High-Impact Risk Factors for Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis in Dairy Herds in Germany

Abstract

In a cross-sectional study, it was identified that three regions in Germany differed with respect to their herd-level prevalence for paratuberculosis in dairy cattle. In the study presented here, the same farms were analyzed to identify those components of biosecurity and farm management with the highest impact on Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis (MAP) introduction and establishment in a farm. Hence, the data analyzes included 183, 170 and 104 herds from the study regions north, east and south, respectively. A herd was considered MAP-positive if at least one fecal environmental sample was positive. Twenty-six different possible risk factors from five different components of biosecurity and farm management were analyzed. We show that the average management of calf feeding increased the odds for a MAP-positive farm by 5.22 times (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.25–21.83). With every 100-cow increase in farm size, the risk for a farm to test MAP-positive increased by 1.94 times (CI = 1.15–3.27), 1.14 times (CI = 1.02–1.27) and 5.53 times (CI = 0.44–68.97) in the north, east and south study regions, respectively. Furthermore, the purchase of cattle with an unknown MAP status increased the risk for a farm testing MAP-positive by 2.86-fold (CI = 1.45–5.67). Our results demonstrate that herd size, unknown MAP status of the purchased cattle and different aspects of calf feeding play an important role in the MAP status of a farm and should be in focus in regions with different MAP between-herd prevalence. Additionally, farm individual risk patterns should be identified during (veterinary) biosecurity consultancy.

Investigating the Prevalence of Paratuberculosis in Hungarian Large-Scale Dairy Herds and the Success of Control Measures over Four Years

“…As a first step, it is necessary for farms to develop feasible methods for calf hygiene and rearing calves free of infection. It is vital to set up a successful control program in the longer term, according to our own experience and as suggested by the international literature [ 21 , 23 , 30 , 35 , 41 ]. The design of “test-and-cull” programs should consider the baseline prevalence and, based on a risk assessment, aim at eliminating “super-shedders” as soon as possible.…”

Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) in Portugal

“…However, the role of wild mammals in the epidemiology of MAP is unclear because these species do not usually exhibit the classical clinical signs of paratuberculosis [3,6,7,10]. Many factors can influence the prevalence and spread of paratuberculosis in domestic animals, such as failure in biosecurity measures, farm management practices, and contact between wildlife and livestock [3,[13][14][15][16].…”

<em>Mycobacterium avium</em> subsp. paratuberculosis in Wild Boar (<em>Sus scrofa</em>) in Portugal

“…However, the role of wild mammals in the epidemiology of MAP is unclear because these species do not usually exhibit the classical clinical signs of paratuberculosis [3,6,13]. Many factors can influence the prevalence and the spread of paratuberculosis in domestic animals such as failure in 2 biosecurity measures, farm management practices, and contact between wildlife and livestock [3,[14][15][16][17].…”