Survival and dispersal of a defined cohort of Irish cattle

Irish Veterinary Journal

I Aznar²  G McGrath²  P White²  J O'Keeffe²  SJ More²  S Ashe¹ 

[1] Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Kildare Street, Dublin 2, Ireland;Centre for Veterinary Epidemiology and Risk Analysis, School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland

关键词: survival;    movement;    livestock;    Kaplan-Meier;    dispersal;    cattle;   

Others  :  1149953
DOI  :  10.1186/2046-0481-62-1-44

【 摘 要 】

An understanding of livestock movement is critical to effective disease prevention, control and prediction. However, livestock movement in Ireland has not yet been quantified. This study has sought to define the survival and dispersal of a defined cohort of cattle born in Co. Kerry during 2000. The cohort was observed for a maximum of four years, from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2004. Beef and dairy animals moved an average 1.31 and 0.83 times, respectively. At study end, 18.8% of the beef animals remained alive on Irish farms, including 6.7% at the farm-of-birth, compared with 48.6% and 27.7% for dairy animals respectively. Beef animals werae dispersed to all Irish counties, but mainly to Cork, Limerick, Tipperary and Galway. Dairy animals mainly moved to Cork, Limerick, and Tipperary, with less animals going to Galway, Meath and Kilkenny. The four-year survival probability was 0.07 (male beef animals), 0.25 (male dairy), 0.38 (female beef), and 0.72 (female dairy). Although there was considerable dispersal, the number of moves per animal was less than expected.

   

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Anderson I: Foot and mouth disease 2001: lessons to be learned enquiry. London, The Stationery Office; 2002.
• [2]Anon: Irish Bovine Animal Identification and Tracing System, Computerised Database. [http://www.agriculture.gov.ie] webciteNBAS Division, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, December 2003 2003. [Accessed 12 March 2006]
• [3]Bachmann I, Rüfenacht J, Griot C, et al.: Assessing effectiveness of control strategies against foot-and-mouth disease in Switzerland using a dynamic simulation model. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Nairn, Inverness, Scotland on March 30-April 1, 2005 Edited by Mellor DJ, Russell AM, Wood JLN. 2005, 222-233.
• [4]Bigras-Poulin M, Thompson A, Chriel M, et al.: Network analysis of the Danish cattle and swine industry trade patterns as an evaluation of risk potential for disease spread: the heterogeneity issue. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Martigny, Switzerland on 24-26 March 2004 Edited by Reid SWJ, Menzies FD, Russell AM. 2004, 189-199.
• [5]Carrique-Mas JJ, Medley GF, Green LE: Risk of bovine tuberculosis breakdowns in post-foot-and-mouth disease restocked cattle herds in Great Britain. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Nairn, Inverness, Scotland on March 30-April 1, 2005 Edited by Mellor DJ, Russell AM, Wood JLN. 2005, 27-41.
• [6]Chowell G, Rivas AL, Hengartner NW, et al.: The role of spatial mixing in the spread of foot-and -mouth disease. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005, 73:297-314.
• [7]Christley RM, Robinson SE, Lysons R, et al.: Network analysis of cattle movement in Great Britain. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Nairn, Inverness, Scotland on March 30-April 1, 2005 Edited by Mellor DJ, Russell AM, Wood JLN. 2005, 234-244.
• [8]Essl A: Longevity in dairy cattle breeding: a review. Livestock Production Science 1998, 57:79-89.
• [9]Forde K, Hillberg-Seitzinger A, Dargatz D, et al.: The availability of state-level data on the interstate cattle movements in the United States. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 1998, 37:209-217.
• [10]Gubbins S: A modelling framework to describe the spread of scrapie between sheep flocks in Great Britain. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005, 67:143-155.
• [11]Kitching RP, Hutber AM, Thrusfield MV: A review of foot and mouth disease with special consideration for the clinical and epidemiological factors relevant to predictive modelling of the disease. The Veterinary Journal 2005, 169:197-209.
• [12]Mangen MJJ, Nielen M, Burrell AM: Simulated effect of pig-population density on epidemic size and choice of control strategy for classical swine fever epidemics in the Netherlands. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2002, 56:141-163.
• [13]Mourits MCM, Nielen M, Léon CD: Effect of control measures on the course of simulated foot and Mouth disese epidemics that started on different farm types in various Dutch areas. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Cambridge, UK, on 3-5 April 2002 Edited by Menzies FD, Reid SWJ. 2002, 190-199.
• [14]Nielen M, Jalvingh AW, Horst HS, et al.: Quantification of contacts between Dutch farms to assess the potential risk of foot-and-mouth disease spread. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 1996, 28:143-158.
• [15]Ojango JMK, Ducrocq V, Pollott GE: Survival analysis of factors affecting culling early in the productive life of Holstein-Friesian cattle in Kenya. Livestock Production Science 2005, 92:317-322.
• [16]Rojas H, Naranjo J, Pinto J, et al.: Risk management of foot and mouth disease to prevent its introduction and dissemination in Chile from neighbouring countries. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Cambridge, UK, on 3-5 April 2002 Edited by Menzies FD, Reid SWJ. 2002, 190-200.
• [17]Samore AB, Schneider MP, Canavesi F, et al.: Relationship between somatic cell count and functional longevity assessed using survival analysis in Italian Holstein-Friesian cows. Livestock Production Science 2003, 80:211-220.
• [18]Sanson RL: The epidemiology of foot-and-mouth disease: implications for New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 1994, 42:41-53.
• [19]Sanson RL, Struthers G, King P, et al.: The potential extent of transmission of foot and mouth disease: A study of the movement of animals and materials in Southland, New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 1993, 41:21-28.
• [20]Velthuis AGJ: The effect of regulations on the contact structure of the Dutch cattle sector. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Martigny, Switzerland on 24-26 March 2004 Edited by Reid SWJ, Menzies FD, Russell AM. 2004, 200-215.
• [21]Webb CR, Sauter-Louis C: Investigations into the contact structure of the British sheep population. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Cambridge, UK, on 3-5 April 2002 Edited by Menzies FD, Reid SWJ. 2002, 10-20.
• [22]Weber MF, van Roermund HJW, Assink HBJ, et al.: Rate and structure of cattle transfers between cattle herds considered to be free of paratuberculosis. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at Martigny, Switzerland on 24-26 March 2004 Edited by Reid SWJ, Menzies FD, Russell AM. 2004, 216-225.