Transcript No Slide Title

Monitoring for Transition Cow Issues
Todd Duffield, DVM, DVSc
[email protected]
Monitoring for Transition Cow
Issues
•
•
•
•
What are the Issues ?
How do we find them ?
Do they matter ?
What can we do about them ?
FOCUS ON ENERGY METABOLISM
What are the Major
Transition Cow Issues?
Goals
Impediments
Ways to gain
insight into the
 Calve without
 RP
success of the
problems
Dystocia
process
Clinical disease
Metritis
Production
Avoid
disease timing,
Severity,
Ketosis
Measure DMI
and duration of
negative DA
BCS
Cow environment
 Make
lots ofbalance
energy
Mastitis
Understanding
milk
cow experience
Rumen acidosis
Feed access
Lameness
Hypocalcemia
Lying time
Immune function
Endometritis
Housing
Get pregnant by
design
120 DIM
Anestrus
 NEFA, BHBA,
Insemination
etc
Feed intake
Time for transitions
• Development of
lactation in
mammary gland ~ 3
weeks
• Rumen microflora
adaptation ~ 10 –
14 days
• Altering metabolic
set-point ~ 6
weeks (?)
• Social adjustment
to new group 2 d to
1 week
Monitoring Transition Cow
Issues
• What are the Issues ?
• How do we find them ?
Disease Incidence
2006 NA Study (Carson, 2008)
Northeast
n=650
Midwest
n=570
Southeast
n=465
West
n=668
Total
2%
3.3%
2.0%
2.5%
2.5%
Ketosis
6.0%
10.5%
6.4%
15.3%
9.6%
RP
5.2%
7.9%
7.9%
9.4%
7.6%
Metritis
5.7%
6.3%
19.5%
34.5%
16.5%
DA
4.5%
5.1%
4.6%
0.5%
3.7%
Milk Fever
Problems with
Clinical Disease?
• Frequently Poorly Recorded
• Disease Definitions not Standardized
• “After the Fact” in an Ideal Monitoring Program
• Probably LESS Sensitive than Metabolic
“Subclinical” Tests
Clinical ketosis treatment rate is a
poor estimate of ketosis
Clinical Ketosis
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
60
40
20
Herd
13
17
1
2
12
11
14
15
0
8
% Subclinical Ketosis
80
% Clinical Ketosis Incidence
SCK 1400 BHBA
(Duffield et al 1998)
What about Milk Components?
• Subclinical Ketosis Associated with:
– ↓ Milk protein %
– ↑ Milk fat %
At First DHI test postcalving
But…
• Best test is PFR ≤ 0.75
– Sensitivity: 58%
– Specificity: 69%
BOTTOMLINE: The test is CRAP.
Summary of Herd Level Tests for
Identifying High Risk Herds for SCK
1.
Subclinical Ketosis in  20% of Herd
at 1st of 2nd week postcalving
2. DA Incidence  5.0 %
3.  40% of Herd with Low PFR (< 0.75)
[or approximately 0.70 in true protein system]
4. > 10 % of Herd Fat Precalving (BCS  4.0)
REQUIRES EXTERNAL VALIDATION:
Only based on 25 Herds in SW Ontario
What about DMI?
• Precalving DMI a good predictor of SCK
postcalving.
• U of G research:
– < 12 kg DMI in last 3 weeks
= 6X Increased Risk of SCK.
• Problems
– Getting it Measured
– Demographics in Group
• Heifers
• Lot’s close to calving
Frequency Distribution of DMI for
160 Holstein Cow and Heifers during
Last 3 Weeks Precalving
1 S.D Mean
16.5% lower 50% lower
Individual
2 S.D’s
GOAL
1400
1200
Group Target
1000
Number of 800
Occurrences 600
DMI
400
200
0
18
> 8
-1
16 6
-1
14 4
-1
12 2
-1
0
-1
-8
-6
-4
-2
10
8
6
4
2
0
Kg
Typical patterns of DMI and
NEFA
Overton/Burhans,
2001
Serum/Blood Metabolic Tests
What Does Work?
• Energy Monitors in Transition Cows:
– Precalving – NEFA
– Postcalving – BHBA
Focus of
Talk
• Calcium status within a few days of calving
– hypocalcemia
• Haptoglobin
– inflammation
↓ Ca, ↑ Culling risk but
need more research
Non-specific but associated
with metritis, need more
data
• DO NOT USE AVERAGES – looking for EXCEPTIONS
–Therefore % above or below a cutpoint for group
interpretation
The “Iceberg” Concept
J.M. Gay
Monitoring Transition Cow
Issues
• What are the Issues ?
• How do we find them ?
• Do they matter ?
