Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:11:39.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of digital dermatitis and sole ulcer on dairy cow behaviour and milk production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

A. Pavlenko ,
C. Bergsten ,
I. Ekesbo ,
T. Kaart ,
A. Aland  and
L. Lidfors
A. Pavlenko*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Health and Environment, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 62, Tartu 51014, Estonia
C. Bergsten
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden Swedish Dairy Association, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
I. Ekesbo
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
T. Kaart
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Genetics and Breeding, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 46, Tartu 51006, Estonia
A. Aland
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Health and Environment, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 62, Tartu 51014, Estonia
L. Lidfors
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate whether the presence of digital dermatitis (DD) and sole ulcer (SU) in dairy cows was associated with changes in behaviour and milk production. Swedish Red and Swedish Holstein cows (mostly in the first to second lactation) were housed in a cubicle system with automatically scraped passageways. After maintenance claw trimming of all the cows in the herd, 10 cows with DD and 10 cows with SU were selected. For each DD- or SU-affected cow, a healthy control cow, matched according to breed, age, parity and lactation stage, was selected. The behaviour of each of the 20 focal cows was observed for 1 h during 2 to 3 weeks after claw trimming (WACT; period 1) and for 1 h during 5 to 6 WACT (period 2). Milk production parameters: energy-corrected milk (ECM), fat and protein percentages and somatic cell counts (SCCs) were recorded once monthly. Lameness was scored once at the start of the study and cows with SU and DD showed more score 2 lameness (42% v. 31%) than the healthy cows (12%). Most differences in behaviour were found during 2 to 3 WACT when DD- and SU-affected cows were lying less (P = 0.001 and P = 0.012, respectively) than healthy cows. Ruminating while standing was performed more in DD-affected cows (P < 0.001) and tended to be performed more in SU-affected cows (P = 0.079) than their controls. Vigilance was performed more in DD- and SU-affected cows than in healthy cows (P < 0.001 and P = 0.047). Cows with DD produced approximately 5.5 kg less ECM per day both at 2 to 3 WACT (P = 0.022) and at 5 to 6 WACT (P = 0.017) than healthy cows, whereas SU-affected cows tended to produce less ECM at 5 to 6 WACT (P = 0.059). No differences in milk fat and protein or SCC were found. It may be concluded that DD-affected cows showed a stronger behavioural response to the claw disease than the SU-affected cows. This shows the importance of regular claw checking and claw trimming of the cows in order to avoid the negative effects on behaviour and milk production.

Keywords

dairy cowclaw diseasebehaviourmilk production
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 8 , August 2011 , pp. 1259 - 1269
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amory, JR, Baker, ZE, Wright, JL, Mason, SA, Blowey, RW, Green, E 2008. Associations between sole ulcer, white line disease and digital dermatitis and the milk yield of 1824 dairy cows on 30 dairy cow farms in England and Wales from February 2003–November 2004. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 83, 381–391.Google Scholar
Bassett, HF, Monaghan, ML, Lenhan, P, Doherty, ML, Carter, ME 1990. Bovine digital dermatitis. Veterinary Record 126, 164–165.Google Scholar
Beilharz, RG, Zeeb, K 1982. Social dominance in dairy cattle. Applied Animal Ethology 8, 79–97.Google Scholar
Bergsten, C 1995. Digital disorders in dairy cattle with special reference to laminitis and heel horn erosion: the influence of housing, management and nutrition. PhD, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.Google Scholar
Bergsten, C, Hultgren, J, Hillström, A 2006. Using a footbath with copper sulphate or peracetic foam for the control of digital dermatitis and heel horn erosion in a dairy herd. Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Lameness in Ruminants, Colonia del Sacramento, Uruguay, pp. 61–62.Google Scholar
Bicalho, RC, Cheong, SH, Cramer, G, Guard, CL 2007. Association between a visual and an automated locomotion score in lactating Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 3294–3300.Google Scholar
