Cargando…

Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle

Digital dermatitis (DD) has been reported in North American feedlots, although risk factors are not well characterized. Our objectives were to analyze: (1) foot and leg conformation and (2) pen hygiene, as potential variables that predispose feedlot cattle to DD. Production parameters in DD-affected...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cortes, Julian A, Thomas, Anice, Hendrick, Steve, Janzen, Eugene, Pajor, Ed A, Orsel, Karin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34278235
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab075
_version_ 1783722742921560064
author Cortes, Julian A
Thomas, Anice
Hendrick, Steve
Janzen, Eugene
Pajor, Ed A
Orsel, Karin
author_facet Cortes, Julian A
Thomas, Anice
Hendrick, Steve
Janzen, Eugene
Pajor, Ed A
Orsel, Karin
author_sort Cortes, Julian A
collection PubMed
description Digital dermatitis (DD) has been reported in North American feedlots, although risk factors are not well characterized. Our objectives were to analyze: (1) foot and leg conformation and (2) pen hygiene, as potential variables that predispose feedlot cattle to DD. Production parameters in DD-affected cattle were compared with healthy cattle and with those diagnosed with more commonly known infectious lesion foot rot (FR). In total, 2,854 feedlot cattle in 11 pens in 2 feedlots were assessed (bi-weekly pen walks) throughout the feeding cycle. Pen condition was categorized as: “dry,” “mud present but has good bedding,” “more mud than bedding,” and “excessive mud.” Gait scoring was competed and cattle with abnormal gait or evident foot lesions (i.e., DD or FR) were restrained in a cattle chute for a close foot inspection (n=280), including scoring of foot angle and claw set and hind and side views of rear feet and legs. Cumulative incidence of DD (present or absent) and FR was 2.5% (71/2,854) and 11.6% (331/2,854), respectively. Foot and leg conformation was not significantly different between left and right sides or between cattle with (n=71) and without DD (n=209). Lameness was diagnosed in only 22% of cattle with DD. Cattle with DD gained 0.27 kg/d less compared with healthy cattle (mean ± SD: 1.29 ± 0.29 vs. 1.56 ± 0.27, P<0.05) and 0.4 kg/d less compared with FR (1.29 ± 0.29 vs. 1.69 ± 0.25). Presence of DD was not significantly different between pens with “dry” and “mud present but has good bedding,” but for pens with “more mud than bedding” or “excessive mud,” the risk of cattle having DD cases increased significantly [odds ratio (OR)=8.55, confidence interval (CI): 4.0–18.4 and OR=14.1, CI: 5.9–33.8, respectively]. In conclusion, it is important to keep good pen conditions to reduce the risk of DD, which can be managed through proper stocking density and strategic bedding, irrespective of foot and leg conformation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8280921
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82809212021-07-16 Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle Cortes, Julian A Thomas, Anice Hendrick, Steve Janzen, Eugene Pajor, Ed A Orsel, Karin Transl Anim Sci Environmental Animal Science Digital dermatitis (DD) has been reported in North American feedlots, although risk factors are not well characterized. Our objectives were to analyze: (1) foot and leg conformation and (2) pen hygiene, as potential variables that predispose feedlot cattle to DD. Production parameters in DD-affected cattle were compared with healthy cattle and with those diagnosed with more commonly known infectious lesion foot rot (FR). In total, 2,854 feedlot cattle in 11 pens in 2 feedlots were assessed (bi-weekly pen walks) throughout the feeding cycle. Pen condition was categorized as: “dry,” “mud present but has good bedding,” “more mud than bedding,” and “excessive mud.” Gait scoring was competed and cattle with abnormal gait or evident foot lesions (i.e., DD or FR) were restrained in a cattle chute for a close foot inspection (n=280), including scoring of foot angle and claw set and hind and side views of rear feet and legs. Cumulative incidence of DD (present or absent) and FR was 2.5% (71/2,854) and 11.6% (331/2,854), respectively. Foot and leg conformation was not significantly different between left and right sides or between cattle with (n=71) and without DD (n=209). Lameness was diagnosed in only 22% of cattle with DD. Cattle with DD gained 0.27 kg/d less compared with healthy cattle (mean ± SD: 1.29 ± 0.29 vs. 1.56 ± 0.27, P<0.05) and 0.4 kg/d less compared with FR (1.29 ± 0.29 vs. 1.69 ± 0.25). Presence of DD was not significantly different between pens with “dry” and “mud present but has good bedding,” but for pens with “more mud than bedding” or “excessive mud,” the risk of cattle having DD cases increased significantly [odds ratio (OR)=8.55, confidence interval (CI): 4.0–18.4 and OR=14.1, CI: 5.9–33.8, respectively]. In conclusion, it is important to keep good pen conditions to reduce the risk of DD, which can be managed through proper stocking density and strategic bedding, irrespective of foot and leg conformation. Oxford University Press 2021-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8280921/ /pubmed/34278235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab075 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Environmental Animal Science
Cortes, Julian A
Thomas, Anice
Hendrick, Steve
Janzen, Eugene
Pajor, Ed A
Orsel, Karin
Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title_full Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title_fullStr Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title_full_unstemmed Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title_short Risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
title_sort risk factors of digital dermatitis in feedlot cattle
topic Environmental Animal Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34278235
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab075
work_keys_str_mv AT cortesjuliana riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle
AT thomasanice riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle
AT hendricksteve riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle
AT janzeneugene riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle
AT pajoreda riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle
AT orselkarin riskfactorsofdigitaldermatitisinfeedlotcattle