Background There is concern that the use of antimicrobials in livestock production has a role in the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance in animals and humans. Consequently, there are increasing efforts to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in agriculture. As the largest consumer of veterinary antimicrobials in several countries, the pig sector is a particular focus of these efforts. Data on AMU in pig production in Ireland are lacking. This study aimed to quantify AMU on Irish pig farms, to identify the major patterns of use employed and to compare the results obtained to those from other published reports and studies. Results Antimicrobial use data for 2016 was collected from 67 Irish pig farms which represented c. 35% of national production. The combined sample population consumed 14.5 t of antimicrobial by weight of active ingredient suggesting that the pig sector accounted for approximately 40% of veterinary AMU in Ireland in 2016. At farm level, median AMU measured in milligram per population correction unit (mg/PCU) was 93.9 (range: 1.0–1196.0). When measured in terms of treatment incidence (TI200), median AMU was 15.4 (range: 0.2–169.2). Oral treatments accounted for 97.5% of all AMU by weight of active ingredient and were primarily administered via medicated feed to pigs in the post weaning stages of production. AMU in Irish pig production in 2016 was higher than results obtained from the national reports of Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and France but lower than the United Kingdom. Conclusions Pig production in Ireland is an important consumer of veterinary antimicrobials. The quantities and patterns of AMU on Irish pig farms are comparable to pig production in other European countries but higher than some countries with more advanced AMU reduction strategies. This AMU is characterised by a high proportion of prophylactic use and is primarily administered to pigs post weaning via medicated feed. Further studies to better understand the reasons for AMU on Irish pig farms and strategies to improve health among weaner pigs will be of benefit in the effort to reduce AMU.

The need to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in livestock production has led to the establishment of national AMU data collection systems in several countries. However, there is currently no consensus on which AMU indicator should be used and many of the systems have defined their own indicators. This study sought to explore the effect of using different internationally recognized indicators on AMU data collected from Irish pig farms and to determine if they influenced the ranking of farms in a benchmarking system. AMU data for 2016 was collected from 67 pig farms (c. 35% of Irish pig production). Benchmarks were defined using seven AMU indicators: two based on weight of active ingredient; four based on the defined daily doses (DDD) used by the European Medicines Agency and the national monitoring systems of Denmark and the Netherlands; and one based on the treatment incidence (TI200) used in several published studies. An arbitrary "action zone," characterized by farms above an acceptable level of AMU, was set to the upper quartile (i.e., the top 25% of users, n = 17). Each pair of indicators was compared by calculating the Spearman rank correlation and assessing if farms above the threshold for one indicator were also above it for the comparison indicator. The action zone was broadly conserved across all indicators; even when using weight-based indicators. The lowest correlation between indicators was 0.94. Fifteen farms were above the action threshold for at least 6 of the 7 indicators while 10 farms were above the threshold for all indicators. However, there were important differences noted for individual farms between most pairs of indicators. The biggest discrepancies were seen when comparing the TI200 to the weight-based indicators and the TI200 to the DDDA NED (as used by Dutch AMU monitoring system). Indicators using the same numerator were the most similar. All indicators used in this study identified the majority of high users. However, the discrepancies noted highlight the fact that different methods of measuring AMU can affect a benchmarking system. Therefore, careful consideration should be given to the limitations of any indicator chosen for use in an AMU monitoring system.

Background20.9% of diagnosable abortions in Ireland in 2015 were caused by Chlamydia abortus infection. Abortion usually occurs in the last 2–3 weeks of gestation, and up to 30% of ewes may be affected in naïve flocks. Serological diagnosis of EAE in flocks using LPS or whole bacteria as antigens is often hindered by cross reactions with C. pecorum. Although the complement fixation test is the official test for diagnosis of EAE, more sensitive and specific ELISA based tests have been developed. This study aimed to compare three commercial ELISA kits to detect C. abortus antibodies in ewes and to determine which of the kits had the highest sensitivity. The IDvet kit utilises a MOMP peptide antigen, the MVD-Enfer kit is based on a POMP90–3 antigen while the LSI kit plates are coated with chlamydial LPS. The study also aimed to examine the potential of these ELISAs to distinguish infected animals that go on to abort compared to those that have live lambs. Ewes were vaccinated with either a commercial live vaccine (n = 10) or Tris-buffer sham inoculation (n = 9) 5 months prior to gestation, these ewes were then challenged with C. abortus (1 × 106 IFU/ml) on day 90 of gestation. Sera were collected at pre-vaccination, 14 days post vaccination, 35 days post vaccination, pre-challenge, 35 days post challenge and 3 weeks post lambing/abortion (~ 70 days post challenge) and tested using the 3 aforementioned ELISAs to determine if one ELISA was more sensitive at detecting circulating anti-chlamydial antibodies.ResultsSensitivity was highest with the LSI test kit at 94.74%, followed by the MVD-Enfer and IDvet kits, at 78.95 and 73.68% respectively. Ewes vaccinated with Enzovax became seropositive at 14 days post vaccination with all kits. Following challenge at day 90 of gestation, antibody titres steadily rose in all groups of ewes. With all ELISA kits, antibody levels were higher in ewes that aborted compared to ewes that had live lambs at 35 days post challenge and three weeks post lambing, and statistically significantly higher antibody levels were recorded in ewes that aborted compared to ewes that had live lambs using the MVD-ENFER ELISA at three weeks post lambing (P = 0.0482).ConclusionsThe LSI assay was the most sensitive out of the three kits tested in this study, when sera were tested at three weeks post lambing. As the LPS used in this kit is cross-reactive with all chlamydia, it is good for identifying flocks infected with any chlamydial species, but it is not considered specific for C. abortus. Furthermore, antibody levels were higher in ewes that aborted compared to ewes that had live lambs, at both 35 days post challenge and at three weeks post lambing. Future work should include evaluation of a larger number of sera at a wider range of time-points as well as an estimation of the specificity of commercially available assays.