Comparison of a novel bovine respiratory disease prediction technology and an automated animal disease detection technology to traditional methods in a U.S. feedlot.

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate feedlot cattle health and performance among three different bovine respiratory disease (BRD) control programs and two different disease detection modalities (i.e., a 3 × 2 factorial design). The BRD control treatments consisted of 1) Negative control, 2) Positive control (Tildipirosin to 100% of the group), and 3) Targeted BRD control program (TBCP) based on individualized risk prediction generated by a novel technology ([Whisper On Arrival; Merck Animal Health] ± Tildipirosin based on a proprietary algorithm). The disease detection treatments consisted of 1) cattle monitored exclusively by a novel animal disease detection (ADD) technology (SenseHub Feedlot; Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and its affiliates), or 2) cattle monitored by traditional pen-riding (PR) methods. Auction market-derived beef calves were procured by traditional means, transported to a single site, and randomly allocated to one of six treatment groups within each block. The study population was followed to closeout (224 d). Data were analyzed as a completely randomized block design within a 3 × 2 factorial treatment format. No interactions (P values > 0.05) between BRD control practices or disease detection methods were observed in this study. Across the BRD control treatments, the TBCP reduced BRD control antimicrobial use by 25% compared to the positive control. However, the positive control displayed improvement (P values ≤ 0.05) in BRD morbidity, overall removals, and overall mortality at the time of closeout compared to the negative control and the TBCP. Regarding disease detection, compared to cattle monitored by PR methods, cattle monitored by the ADD technology displayed a reduction (P values ≤ 0.05) in days to first BRD treatment, pen-deads, and overall removals. Cattle monitored by ADD technology displayed an increase (P = 0.06) in net financial value of $29.50/head compared to cattle monitored by PR methods.