sensor parameters was inspected and showed no significant impact of lameness on total rumination time. Behavioral patterns for eating, low activity, and medium activity differed significantly in lame cows compared to nonlame cows. Finally, random forest models for lameness detection were fit by including different combinations of influencing variables. The results of these models were compared according to accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. The best performing model achieved an accuracy of 0.75 with a sensitivity of 0.72 and specificity of 0.78. These approaches with routinely available data and sensor data can deliver promising results for early lameness detection in dairy cattle. While experimental automated lameness detection systems have achieved improved predictive results, the benefit of this presented approach is that it uses results from existing, routinely recorded, and therefore widely available data.

Hoof lesions in partly housed pasture-based dairy cows

Lameness is a symptom of a painful disorder affecting the limbs, which impacts dairy cow welfare and productivity. Lameness is primarily caused by hoof lesions. The prevalence of different lesion types can differ depending on environmental conditions and farm management practices. The aims of this observational study were to establish the cow-level and herd-level lesion prevalence during both housing and grazing periods in a partly housed, pasture-based system, establish the prevalence of lesions always associated with pain ("alarm" lesion), identify the lesions associated with a higher lameness score, determine relationships between lesions, and identify risk factors for digital dermatitis. On 98 farms during the grazing period and on 74 of the same farms during the housing period, every cow was lameness scored (0-3 lameness scoring scale), and the hind hooves of lame cows (score 2 and 3) were examined (maximum 20 cows per visit) and the prevalence of each lesion type recorded. To gather data on potential predictors for the risk factor analysis, a questionnaire with the farmer was conducted on lameness management practices and infrastructure measurements were taken at each visit. Cow-level data were also collected (e.g., parity, breed, milk yield, and so on). Noninfectious lesions were found to be more prevalent than infectious lesions in this system type. The most prevalent lesion types during both grazing and housing periods were white line separation, sole hemorrhages and overgrown claws; all remaining lesions had a cow-level prevalence of less than 15%. The cow-level prevalence of alarm lesions was 19% during the grazing period and 25% during the housing period; the most prevalent alarm lesion was sole ulcers during both periods. We found significantly more foreign bodies within the hoof sole (grazing = 14%, housing = 7%) and overgrown claws (grazing = 71%, housing = 55%) during the grazing period compared with the housing period. Cows with foul of the foot, sole ulcer, white line abscess, toe necrosis or an amputated claw had higher odds of being more severely lame, compared with mildly lame. The strongest correlation between lesions were between toe necrosis and digital dermatitis (r = 0.40), overgrown claws and corkscrew claws (r = 0.33), and interdigital hyperplasia and digital dermatitis (r = 0.31) at herd level. At the cow level, the strongest correlation was between overgrown claws and corkscrew claws (r = 0.27), and digital dermatitis and heel erosion (r = 0.22). The farmers' perception of the presence of digital dermatitis (and lameness) was significantly correlated with the actual presence of digital dermatitis recorded. Additional risk factors for the presence of digital dermatitis were cow track and verge width near the collecting yard, and stone presence on the cow tracks. Results from this study help further our understanding of the causes of lameness in partly housed, pasture-based dairy cows, and can be used to guide prevention and treatment protocols.

Risk factors associated with indicators of dairy cow welfare during the housing period in Irish, spring-calving, hybrid pasture-based systems

In a dairy production system where cows are grazing for a large portion of their lactation, little attention has been afforded to investigating multiple indicators of welfare for risk factors associated with the housing period. Yet regardless of the length of the housing period, cows still experience the positive and negative welfare impacts of both indoor and outdoor environments in a hybrid system. Thus, the objective of this study was to identify risk factors for indicators of dairy cow welfare during the housing period in a spring-calving, hybrid pasture-based system. Herd-level scores for seven indicators of welfare (locomotion, body condition, ocular and nasal discharge, integument damage, tail injury and human avoidance response) were collected from 82 Irish dairy farms during the housing period (October - February). Data were analysed using multiple beta regression or zero-inflated beta regression to identify associations between these welfare indicators and measured herd-level housing, resource and management factors. Thirty-six unique risk factors were associated with one or more welfare indicators (P < 0.05). Analyses identified two risk factors for body condition < 3.0 and four for body condition > 3.5, the target range during the housing period. Four risk factors were identified for each of ocular discharge, nasal discharge and avoidance response of > 1 m from human approach. Six risk factors each were associated with the proportion of lame cows and integument damage to the head-neck-back or hindquarter regions. The greatest number of risk factors, 12, were associated with tail injury (broken, lacerated or incomplete tails). Risk factors associated with multiple indicators of welfare were cow comfort index (tail lacerations and hindquarter integument damage), cubicle width (broken and incomplete tails), shed floor slipperiness (lameness and head-neck-back integument damage), shed light-level (tail lacerations, avoidance response and below target body condition), shed passage width (broken tails and head-neck-back integument damage) and presence (incomplete tails) or absence (broken tails) of a collecting yard backing gate. With the large number of risk factors associated with tail injury, continued research is necessary to identify causes and determine prevention methods to contribute to improved overall welfare of dairy cows. Housing features meeting recommended guidelines from the literature were frequently associated with greater negative indicators of welfare. In light of this, housing guidelines may benefit from regular re-evaluation to ensure facilities meet the welfare needs of cows during the housing period.

