Cost benefit analysis of automatic lameness detection systems in dairy herds: A dynamic programming approach.

Epidemiological data establish that lameness is second only to mastitis as the dairy industry's most prevalent and costly animal welfare issue. Using an automatic lameness detection (ALD) system in which continuous, accurate detection is coupled with proper treatment, is key for reducing economic losses due to lameness. It is reasonable to assume that the cost of lameness would vary with its severity. Therefore, our first objective was to estimate the cost of different lameness severity levels as a function of milk production, lameness risk, conception probability, and treatment cost using a dynamic programming (DP) model. Our second objective was to conduct a cost benefit analysis for ALD systems which can reduce production losses through early detection and treatment of lameness, when compared to visual-detection (VD; i.e., performed by humans) systems. The default production loss parameters for the VD system used as inputs to the DP model were either sourced from the literature or were estimated based on data from a field trial. The production loss parameters for the ALD system used as inputs to the DP model were based on extrapolations of parameter values used for the VD system. The profit per present cow per year under assumed expenses and revenues decreased from $426.05 (when lameness incidence was assumed to be 0%) to $389.69 when lameness incidence was 19.5 %. Out of the 19.5 % lameness incidence in our default scenario, 9.8 % were moderate cases and 9.7 % were severe cases. Average cost of lameness was $36.36 at 19.5 % incidence. Average cost of lameness increased with increased incidence and was respectively $82.05, $195.05, and $286.87 at the low, medium, and high incidence scenarios. We used an operational framework which compared the lameness costs between the VD and ALD systems with 25 %, 50 % and 75 % net avoided costs (NAC) for the 10 year lifespan of the ALD system, at default, low, medium and high lameness incidence scenarios. The net return per cow per year from using an ALD system over a VD system was $13, at low incidence and 25 % NAC. The net return per cow per year for the ALD system was as high as $99 at high incidence and 75 % NAC. Out of 351 (3 system prices, 3 system efficiencies, 3 levels of lameness incidence and 13 different herd sizes) scenarios tested, 295 resulted in a net profit within the system lifespan of 10 years, thus justifying the investment in ALD systems.

Effect of gonadorelin, lecirelin, and buserelin on LH surge, ovulation, and progesterone in cattle.

Analogs of gonadoliberin (GnRH) are widely used in cattle to synchronize estrus and to induce ovulation, as well as for the treatment of ovarian cysts. The aim of this study was to compare the plasma profiles of LH and progesterone and the follicular dynamics in response to the administration of gonadorelin, lecirelin, or buserelin at the dose recommended to induce ovulation. In addition, the biological response to a half dose of lecirelin was assessed. Twelve healthy Holstein female cows were divided into four sequence groups, according to a Latin square design and received the four treatments during the four periods of the study. Before each period, the estrous cycle was synchronized, and on Day 6 or 7 of the ensuing cycle, the time at which it was most likely to have a dominant follicle, 100 µg of gonadorelin, 25 µg of lecirelin, 50 µg of lecirelin, or 10 µg of buserelin was administered to the cows. Blood samples were regularly collected for up to 4 days after the GnRH administrations. The plasma LH response was evaluated for up to 6 hours after administration, and the plasma progesterone response and ovarian follicular dynamics were evaluated for up to 4 days. There was a significantly lower LH release after gonadorelin treatment compared to lecirelin at the doses of 25 or 50 µg and the buserelin treatment. The mean maximal LH concentration after gonadorelin treatment was 2.5 lower than after lecirelin or buserelin treatment and was reached 1 hour earlier. Four days after the GnRH administration (i.e., at Days 10-11 of the estrous cycle), the overall mean increase in plasma progesterone concentration was 70% and did not differ between the treatment groups. The percentage of disappearance of the dominant follicle (84.8% of ovulation and 4.3% of luteinization) after GnRH treatment was high (73%, 82%, 100%, and 100%, for gonadorelin, lecirelin at the doses of 25 and 50 µg, and buserelin, respectively) and did not differ between the GnRH treatments. The follicle disappearance was followed by the emergence of a synchronous follicle wave within 2 days in almost all the heifers. Altogether, our data show that the three GnRH analogs, at the doses indicated for the induction of ovulation or at a half dose for lecirelin, are almost equally effective to induce the disappearance of the dominant follicle at Day 6 to 7 of the estrous cycle.