Know more

Our use of cookies

Cookies are a set of data stored on a user’s device when the user browses a web site. The data is in a file containing an ID number, the name of the server which deposited it and, in some cases, an expiry date. We use cookies to record information about your visit, language of preference, and other parameters on the site in order to optimise your next visit and make the site even more useful to you.

To improve your experience, we use cookies to store certain browsing information and provide secure navigation, and to collect statistics with a view to improve the site’s features. For a complete list of the cookies we use, download “Ghostery”, a free plug-in for browsers which can detect, and, in some cases, block cookies.

Ghostery is available here for free: https://www.ghostery.com/fr/products/

You can also visit the CNIL web site for instructions on how to configure your browser to manage cookie storage on your device.

In the case of third-party advertising cookies, you can also visit the following site: http://www.youronlinechoices.com/fr/controler-ses-cookies/, offered by digital advertising professionals within the European Digital Advertising Alliance (EDAA). From the site, you can deny or accept the cookies used by advertising professionals who are members.

It is also possible to block certain third-party cookies directly via publishers:

Cookie type

Means of blocking

Analytical and performance cookies

Realytics
Google Analytics
Spoteffects
Optimizely

Targeted advertising cookies

DoubleClick
Mediarithmics

The following types of cookies may be used on our websites:

Mandatory cookies

Functional cookies

Social media and advertising cookies

These cookies are needed to ensure the proper functioning of the site and cannot be disabled. They help ensure a secure connection and the basic availability of our website.

These cookies allow us to analyse site use in order to measure and optimise performance. They allow us to store your sign-in information and display the different components of our website in a more coherent way.

These cookies are used by advertising agencies such as Google and by social media sites such as LinkedIn and Facebook. Among other things, they allow pages to be shared on social media, the posting of comments, and the publication (on our site or elsewhere) of ads that reflect your centres of interest.

Our EZPublish content management system (CMS) uses CAS and PHP session cookies and the New Relic cookie for monitoring purposes (IP, response times).

These cookies are deleted at the end of the browsing session (when you log off or close your browser window)

Our EZPublish content management system (CMS) uses the XiTi cookie to measure traffic. Our service provider is AT Internet. This company stores data (IPs, date and time of access, length of the visit and pages viewed) for six months.

Our EZPublish content management system (CMS) does not use this type of cookie.

For more information about the cookies we use, contact INRA’s Data Protection Officer by email at cil-dpo@inra.fr or by post at:

INRA
24, chemin de Borde Rouge –Auzeville – CS52627
31326 Castanet Tolosan CEDEX - France

Dernière mise à jour : Mai 2018

Menu Logo Principal Oniris

Home page

Transmission dynamics of 2 pathogens (Mannheimia haemolytica and Mycoplasma bovis) in Young Cattle at the beginning of the fattening period.

The highly variable diversity of strains of 2 major bacteria involved in respiratory diseases in young cattle suggests different origins of infection. For Mannheimia haemolytica several clones (pulsotypes) were found during episodes of infectious bronchopneumonia (IPB) at the beginning of fattening. In contrast, for Mycoplasma bovis only one clone was present during high prevalence episodes. These results provide a better understanding of the transmission dynamics of these agents and will ultimately allow better adaptation of IPB control measures.

National and/or international context/issues/issues

More than 50% of European and North American beef comes from male cattle raised from weaning in feedlots (USDA, 2011, FranceAgriMer, 2010). Infectious bronchopneumonia (IPB) is the main disease encountered in these workshops (Assié et al., 2009, Cusack et al., 2003, Smith, 2009). These are infectious diseases caused by viruses and bacteria. Among bacteria, Mannheimia haemolytica (M. haemolytica) and Mycoplasma bovis (M. bovis) are considered important agents. In addition to these infectious agents, various factors related to animals, husbandry conditions and the environment favour the development of clinical signs.

Measures to prevent the development of IPBs are based on the control of risk factors and targeted vaccination against some of the infectious agents. These measures reduce the incidence of cases but do not completely prevent the occurrence of IPB (Taylor et al., 2010). IPBs are difficult to detect early and completely (Timsit et al., 2011), resulting in growth retardation and mortalities that can have a significant impact on the economic performance of feedlots (Griffin, 1997, Smith, 1998).

The treatment of IPBs requires the use of antibiotics (Radostits et al., 2007). To circumvent the difficulty of detecting young cattle that could benefit from treatment, an alternative strategy to curative treatment of only cattle detected by visual inspection is the use of metaphylaxis, i.e. treatment of all animals in a batch after detection of the first cases that may require treatment (Schwarz et al., 2001). As with any non-targeted antibiotic treatment, metaphylaxis results in the treatment of healthy animals that may not require treatment and therefore potential overuse of antibiotics. Indeed, one justification for the use of metaphylaxis is the protection it could confer by preventing the occurrence of new patients secondary to the transmission of pathogenic bacteria within batches of animals. With the overall objective of reducing antibiotic consumption, the use of metaphylaxis in the treatment of IPB must be very cautious. At present, however, there is insufficient knowledge about the horizontal transmission of bacteria involved in IPBs, particularly during or just after batching, to assess the real danger posed by these secondary cases.   

The objective of our work was to determine whether one or more clones of M. haemolytica and M. bovis are present in the lungs of the various cattle in a batch during IPB episodes. Isolates of M. haemolytica and M. bovis were characterized by pulsed field electrophoresis (PFGE). 

Results

Sixteen episodes of IPB occurred naturally in 12 batches of 8 to 12 young cattle (n=112) newly arrived in 3 fattening plants. M. haemolytica was isolated during 14 of these episodes. 175 isolates of M. haemolytica were collected. Two to 3 clones of M. haemolytica were found in 10 episodes while only one clone was found in 4 episodes. Isolates of M. bovis were found in 8 of these 16 episodes. The intra-lot prevalence of M. bovis positive cattle was 8-100%. The PFGE revealed that, although the cattle came from different breeder farms of origin, only one M. bovis clone was present in a batch during IPB episodes with a high prevalence of M. bovis infection.

 

Perspectives/term impact

The significant diversity of M. haemolytica strains during IPB episodes indicates that IPB in which M. haemolytica is involved is not primarily due to the spread of a single virulent clone among cattle and highlights the importance of factors that predispose to the occurrence of cases by helping the resident flora in the nasopharynx of cattle to overwhelm their immune system.

Although M. bovis can occur in carrier animals after a stressful event such as transport or allotment, the increased prevalence of M. bovis lung infection observed in IPB episodes occurring early in the feeding period appears to be primarily due to horizontal transmission of a clone among young cattle.

 

Valorisation

Timsit E., Christensen H., Bareille N., Seegers H., Bisgaard M., Assié S. 2012. Transmission dynamics of Mannheimia haemolytica in newly-received beef bulls at fattening operations. Veterinary Microbiology.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.07.044

Timsit E., Arcangioli M.A., Bareille N., Seegers H., Assié S. 2012. Molecular epidemiology of Mycoplasma bovis during bovine respiratory disease outbreaks in newly-received beef bulls at fattening operations. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. In press.

 

Bibliography

  • Assié, S., H. Seegers, B. Makoschey, L. Desire-Bousquie, et N. Bareille. 2009. Exposure to pathogens and incidence of respiratory disease in young bulls on their arrival at fattening operations in France. Veterinary Record 165: 195-199.
  • Cusack, P., N. McMeniman, et I. Lean. 2003. The medicine and epidemiology of bovine respiratory disease in feedlots. Australian Veterinary Journal 81: 480-487.
  • FranceAgriMer. 2010. Filière bovine. http://www.franceagrimer.fr/Projet-02/08publications/
  • elevage/bovins_20103. pdf
  • Griffin, D. 1997. Economic impact associated with respiratory disease in beef cattle. The
  • Veterinary clinics of North America 13: 367-377.
  • Radostits, O., C. Gay, K. Hinchcliff, et P. Constable. 2007. Veterinary Medicine: A textbook of the diseases of cattle, horse, sheep, pigs, and goats. 10th ed. W.B. Saunders Ltd, London.
  • Schwarz, S., et E. Chaslus-Dancla. 2001. Use of antimicrobials in veterinary medicine and mechanisms of resistance. Veterinary Research 32: 201-225.
  • Smith, R. 1998. Impact of disease on feedlot performance: a review. Journal of Animal Science 76: 272-274.
  • Smith, R. 2009. North American cattle marketing and bovine respiratory disease (BRD). Animal Health Research Reviews 10(2): 105-108.
  • Taylor, J., R. Fulton, T. Lehenbauer, D. Step, et A. Confer. 2010. The epidemiology of bovine respiratory disease: what is the evidence for preventive measures? The Canadian Veterinary Journal 51: 1351-1359.
  • Timsit E., Bareille N., Seegers H., Lehebel A., Assié S. 2011. Visually undetected fever episodes in newly received beef bulls at a fattening operation: Occurrence, duration, and impact on performance. Journal of Animal Science 89: 4272-4280.
  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2011. U.S. Beef and Cattle Industry: Background Statistics and Information. http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm

National and/or international context/issues/issues