The prevalence of damaged tails in New Zealand dairy cattle.

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
New Zealand veterinary journal Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-11 DOI:10.1080/00480169.2024.2321180
E L Cuttance, W A Mason, S Y Hea, M A Bryan, R A Laven
{"title":"The prevalence of damaged tails in New Zealand dairy cattle.","authors":"E L Cuttance, W A Mason, S Y Hea, M A Bryan, R A Laven","doi":"10.1080/00480169.2024.2321180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To undertake a survey of the prevalence of tail deviations, trauma and shortening on a representative selection of New Zealand dairy farms, and to assess whether sampling based on milking order could be used instead of random sampling across the herd to estimate prevalence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional observational study, with 200 randomly selected farms enrolled across nine regions of New Zealand via selected veterinary practices (one/region). Veterinary clinics enrolled 20-25 farms each depending on region, with 1-2 trained technicians scoring per region. All cows (n = 92,348) present at a milking or pregnancy testing event were tail scored using a modified version of the New Zealand Veterinary Association Industry Scoring System. Palpated lesions were recorded as deviated (i.e. non-linear deformity), shortened (tail shorter than normal) or traumatic (all other lesions). The location of lesions was defined by dividing the tail into three equal zones: upper, middle and lower. A cow could have more than one lesion type and location, and/or multiple lesions of the same type, but for the prevalence calculation, only the presence or absence of a particular lesion was assessed. Prevalence of tail damage calculated using whole herd scoring was compared to random sampling across the herd and sampling from the front and back of the milking order. Bootstrap sampling with replacement was used to generate the sampling distributions across seven sample sizes ranging from 40-435 cows.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When scoring all cows, the median prevalence for deviation was 9.5 (min 0.9, max 40.3)%; trauma 0.9 (min 0, max 10.7)%, and shortening was 4.5 (min 1.3, max 10.8)%. Deviation and trauma prevalence varied between regions; the median prevalence of deviations ranged from 6% in the West Coast to 13% in Waikato, and the median prevalence of all tail damage from 7% in the West Coast to 29% in Southland. Sampling based on milking order was less precise than random sampling across the herd. With the latter and using 157 cows, 95% of prevalence estimates were within 5% of the whole herd estimate, but sampling based on milking order needed > 300 cows to achieve the same precision.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical relevance: </strong>The proportion of cows identified as having damaged tails was consistent with recent reports from New Zealand and Ireland, but at 11.5%, the proportion of cows with trauma or deviation is below acceptable standards. An industry-wide programme is needed to reduce the proportion of affected cows.</p>","PeriodicalId":19322,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand veterinary journal","volume":" ","pages":"123-132"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand veterinary journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2024.2321180","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To undertake a survey of the prevalence of tail deviations, trauma and shortening on a representative selection of New Zealand dairy farms, and to assess whether sampling based on milking order could be used instead of random sampling across the herd to estimate prevalence.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study, with 200 randomly selected farms enrolled across nine regions of New Zealand via selected veterinary practices (one/region). Veterinary clinics enrolled 20-25 farms each depending on region, with 1-2 trained technicians scoring per region. All cows (n = 92,348) present at a milking or pregnancy testing event were tail scored using a modified version of the New Zealand Veterinary Association Industry Scoring System. Palpated lesions were recorded as deviated (i.e. non-linear deformity), shortened (tail shorter than normal) or traumatic (all other lesions). The location of lesions was defined by dividing the tail into three equal zones: upper, middle and lower. A cow could have more than one lesion type and location, and/or multiple lesions of the same type, but for the prevalence calculation, only the presence or absence of a particular lesion was assessed. Prevalence of tail damage calculated using whole herd scoring was compared to random sampling across the herd and sampling from the front and back of the milking order. Bootstrap sampling with replacement was used to generate the sampling distributions across seven sample sizes ranging from 40-435 cows.

Results: When scoring all cows, the median prevalence for deviation was 9.5 (min 0.9, max 40.3)%; trauma 0.9 (min 0, max 10.7)%, and shortening was 4.5 (min 1.3, max 10.8)%. Deviation and trauma prevalence varied between regions; the median prevalence of deviations ranged from 6% in the West Coast to 13% in Waikato, and the median prevalence of all tail damage from 7% in the West Coast to 29% in Southland. Sampling based on milking order was less precise than random sampling across the herd. With the latter and using 157 cows, 95% of prevalence estimates were within 5% of the whole herd estimate, but sampling based on milking order needed > 300 cows to achieve the same precision.

Conclusions and clinical relevance: The proportion of cows identified as having damaged tails was consistent with recent reports from New Zealand and Ireland, but at 11.5%, the proportion of cows with trauma or deviation is below acceptable standards. An industry-wide programme is needed to reduce the proportion of affected cows.

新西兰奶牛尾巴受损的普遍程度。
目的:对新西兰奶牛场中具有代表性的部分牧场进行尾部偏差、外伤和短缩发生率的调查,并评估是否可以使用基于挤奶顺序的抽样而不是整个牛群的随机抽样来估计发生率:这是一项横断面观察研究,通过选定的兽医诊所(每个地区一家)在新西兰的九个地区随机抽取 200 个牧场。兽医诊所根据地区不同,每个诊所负责 20-25 个牧场,每个地区有 1-2 名训练有素的技术人员负责评分。所有参加挤奶或妊娠检测的奶牛(n = 92,348 头)均使用新西兰兽医协会行业评分系统的改进版进行尾部评分。触诊到的病变记录为偏离(即非线性畸形)、缩短(尾巴比正常短)或外伤(所有其他病变)。将牛尾分为上、中、下三个等分区来确定病变位置。一头奶牛可能有不止一种病变类型和位置,和/或同一类型的多种病变,但在计算患病率时,只评估是否存在特定病变。用全牛群评分法计算的尾部损伤流行率与全牛群随机取样法和挤奶顺序前后取样法进行了比较。使用带替换的Bootstrap抽样法生成从40-435头奶牛的七个样本的抽样分布:对所有奶牛进行评分时,偏离率中位数为 9.5%(最低 0.9%,最高 40.3%);外伤率中位数为 0.9%(最低 0%,最高 10.7%);缩短率中位数为 4.5%(最低 1.3%,最高 10.8%)。偏离和外伤发生率因地区而异;偏离发生率的中位数从西海岸的6%到怀卡托的13%不等,所有尾部损伤发生率的中位数从西海岸的7%到南地的29%不等。基于挤奶顺序的抽样不如整个牛群的随机抽样精确。后者使用157头奶牛,95%的患病率估计值在整个牛群估计值的5%以内,但基于挤奶顺序的抽样需要>300头奶牛才能达到同样的精确度:被鉴定为牛尾受损的奶牛比例与新西兰和爱尔兰最近的报告一致,但有外伤或偏差的奶牛比例为 11.5%,低于可接受的标准。需要在整个行业开展一项计划,以降低受影响奶牛的比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
New Zealand veterinary journal
New Zealand veterinary journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The New Zealand Veterinary Journal (NZVJ) is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed articles covering all aspects of veterinary science, including clinical practice, animal welfare and animal health. The NZVJ publishes original research findings, clinical communications (including novel case reports and case series), rapid communications, correspondence and review articles, originating from New Zealand and internationally. Topics should be relevant to, but not limited to, New Zealand veterinary and animal science communities, and include the disciplines of infectious disease, medicine, surgery and the health, management and welfare of production and companion animals, horses and New Zealand wildlife. All submissions are expected to meet the highest ethical and welfare standards, as detailed in the Journal’s instructions for authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信