Blackie, N 2009. Assessing the impact of lameness on gait and behaviour of dairy cattle: development of an automated lameness detection system. PhD, Department of Writtle College, Essex University.Google Scholar
Blowey, RW, Sharp, MW 1988. Digital dermatitis in dairy cattle. Veterinary Record 122, 505–508.Google Scholar
Broom, DM, Fraser, AF 2007. Welfare and behaviour in relation to disease. In Domestic animal behaviour and welfare, 4th edition. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK, 438 pp.Google Scholar
Cheli, R, Mortellaro, C 1974. La dermatite digitale del bovino. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference Diseases of Cattle, Milan, Italy, pp. 208–213.Google Scholar
Clarkson, MJ, Downham, DY, Faull, B, Huges, JW, Manson, FJ, Merritt, JB, Murray, RD, Russell, WB, Sutherst, JE, Ward, WR 1996. Incidence and prevalence of lameness in dairy cattle. Veterinary Record 138, 563–567.Google Scholar
Cook, NB, Nordlund, KV, Oetzel, GR 2004a. Environmental influences on claw horn lesions associated with laminitis and subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87, E36–E46.Google Scholar
Cook, NB, Bennett, TB, Nordlund, KV 2004b. Effect of free stall surface on daily activity patterns in dairy cows with relevance to lameness prevalence. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 2912–2922.Google Scholar
Cooper, MD, Arney, DR, Phillips, CJC 2007. Two- or four-hour lying deprivation on the behaviour of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1149–1158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cramer, G, Lissemore, KD, Guard, CL, Leslie, KE, Kelton, DF 2008. Herd- and cow-level prevalence if foot lesions in Ontario dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 3888–3895.Google Scholar
European Food Safety Authority 2009. Lameness and welfare. In Scientific report on the effects of farming systems on dairy cow welfare and disease. Report of the Panel on Animal Health and Welfare. EFSA Journal, pp. 137–151, Retrieved June 5, 2009, from http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1211902935007.htm.Google Scholar
Flower, FC, Sanderson, DJ, Weary, DM 2005. Hoof pathologies influence kinematic measures of dairy cow gait. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 3166–3173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galindo, F, Broom, DM 2002. The effects of lameness on social and individual behaviour of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 5, 193–201.Google Scholar
Green, LE, Hedges, VJ, Schukken, YH, Blowey, RW, Packington, AJ 2002. The impact of clinical lameness on the milk yield of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2250–2256.Google Scholar
Greenough, PR 2007. Disorders of the claw capsule associated with laminitis. In Bovine laminitis and lameness. Elsevier Limited, Philadelphia, USA, 328 pp.Google Scholar
Haley, DB, de Passillé, AM, Rushen, J 2001. Assessing cow comfort: effects of two floor types and two tie stall designs on the behaviour of lactating dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 71, 105–117.Google Scholar
Hassall, SA, Ward, WR, Murray, RD 1993. Effects of lameness on the behaviour of cows during the summer. Veterinary Record 132, 578–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hultgren, J, Manske, T, Bergsten, C 2004. Associations of sole ulcer at claw trimming with reproductive performance, udder health, milk yield, and culling in Swedish dairy cattle. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 62, 233–251.Google Scholar
Ladevig, J, Borell, EV 1988. Ethological methods alone are not sufficient to measure the impact of environment on animal health and animal well-being. In Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology in Farm Animals, Skara (ed. J Unshelm, G van Putten, K Zeeb and I Ekesbo), pp. 95–101. Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft, Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Lidfors, L 1989. The use of getting up and lying down movements in the evaluation of cattle environments. Veterinary Research Communications 13, 307–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manske, T, Hultgren, J, Bergsten, C 2002a. Prevalence and interrelationships of hoof lesions and lameness in Swedish dairy cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 54, 247–263.Google Scholar
Manske, T, Hultgren, J, Bergsten, C 2002b. The effect of claw trimming on the hoof health of Swedish dairy cattle. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 54, 113–129.Google Scholar
