title: Disease screening profiles and colostrum management practices on 16 Irish suckler beef farms.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Calf output is a key element in determining the profitability of a suckler beef enterprise. Infectious agents such as Bovine Virus Diarrhoea (BVD) virus, colostrum management and parasitic challenge can all affect calf output. Prior to the national BVD eradication programme, there was little published information on either the prevalence or effect of BVD in Irish beef herds. There is little published information on colostrum management practices in Irish commercial beef herds and there have also been few studies published on the prevalence of liver fluke or rumen fluke infection in Irish beef herds. Sixteen farms participating in the Teagasc/Farmers Journal BETTER farm beef programme were used in this study. Fourteen herds were screened for the presence of BVD virus in 2010 using RT-PCR. In 13 herds, blood samples were collected from calves (2-14 days of age) in November 2011 - April 2012 to determine their passive immune status using the zinc sulphate turbidity (ZST) test, while in 12 herds, blood and faecal samples were taken in order to determine the level of exposure to gastrointestinal and hepatic helminths.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The overall prevalence of BVD virus-positive cattle was 0.98% (range 0 - 3% per herd, range 0.6 - 3.0% per positive herd). Eighteen of the 82 calves (22%) sampled had ZST values less than 20 units (herd mean range 17.0 - 38.5 units) indicating a failure of passive transfer. The overall animal-level (herd-level) prevalence of liver fluke and rumen fluke infection in these herds was 40.5% (100%) and 20.8% (75%), respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The potential costs associated with the presence of animals persistently infected with BVD virus through the increased use of antibiotics; the rate of failure of passive transfer of colostral immunoglobulins and the high prevalence of liver fluke infection in these herds highlight that some Irish suckler beef farms may not be realizing their economic potential due to a range of herd health issues. The use of farm-specific herd health plans should be further encouraged on Irish suckler beef farms.
authors: Animal and Bioscience Research Department, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Ireland ; School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
authors: James
authors: J
authors: O'Shaughnessy
authors: Animal and Bioscience Research Department, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Ireland.
authors: Bernadette
authors: B
authors: Earley
authors: DAFM, Sligo Regional Veterinary Laboratory, Doonally, Co. Sligo, Ireland.
authors: Damien
authors: D
authors: Barrett
authors: School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
authors: Michael L
authors: ML
authors: Doherty
authors: Livestock Systems Department, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Ireland.
authors: Paul
authors: P
authors: Crosson
authors: School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
authors: Theo
authors: T
authors: de Waal
authors: Animal and Bioscience Research Department, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Ireland.
authors: John F
authors: JF
authors: Mee
keywords: BVD; Beef; Colostrum; Herd health; Liver fluke; Rumen fluke; Suckler
references: Can J Vet Res. 1989 Jul;53(3):336-9
references: 2766154
references: Ir Vet J. 2013 Nov 06;66(1):21
references: 24195997
references: Vet Parasitol. 2013 Jul 1;195(1-2):65-71
references: 23411375
references: Am J Vet Res. 1995 Sep;56(9):1149-54
references: 7486391
references: Prev Vet Med. 2006 Sep 15;76(1-2):1-10
references: 16777251
references: Vet Parasitol. 2014 Aug 29;204(3-4):199-208
references: 24907069
references: Ir Vet J. 2012 Jul 02;65(1):12
references: 22748235
references: Int J Parasitol. 2006 Sep;36(10-11):1153-8
references: 16843470
references: Vet Rec. 2012 Nov 17;171(20):509-10
references: 23161932
references: Vet Microbiol. 2002 Nov 6;89(4):255-65
references: 12383635
references: Vet Parasitol. 2007 Nov 10;149(3-4):207-12
references: 17768010
references: Vet J. 2011 Feb;187(2):189-94
references: 20022529
references: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 Mar 15;228(6):914-21
references: 16536707
references: Clin Chim Acta. 1970 Jan;27(1):155-63
references: 4189647
references: Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2004 Nov;20(3):593-603
references: 15471626
references: Vet Parasitol. 1999 Jun 1;83(1):15-24
references: 10392764
references: Res Vet Sci. 1984 Sep;37(2):167-71
references: 6150530
references: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1990 Apr 15;196(8):1239-43
references: 2110124
references: Vet Microbiol. 1999 Jan;64(2-3):89-107
references: 10028165
references: Vet Rec. 2010 Nov 6;167(19):752-4
references: 21257513
references: Aust Vet J. 2001 Oct;79(10):682-5
references: 11712707
references: Vet J. 2013 Dec;198(3):631-7
references: 24269107
references: Vet Rec. 2008 Jun 21;162(25):831
references: 18567936
references: Can Vet J. 2003 Nov;44(11):907-13
references: 14664353
references: Prev Vet Med. 2007 Jan 16;78(1):57-66
references: 17095109
references: Vet Rec. 1977 Jan 15;100(3):43-5
references: 835211
references: Vet Rec. 2013 May 4;172(18):472
references: 23482238
references: Prev Vet Med. 2010 Jul 1;95(3-4):198-207
references: 20554068