FOCUS ON ENERGY METABOLISM
Investigating or Monitoring
Energy Metabolism in Transition
Cows
• PreCalving - NEFA
• PostCalving - Ketones
Relationship between
Precalving DMI and serum
NEFA
14
12
DMI (kg)
10
8
DMI
6
4
2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
NEFA (U/L)
R2 = 0.29
0.8
1
1.2
Prepartum NEFA cutpoints for
predicting postpartum SCK
NEFA
n
Pvalue
OR
0.7
17
0.04
4.8
0.6
27
0.10
3.0
0.5
46
0.56
1.4
0.4
68
0.51
1.4
(mmol/L)
Osborne, 2003
Increased Pre-Partum NEFA
Associated with:
↑
risk of LDA
(Cameron et al, 1998; LeBlanc et al, 2005,
Carson, 2008; Ospina et al, 2010)
↑ risk of RP and/or Metritis
(Dyk, 1995; Carson, 2008; Quiroz-Rocha et al, 2009;
Ospina et al, 2010)
↑ risk of ketosis
(Osborne, 2003; Gooijer et al, 2004; Ospina et al, 2010)
↑ risk of early culling
(Duffield et al, 2006)
↓
milk yield
↓
Pregnancy Risk
(Carson, 2008; Ospina et al, 2010)
(Ospina et al, 2010)
Cow-Level Associations of
Pre-calving NEFA (mmol/L) with
Disease/Production Outcomes
Weeks
relative
to
Calving
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-2
-1
-2
-1
-2
Author, Year
Cut-point
Carson, 2008
Quiroz-Rocha,
2007
Carson, 2008
Carson, 2008
Leblanc, 2005
Ospina, 2010
Carson, 2008
Ospina, 2010
Carson, 2008
Ospina, 2010
Outcome
Impact
P-Value
0.3
Retained Placenta
OR = 1.8
<0.001
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
Retained Placenta
Metritis
OR = 1.2
OR = 1.8
OR = 2.4
OR = 3.6
OR > 1.8
↓ 1.6 kg/d
↓ 2.2 kg/d
↑ 0.24
↓ 18%
<0.01
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
Displaced Abomasum
Displaced Abomasum
DA, CK, Metritis
Milk Yield
Milk Yield
1st Test LS
Pregnancy Risk
Serum NEFA (mEq/L)
2.0
Cows without DA (n = 1078)
Cows with DA (n = 53)
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
Days from calving
LeBlanc et al, 2005
Precalving NEFA and
Subsequent DHI Milk Yield
Carson, 2008
41
NEFA <0.5
Milk Yield (kg/day)
40
NEFA ≥0.5
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
0
1
2
3
DHI Test Number
4
5
Investigating or Monitoring
Energy Metabolism in Transition
Cows
• PreCalving - NEFA
• PostCalving - Ketones
Summary of Objective Serum BHBA
Thresholds for Hyperketonaemia
Threshold
Measure
Risk
Author
umol/L
mg/dL
1200
12
LDA
8X
LeBlanc
1400
14
LDA
3X
Geishauser
1200
12
LDA/Ketosis
3X
Duffield
1000
10
LDA/Ketosis/Metritis
2X
Ospina
1400
12
Repro (CR)
40% 
Walsh
1400
14
Repro (CR)
55% 
Whitaker
1000
10
Repro (Pregnancy risk) 13% 
Ospina
1400
14
Culling
2X
Duffield
1400
14
Milk Loss
1.9 kg
Duffield
1000 10
Milk Loss
1.3 kg
NOTES:
1. Minimum Threshold = 1000 umol/L BHBA
Ospina
2. Effect Increases with increasing BHBA concentration.
3. Optimum Cutpoint 1000 to 1400 umol/L BHBA
When Do I Test?
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
% Subclinical
Ketosis
-3
Monensin
Placebo
0
3
6
9
Weeks from Calving
Weeks: 1, 2, +/- 3 Postcalving
Frequency: every 1 to 2 weeks
Who: ALL cows and 1st lactation heifers
Cow-side tests for ketosis
(relative to serum BHB ≥1400 µmol/L)
Milk
Keto-Test
•
100 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 83%
– Specificity = 82%
•
200 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 54%
– Specificity = 94%
Oetzel, 2004
•
•
Cost = $2/test
Powder lacks
sensitivity
The ONLY reliable milk
ketone test
Cow-side tests for ketosis
(relative to serum BHB ≥1400 µmol/L)
Milk
Keto-Test
•
Urine
Ketostix
100 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 83%
– Specificity = 82%
•
– Sensitivity = 79%
– Specificity = 96%
200 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 54%
– Specificity = 94%
Oetzel, 2004
•
•
•
Cost = $2/test
Powder lacks
sensitivity
(read at 5 seconds)
“small” (15µmol/L)
Carrier et al, 2004
•
•
Cost = $0.25/test
Acetest tablet lacks
specificity
The ONLY
reliable
urine ketone test
Cow-side tests for ketosis
(relative to serum BHB ≥1400 µmol/L)
Milk
Urine
Precision XTRA:
Keto-Test
Ketostix
- Highly Accurate test
•
-
(read at 5 seconds)
Like
having the Lab• in“small”
your(15µmol/L)
Hand!
