Effect of eprinomectin treatment at calving on milk production in dairy herds with limited outdoor exposure.
The objective of this study was to determine the effect of anthelmintic treatment at calving in herds that were totally or semiconfined during the summer. In totally confined herds, lactating and dry cows were housed throughout the summer and had no access to pasture. In semiconfined herds, lactating and dry cows had limited outdoor exposure to a small pasture or paddock but were still fed a ration that met all their nutritional requirements. The study was carried out between February 2002 and February 2003 in 65 herds enrolled with DHI and distributed in 4 regions in Canada and 1 state in the United States. Cows were randomly allocated to receive eprinomectin or a placebo, with treatment being administered on or close to day of calving. In May and June 2002, 8 fecal samples were collected from each farm and fecal egg counts (FEC) were determined. Monthly bulk tank milk samples from each farm were tested with an indirect ELISA using a crude Ostertagia ostertagi antigen. Monthly test-day milk production data were recorded for 200 d after calving. In general, FEC were very low (mean = 1 egg per gram, range = 0 to 27). Mean herd bulk milk ELISA optical density ratio (ODR) values for the whole year ranged between 0.22 and 0.80. The ODR values were dichotomized into high and low using a threshold of 0.5. Treatment effects were analyzed using a linear mixed model with herd and cow as random effects. The analysis was restricted to 4789 cows (23,956 test-day records) treated between 21 d before and 7 d after calving. Overall, there was no significant effect of treatment. However, there was a tendency for an interaction between treatment and ODR, as illustrated by a larger numerical difference in treated vs. untreated cows in high-ODR herds than in low-ODR herds. However, the confidence intervals for the treatment effects (kg/d of milk per cow) in high-ODR herds (-0.33 to 1.10) and in low-ODR herds (-0.53 to 0.14) were wide and included zero. Therefore, this study failed to show a beneficial effect of eprinomectin treatment in these totally or semiconfined herds.
Sithole
F
F
Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, 550 University Avenue, Charlottetown, Canada C1A 4P3. fsithole@upei.ca
Dohoo
I
I
Leslie
K
K
DesCôteaux
L
L
Godden
S
S
Campbell
J
J
Stryhn
H
H
Sanchez
J
J
D000822:Animal Husbandry / Q000379:methods; D000818:Animals; D000871:Anthelmintics / Q000494:pharmacology*; D000947:Antigens, Helminth / Q000032:analysis; D002417:Cattle / Q000502:physiology*; D004797:Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay / Q000662:veterinary; D005243:Feces / Q000469:parasitology; D005260:Female; D007559:Ivermectin / Q000031:analogs & derivatives* / Q000494:pharmacology*; D007774:Lactation / Q000187:drug effects* / Q000502:physiology; D008892:Milk / Q000276:immunology / Q000378:metabolism; D008924:Mite Infestations / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000662:veterinary; D010270:Parasite Egg Count / Q000662:veterinary; D010273:Parasitic Diseases, Animal / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000517:prevention & control; D006109:Poaceae; D011247:Pregnancy
D000871:Anthelmintics; D000947:Antigens, Helminth; D007559:Ivermectin; C101434:eprinomectin