Martin, P, Bateson, P 1993. Recording methods. In Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 238 pp.Google Scholar
Munksgaard, L, Jensen, MB, Pedersen, LJ, Hansen, SW, Matthews, L 2005. Quantifying behavioural priorities – effects of time constraints on behaviour of dairy cows, Bos taurus. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 92, 3–14.Google Scholar
Murray, RD, Downham, DY, Clarkson, MJ, Faull, WB, Hughes, JE, Manson, FJ, Merritt, JB, Russell, WB, Sutherst, JE, Ward, WR 1996. Epidemiology of lameness in dairy cattle: description and analysis of foot lesions. Veterinary Record 138, 586–591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilsson, SA 1963. Clinical, morphological and experimental studies of laminitis in cattle. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 4 (suppl. 1), 1–304.Google Scholar
Peterse, DJ 1979. Een mogelijke invloed van de voeding op het optreden van zoolzweren bij het rund (Nutrition as a possible factor in the pathogenesis of ulcers of the sole in cattle). Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 104, 966–970 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
Pringle, M, Backhans, A, Otman, F, Sjölund, M, Fellström, C 2009. Isolation of spirochetes of genus Treponema from pigs with ear necrosis. Veterinary Microbiology 139, 279–283.Google Scholar
Rajala-Schultz, PJ, Gröhn, YT, McCulloch, CE 1999. Effects of milk fever, ketosis, and lameness on milk yield of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 288–294.Google Scholar
Rushen, J, Pombourcq, E, de Passillé, AM 2007. Validation of two measures of lameness in dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 106, 173–177.Google Scholar
Rusterholz, A 1920. Das spezifisch-traumatische klauensohlengeschwür des rindes (sole ulcer of traumatic origin in cattle). Schweizer Archiv fur Tierheilkunde 62, 505–525 (in German).Google Scholar
Rutherford, KMD, Langford, FM, Jack, MC, Sherwood, L, Lawrence, AB, Haskell, MJ 2009. Lameness prevalence and risk factors in organic and non-organic dairy herds in the United Kingdom. Veterinary Journal 180, 95–105.Google Scholar
Schnitzer, I 1971. Abliegen, Liegestellungen und Aufstehen beim Rind im Hinblick auf die Entwicklung von Stalleinrichtungenfür Milchvieh. Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft- Bauschriften, 10, 43 pp.Google Scholar
Snider, TG, Hoyt, PG, Coats, KS, Graves, KF, Cooper, CR, Storts, RW, Luther, G, Jenny, BF 2003. Natural bovine lentiviral type 1 infection in Holstein dairy cattle. I. Clinical, serological, and pathological observations. Comparative Immunology, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 26, 89–101.Google Scholar
Somers, JGCJ, Frankena, K, Noordhuizen-Stassen, EN, Metz, JHM 2003. Prevalence of claw disorders in Dutch dairy cows exposed to several floor systems. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2082–2093.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sprecher, DJ, Hostetler, DE, Kaneene, JB 1997. A lameness scoring system that uses posture and gait to predict dairy cattle reproductive performance. Theriogenology 47, 1179–1187.Google Scholar
Svensk Mjölk 2009. Klövhälsa. In Redogörelse av husdjursorganisationens djurhälsovård 2008/2009 (Animal health organisation yearly report 2008/2009). Svensk Mjölk (Swedish Dairy Association), Stockholm, Sweden, 37 pp.Google Scholar
Walker, SL, Smith, RF, Routly, JE, Jones, DN, Morris, MJ, Dobson, H 2008. Lameness, activity time-budgets, and oestrus expression in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 4552–4559.Google Scholar
Warnick, LD, Janssen, D, Guard, CL, Gröhn, YT 2001. The effect of lameness on milk production in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 1988–1997.Google Scholar
Wells, SJ, Garber, LP, Wagner, BA 1999. Papillomatous digital dermatitis and associated risk factors in US dairy herds. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 38, 11–24.Google Scholar
Wells, SJ, Trent, AM, Marsh, WE, Robinson, RA 1993. Prevalence and severity of lameness in lactating dairy cows in a sample of Minnesota and Wisconsin herds. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association 202, 78–82.Google Scholar
Whay, HR, Waterman, AE, Webster, AJF, O'Brien, JK 1998. The influence of lesion type on the duration of hyperalgesia associated with hindlimb lameness in dairy cattle. Veterinary Journal 156, 23–29.Google Scholar
Whay, HR, Main, DCJ, Green, LE, Webster, AJF 2003. Assessment of the welfare of dairy cattle using animal-based measurements: direct observations and investigation of farm records. Veterinary Record 153, 197–202.Google Scholar