– Sensitivity = 83%
100 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 79%
– Specificity = 96%
– Specificity = 82%
•
200 µmol/L
– Sensitivity = 54%
– Specificity = 94%
Oetzel, 2004
•
•
Blood
Cost = $2/test
Powder lacks
sensitivity
Precision XTRA
BHBA
•
•
Heuweiser,2007
Oetzel, 2008
Burke,2008
Carrier et al, 2004
•
•
Cost = $0.25/test
Acetest tablet lacks
specificity
Sensitivity = 87-93%
Specificity = 93-100%
•
Cost = $2/test
How do you know where you are
unless you look?
Herd Monitoring Example – 100 Cow
Freestall
Keto-Test Monitoring Program Results
40
20
ay
Ju
nJu
ly
M
A
pr
il
0
ar
ch
Goal
60
M
1 SD
80
ry
2 SD
100
Fe
br
ua
3 SD
P
r
e
v
a
l
e
n
c
e
Test Number
Herd Monitoring Example – 100 Cow
Freestall
Keto-Test Monitoring Program Results
2 DA’s, 4 RP’s
100
P
40
20
Ju
ly
A
ug
us
Se
t
pt
em
be
r
O
ct
ob
er
D
ec
em
be
r
ay
M
A
pr
il
0
ar
ch
Goal
60
M
1 SD
80
ry
2 SD
r
e
v
a
l
e
n
c
e
Fe
br
ua
3 SD
Month
What Do I Do With the Data?
Purpose of Data Gathering
A. Monitoring
B. Problem Investigation
Level of Interpretation
Prevention
1.
Group Interpretation
–
Identify/Dx problems and make changes prior to
major losses
Proactive rather than Reactive (if monitoring)
- HERD LEVEL
–
Treatment
2. Individual Interpretation
- INDIVIDUAL LEVEL
– Early treatment may ward off Clinical Disease
Case Example 1A
- Individual
• 80 Milking Cows in a Tiestall
– Owner starts a weekly Keto-Test
monitoring program 1st week of September
• Tests all cows 3 weeks fresh Tuesday mornings
– Week 1: 0/6
– Week 2: 0/5
– Week 3: 1 / 4
• Owner calls because +ve Cow has a PING
– I go – It’s an LDA
– Farmer didn’t know she had a problem until he tested!
Case Example 1B
- Herd
• 80 Milking Cows in a Tiestall
– Owner starts a weekly Keto-Test
monitoring program 1st week of September
• Tests all cows 3 weeks fresh Tuesday mornings
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Week
Week
Week
Week
Week
Week
Week
1: 0/6
2: 0/5
3: 1 / 4
4: 0/5
5: 1/6
6: 1/8
7: 7/10
Now What?
Herd Example 1B
• Change was Real
– Testing was being done correctly
• Of the 7 +ve:
– 1 was 500 umol/L
– 3 were 200 umol/L
– 3 were 100 umol/L
– CUD cows eating well
– Changed to higher fiber, lower energy
Baleage
– All cases were > 11 DIM
What’s Normal?
Cutpoints Used for Herd-Level
Analysis – based on 2006 study
Param
eter
Time Relative
to Calving
Cutpoint
Median Herd
Prevalence
SUGGESTED
HERD GOAL
NEFA
- 1 Week Pre
0.5 mmol/L
25%
< 3/12
+1 Week Post
1.0 mmol/L
20%
< 2/12
+1 Week Post
1400 umol/L
15%
< 2/12
BHBA
High Pre-Calving NEFA
80
70
High Risk
Herds
60
50
40
30
Low Risk
Herds
20
10
0
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Herd
High Risk Herds set at or above Median Herd Prevalence
Validated* Herd-Alarm Levels
(Ospina et al, 2010)
Time Relative Parameter
to Calving
Cutpoint
Alarm Level
Prevalence
Mean
Proportion of
Herds Above
Alarm Level
Prepartum
NEFA
(mEq/L)
≥ 0.3
15%
75%
Postpartum
NEFA
(mEq/L)
≥ 0.7
15%
65%
Postpartum
BHBA
(mg/dL)
≥ 12
15%
40%
*Alarm levels associated with:
•↑risk of DA & CK, ↓Pregnancy Rate,
and ↓Milk Yield at the Herd-Level
Weekly prevalence of
Subclinical Ketosis in Four
Large New York Dairies
60%
50%
40%
Using Precision Xtra BHBA ≥ 1.3 mmol/L
(13 mg/dL)
30%
20%
Herd L
Herd E
10%
0%
-10%
Weekly prevalence of
Subclinical Ketosis in Four
Large New York Dairies
60%
50%
40%
30%
Herd L
Herd E
Herd D
20%
10%
0%
Herd S
Monitoring Transition Cow
Issues
•
•
•
•
What are the Issues ?
How do we find them ?
Do they matter ?
What can we do about them ?
FOCUS ON ENERGY METABOLISM
Transition Cow Issues
Key Prevention Strategies
1. MONITOR
–
–
Need to Know Where You Are
Need to Detect Change
Cutpoints Used for Herd-Level
Analysis
Param
eter
Time Relative
to Calving
Cutpoint
Median Herd
Prevalence
HERD GOAL
NEFA
- 1 Week Pre
0.5 mmol/L
25%
< 3/12
+1 Week Post
1.0 mmol/L
20%
< 2/12
+1 Week Post
1400 umol/L
15%
< 2/12
BHBA
High Pre-Calving NEFA
80
70
High Risk
Herds
60
50
40
30
Low Risk
Herds
20
10
0
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Herd
High Risk Herds set at or above Median Herd Prevalence
Variable
Variables Associated with
High Risk Herds
Odds Ratio’s (p-value) for High Risk Herds Classified
by:
> 25% Wk -1
NEFA ≥ 0.5
> 20% Wk +1
NEFA ≥1.0
> 15% Wk +1
BHBA ≥ 1.4
Wreck
Fresh Group
6.0 (P=0.03)
4.3 (P=0.04)
9.0 (P=0.01)
3 Transition
Rations
0.17 (P=0.04)
--- data too
sparse---
(All 3
categories)
Heifers and
Cows mixed
in Close-up
Group
5.0 (0.07)
9.0 (0.05)
Anionic diet
fed to Closeups
0.21 (0.02)
0.22 (P=0.02) 0.16 (P=0.03)
Cows calve in
Maternity
pens
3.7 (0.04)
= “Social Stress”
Relationship Between Mean Herd Precalving
NEFA and Close-up Diet NDF
0.80
0.70
0.60
R2 = 0.30
NEFA (mmol/L)
0.50
0.40
NEFA versus NDF
Linear (NEFA versus NDF)
0.30
0.20
High NDF Limits Intake
0.10
0.00
20.0%
30.0%
40.0% 50.0%
NDF %
60.0%
Relationship Between Mean Herd Precalving
NEFA and Close-up Diet NDF
0.80
0.70
R2 = 0.30
0.60
NEFA (mmol/L)
0.50
0.40
Straw
No Straw
0.30
0.20
High NDF Limits Intake
0.10
0.00
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
NDF %
50.0%
60.0%
Transition Cow Issues
Key Prevention Strategies
1. MONITOR
2. MANAGEMENT
Transition Cow Issues
Key Prevention Strategies
1. MONITOR
2. MANAGEMENT
3. MANAGEMENT
Transition Cow Issues
Key Prevention Strategies
1.
2.
3.
4.
MONITOR
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
Dry Matter Intake
Failure to ALLOW cows to eat
is an International problem
Australia
Mexico
Canada
Transition Cow Issues
Key Prevention Strategies
1.
2.
3.
4.
MONITOR
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
↑ Dry Matter Intake
5. Feed Additives
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Rumensin
Propylene Glycol
Rumen protected choline
Yeast
Others?
 Definitely
 Maybe – Temporary Fix
 Selected Use – Fat Cows
 Transition Cows Benefit
? Efficacy / Economics?
CONCLUSIONS
TRANSITION COW ISSUES
A Poor Transition Matters:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Reduced Health
Lost production
Impaired Reproduction
Risk of Culling
LOOK! To see where you are  MONITOR
CONCLUSIONS
TRANSITION COW ISSUES
Key Prevention Strategies
1. MONITOR
ENERGY METABOLISM :
-
Precalving: Need to use NEFA
 Need a Cowside NEFA test to improve practicality
-
Postcalving: Choose a KETONE test that suits you.
CONCLUSIONS
TRANSITION COW ISSUES
Key Prevention Strategies
1.
2.
3.
4.
MONITOR
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
DMI ↑ =
Social Stress
Feed Quality
BCS
Feed Access
↓
↑
↓
↑
CONCLUSIONS
TRANSITION COW ISSUES
Key Prevention Strategies
1.
2.
3.
4.
MONITOR
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
5. Feed Additives ?
-use the ones with
proven Science.
DMI ↑ =
Social Stress
Feed Quality
BCS
Feed Access
↓
↑
↓
↑
Questions?
or
Discussion