Lameness prevalence and management practices on Irish pasture-based dairy farms

Background

Lameness is a painful disease, which negatively impacts dairy cow production and welfare. The aim of this observational study was to determine herd lameness prevalence, describe current lameness management practices and identify the presence of established risk factors for lameness on Irish pasture-based dairy farms. Farms were visited once during grazing (99 farms) and again during housing (85 farms). Lameness scoring was carried out at each visit (AHDB 0–3 scale); cows were classified as lame if they scored two or three. Farm management practices and infrastructure characteristics were evaluated via farmer questionnaires and direct measurements of farm infrastructure.

Results

Median herd-level lameness prevalence was 7.9% (interquartile range = 5.6 – 13.0) during grazing and 9.1% (interquartile range = 4.9 – 12.0) during housing; 10.9% of cows were lame at a single visit and 3.5% were lame at both visits (chronically lame or had a repeat episode of lameness). Fifty-seven percent of farmers were not familiar with lameness scoring and only one farm carried out lameness scoring. Only 22% of farmers kept records of lame cows detected, and 15% had a lameness herd health plan. Twenty-eight percent of farmers waited more than 48 h to treat a lame cow, and 21% waited for more than one cow to be identified as lame before treating. Six percent of farmers carried out routine trimming and 31% regularly footbathed (> 12 times per year). Twelve percent put severely lame cows in a closer paddock and 8% stated that they used pain relief to treat severely lame cows. Over 50% of farms had at least one cow track measurement that was classified as rough or very rough, and cow tracks were commonly narrow for the herd size. On 6% of farms, all cubicle beds were bare concrete (no matting or bedding) and on a further 6% of farms, there was a combination of cubicles with and without matting or bedding. On 56% of farms, all pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow and on 28% of farms, a proportion of pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow.

Conclusions

Overall, this study identified infrastructure and management practices which could be improved upon. The comparatively low lameness prevalence demonstrated, compared to fully housed systems, also highlights the benefits of a pasture-based system for animal welfare; however, there remains scope for improvement.

Association between a genetic index for lameness resistance and the incidence of claw horn lesions in Holstein cows

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the association between the lameness advantage genetic index and four outcomes: sole haemorrhage (SH), sole ulcers (SU), white line lesions (WL), and lameness during mobility scoring.

METHODS

We enrolled 2352 Holstein cows from four predominantly housed dairy herds in the UK. Cows were mobility scored and foot lesions recorded at four time points from before calving to late lactation. Cows were genotyped and genetic indexes were assigned to each cow following national genetic evaluations. Lameness records and genetic indexes were matched for 2107 cows. Four separate multivariable logistic regression models, which included farm and parity as covariables, were used to quantify the association between the lameness advantage index and whether animals were affected by SH, SU, WL, or lameness.

RESULTS

The odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for one-point increases in the lameness advantage index were 0.79 (0.72-0.86), 0.68 (0.59-0.78), 0.94 (0.84-1.04), and 0.82 (0.74-0.91) for SH, SU, WL, and lameness, respectively. The same trends were present when the sire's lameness advantage index was evaluated in place of the animal's own, although the strength of this association was generally weaker.

CONCLUSION

The lameness advantage index is associated with SH, SU, and lameness, therefore selection on the lameness advantage index could be considered in herds aiming to reduce lameness. Where genomic testing of heifers is not conducted, sire lameness advantage index may still be effective to reduce SH and SU incidence.