Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:15:08.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring the economic impact of improved control of sub-clinical mastitis in Irish dairy herds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2015

E. J. DILLON ,
T. HENNESSY  and
J. CULLINAN
E. J. DILLON*
Affiliation:
Rural Economy and Development Programme Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland
T. HENNESSY
Affiliation:
Rural Economy and Development Programme Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland
J. CULLINAN
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: Emma.Dillon@teagasc.ie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Improvements in milk quality are important if the Irish dairy industry is to grow sustainably and retain a competitive advantage in a post-quota environment. In this regard, superior animal health has an important role to play. In order to reduce the costs of disease and to improve best practice it is important to demonstrate the economic gains achievable from improved dairy herd health. Elevated levels of somatic cell count (SCC) are an indicator of the prevalence of clinical and sub-clinical mastitis in dairy herds. Nationally representative farm-level data for Ireland (2008–2011) and panel data methods are used here to consider the independent effect of herd-level SCC (an annual weighted average figure based on monthly milk bulk tank readings) on both milk yield and gross margin per cow. Results indicate a 2% reduction in productivity for farms with SCC above 400 (‘000 cells/ml), while a reduction in bulk tank SCC from 400 to 300 (‘000 cells/ml) for the average herd (55 cows) results in an annual increase in gross margin of €1045. The impact of a range of herd management practices on SCC is also considered, with such practices shown to be important in influencing animal health.

Type
Modelling Animal Systems Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 153 , Issue 4 , May 2015 , pp. 666 - 675
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Archer, S. C., McCoy, F., Wapenaar, W. & Green, M. J. (2013). Association between somatic cell count early in the first lactation and the lifetime milk yield of cows in Irish dairy herd. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 2951–2959.Google Scholar
Barkema, H. W., Van Der Ploeg, J. D., Schukken, Y. H., Lam, T. J. G. M., Benedictus, G. & Brand, A. (1999). Management style and its association with bulk milk somatic cell count and incidence rate of clinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 1655–1663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, R. (2003). The ‘direct costs’ of livestock disease, the development of a system of models for the analysis of 30 endemic livestock diseases in Great Britain. Journal of Agricultural Economics 54, 55–71.Google Scholar
Blowey, R. W. & Edmondson, P. (2010). Mastitis Control in Dairy Herds: an Illustrated and Practical Guide. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Bruijnis, M., Hogeveen, H., Garforth, C. & Stassen, E. (2013). Dairy farmers’ attitudes and intentions towards improving dairy cow foot health. Livestock Science 155, 103–113.Google Scholar
Connolly, L., Kinsella, A., Quinlan, G. & Moran, B. (2009). National Farm Survey 2008. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc.Google Scholar
Connolly, L., Kinsella, A., Quinlan, G. & Moran, B. (2010). National Farm Survey 2009. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc.Google Scholar
De Vliegher, S., Fox, L. K., Piepers, S., McDougall, S. & Barkema, H. W. (2012). Invited review: mastitis in dairy heifers: nature of the disease, potential impact, prevention and control. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 1025–1040.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dillon, P., Crosse, S., O'Brien, B. & Mayes, R. W. (2002). The effect of forage type and level of concentrate supplementation on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows in early lactation. Journal of Grass and Forage Science 57, 212–223.Google Scholar
Dohoo, I. R. & Leslie, K. E. (1991). Evaluation of changes in somatic cell counts as indicators of new intramammary infections. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 10, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufour, S., Fréchette, A., Barkema, H. W., Mussell, A. & Scholl, D. T. (2011). Invited review: effect of udder health management practices on herd somatic cell count. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 563–579.Google Scholar
