Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:45:42.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Current recommendations for footbath solutions renewal rates in dairy cattle: the need for adaptation?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2018

J. M. Ariza Open the ORCID record for J. M. Ariza [Opens in a new window] ,
N. Bareille Open the ORCID record for N. Bareille [Opens in a new window] ,
K. Oberle  and
R. Guatteo Open the ORCID record for R. Guatteo [Opens in a new window]
J. M. Ariza*
Affiliation:
BIOEPAR, INRA, UMR1300, ONIRIS, Université Bretagne Loire, Atlanpole-Chantrerie CS 40706, 44307Nantes Cedex 3, France Neovia Group, Qalian, Rue Jean Monnet, Segré49500, France
N. Bareille
Affiliation:
BIOEPAR, INRA, UMR1300, ONIRIS, Université Bretagne Loire, Atlanpole-Chantrerie CS 40706, 44307Nantes Cedex 3, France
K. Oberle
Affiliation:
Neovia Group, Qalian, Rue Jean Monnet, Segré49500, France
R. Guatteo
Affiliation:
BIOEPAR, INRA, UMR1300, ONIRIS, Université Bretagne Loire, Atlanpole-Chantrerie CS 40706, 44307Nantes Cedex 3, France
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Footbaths represent a potentially useful strategy for the prevention of claw infectious diseases by treating a large number of animals concomitantly. Nevertheless, under field conditions, footbath solutions are exposed to increasing number of animal passages and therefore, to different volume losses and concentrations of manure contamination which could alter their presumed bactericidal activity. Across increasing number of cow passages, the organic matter (OM) concentration, the microbial load (ML) and the residual volumes were assessed in six commercial farms. The results indicate that the OM concentration and ML increased linearly with the number of passages of animals, and with the number of defecations in the footbath. The OM concentrations and the ML were not impacted by the farm’s feet hygiene status (clean, fair and dirty), suggesting that probably the increasing number of cow passages and defecations influenced more the contamination of footbaths than the hygiene of the feet. In all the farms the volumes decreased drastically after 200 cow passages (50%). The OM concentrations after 150 and 200 cow passages did not exceed the regulatory concentrations in which disinfectant products should demonstrate to still be effective (20 g/l), and coincide with the often advised renewal rates. The findings of this study suggested that beyond the footbath contamination by OM, the renewal rates must be mainly adapted according to the remaining volume to guarantee that the entire foot is covered and therefore assure the topical action of the solution. This study highlights the importance of footbath designs for the successful implementation of these strategies in practice.

Keywords

footbathdairy cattleorganic mattermicrobial loadrenewal rates
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , June 2019 , pp. 1319 - 1325
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

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

Alban, L, Lawson, LG and Agger, JF 1995. Foul in the foot (interdigital necrobacillosis) in Danish dairy cows – frequency and possible risk factors. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 24, 73–82.Google Scholar
Ariza, JM, Relun, A, Bareille, N, Oberle, K and Guatteo, R 2017. Effectiveness of collective treatments in the prevention and treatment of bovine digital dermatitis lesions: a systematic review. Journal of Dairy Science 100, 7401–7418.Google Scholar
Bruijnis, MRN, Beerda, B, Hogeveen, H and Stassen, EN 2012. Assessing the welfare impact of foot disorders in dairy cattle by a modeling approach. Animal 6, 962–970.Google Scholar
Cook, NB, Rieman, J, Gomez, A and Burgi, K 2012. Observations on the design and use of footbaths for the control of infectious hoof disease in dairy cattle. Veterinary Journal 193, 669–673.Google Scholar
Ellis, KA, Innocent, GT, Mihm, M, Cripps, P, McLean, WG, Howard, CV and Grove-White, D 2007. Dairy cow cleanliness and milk quality on organic and conventional farms in the UK. Journal of Dairy Research 74, 302–310.Google Scholar
European Chemicals Agency 2017. Guidance on the biocidal products regulation: volume II efficacy – assessment and evaluation (parts B+C). European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
European Parliament 2012. Regulation (EU) no. 528/2012. Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Fjeldaas, T, Bøe, KE and Larssen, RB 2014. Water footbath, automatic flushing, and disinfection to improve the health of bovine feet. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 2835–2846.Google Scholar
Guatteo, R, Arnoult, A, Ménard, J-L and Bareille, N 2013. Elaboration of a scoring grid to assess feet cleanliness in dairy cattle and identification of risk factors in the winter period. In Rencontres Recherches Ruminants volume 20, pp. 379–382.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, RE, Thomas, EC, Anklam, K, Lopez-Benavides, MG, Buchalova, M, Hemling, TC and Döpfer, D 2013. Short communication: minimum bactericidal concentration of disinfectants evaluated for bovine digital dermatitis-associated Treponema phagedenis-like spirochetes. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 3034–3038.Google Scholar
Holzhauer, M, Sampimon, OC and Counotte, GH 2004. Concentration of formalin in walk-through footbaths used by dairy herds. Veterinary Record 154, 755–756.Google Scholar
International Organization for Standardization 1999. ISO 6222: 1999 Water quality – Enumeration of culturable micro-organisms – colony count by inoculation in a nutrient agar culture medium. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Houba VJG, van der Lee JJ and Novozamsky I 1997. Soil analysis procedures. Other procedures (Soil and Plant Analysis, Part 5B). Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Manning, AD, Mahendran, SA, Hurst, BS, Blackmore, TL and Bell, NJ 2017. Effect of a prewash on footbath contamination: a randomised control trial. Veterinary Record 180, 121.Google Scholar
Mcdonnell G and Russell AD 1999. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 12, 147–179.Google Scholar
Nielsen, BH, Thomsen, PT and Sørensen, JT 2011. Identifying risk factors for poor hind limb cleanliness in Danish loose-housed dairy cows. Animal 5, 1613–1619.Google Scholar
Palmer, MA, Donnelly, RF, Garland, MJ, Majithiya, R and O’Connell, NE 2013. The effect of slurry on skin permeability to methylene blue dye in dairy cows with and without a history of digital dermatitis. Animal 7, 1731–1737.Google Scholar
R Core Team 2017. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Read, DH and Walker, RL 1998. Papillomatous digital dermatitis (footwarts) in California dairy cattle: clinical and gross pathologic findings. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 10, 67–76.Google Scholar
Relun, A, Guatteo, R, Auzanneau, MM and Bareille, N 2013a. Farmers’ practices, motivators and barriers for adoption of treatments of digital dermatitis in dairy farms. Animal 7, 1542–1550.Google Scholar
Relun, A, Guatteo, R, Roussel, P and Bareille, N 2011. A simple method to score digital dermatitis in dairy cows in the milking parlor. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 5424–5434.Google Scholar
Relun, A, Lehebel, A, Bareille, N and Guatteo, R 2012. Effectiveness of different regimens of a collective topical treatment using a solution of copper and zinc chelates in the cure of digital dermatitis in dairy farms under field conditions. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 3722–3735.Google Scholar
Relun, A, Lehebel, A, Chesnin, A, Guatteo, R and Bareille, N 2013b. Association between digital dermatitis lesions and test-day milk yield of Holstein cows from 41 French dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 2190–2200.Google Scholar
Solano, L, Barkema, HW, Pickel, C and Orsel, K 2017. Effectiveness of a standardized footbath protocol for prevention of digital dermatitis. Journal of Dairy Science 100, 1295–1307.Google Scholar