European Economic Community (EEC) (1992). Council Directive 92/46/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the health rules for the production and placing on the market of raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk-based products. Official Journal of the European Communities L268, 1–32.Google Scholar
Geary, U., Lopez-Villalobos, N., Begley, N., McCoy, F., O'Brien, B., O'Grady, L. & Shalloo, L. (2012). Estimating the effect of mastitis on the profitability of Irish dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 3662–3673.Google Scholar
Green, M. J., Leach, K. A., Breen, J. E., Green, L. E. & Bradley, A. J. (2007). National intervention study of mastitis control in dairy herds in England and Wales. The Veterinary Record 160, 287–293.Google Scholar
Heikkilä, A. M., Nousiainen, J. I. & Pyörälä, S. (2012). Costs of clinical mastitis with special reference to premature culling. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 139–150.Google Scholar
Hennessy, T. & Heanue, K. (2012). Quantifying the effect of discussion group membership on technology adoption and farm profit on dairy farms. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 18, 41–54.Google Scholar
Hennessy, T., Moran, B., Kinsella, A. & Quinlan, G. (2011). National Farm Survey 2010. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc.Google Scholar
Hennessy, T., Kinsella, A., Moran, B. & Quinlan, G. (2012). National Farm Survey 2011. Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc.Google Scholar
Hogeveen, H., Huijps, K. & Lam, T. J. (2011). Economic aspects of Mastitis: new developments. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 59, 16–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hortet, P. & Seegers, H. (1998). Calculated milk production losses associated with elevated somatic cell counts in dairy cows: review and critical discussion. Veterinary Research 29, 497–510.Google Scholar
Huijps, K. (2009). Economic decisions in mastitis management. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Huijps, K., Hogeveen, H., Lam, T. J. G. M. & Oude Lansink, A. G. J. M. (2010). Costs and efficacy of management measures to improve udder health on Dutch dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 115–124.Google Scholar
International Dairy Federation (1997). Recommendations for Presentation of Mastitis-Related Data. Bulletin No. 321. Brussels, Belgium: International Dairy Federation.Google Scholar
Läpple, D., Hennessy, T. & O'Donovan, M. (2012). Extended grazing: a detailed analysis of Irish dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 188–195.Google Scholar
McCoy, F. (2012). CellCheck: a new solution to an old challenge. M2-Magazine 2, 22–28. Available from: http://www.animalhealthireland.ie/page.php?id=46 (accessed October 2014).Google Scholar
More, S. J. (2009). Global trends in milk quality: implications for the Irish dairy industry. Irish Veterinary Journal 62 (Suppl. 4), S5–14.Google Scholar
Nielsen, C., Østergaard, S., Emanuelson, U., Andersson, H., Berglund, B. & Strandberg, E. (2010). Economic consequences of mastitis and withdrawal of milk with high somatic cell count in Swedish dairy herds. Animal 4, 1758–1770.Google Scholar
O'Brien, B. (Ed.) (2008). Practical Steps to Improve Milk Quality. Milk Quality Handbook. Series No. 8: Moorepark Dairy Levy Research Update. Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland: Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre.Google Scholar
Schwabenbauer, K. (2012). The role of economics for animal health policymakers. Eurochoices 11, 18–22.Google Scholar
Seegers, H., Fourichon, C. & Beaudeau, F. (2003). Production effects related to mastitis and mastitis economics in dairy cattle herds. Veterinary Research 34, 475–491.Google Scholar
Shalloo, L., Dillon, P., O'Loughlin, J., Rath, M. & Wallace, M. (2004). Comparison of a pasture-based system of milk production on a high rainfall, heavy-clay soil with that on a lower rainfall, free draining soil. Grass & Forage Science 59, 157–168.Google Scholar
Stott, A. W. (2011). The role of economics in motivating farmers to improve udder health. In Udder Health and Communication (Eds Hogeveen, H. & Lam, T. J. G. M.), pp. 43–53. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Valencia, V. & Anderson, D. (2000). Choosing optimal milk production systems in a changing economic environment. Journal of Farm Management 10, 618–630.Google Scholar
Van Asseldonk, M. A. P. M., Renes, R. J., Lam, T. J. G. M. & Hogeveen, H. (2010). Awareness and perceived value of economic information in controlling somatic cell count. Veterinary Record 166, 263–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed