In Estonia few efforts are made to control the infection and the situation has basically been unchanged for decades (Lassen et al. 2009).
Image: Calves infected with Eimeria bovis; left untreated and to the right treated. Source: Daniel et al. Better herd health. Implants decrease severity of disease response in cattle. Highlights of Agricultural Research. 2000; Vol 47, No. 3.
Without proper tools and data, it is difficult to convince farmers and veterinary practitioners that a situation that has persisted as long as the memory can be changed to the benefit of animals and the farmers production.
Scientifically it is a challenge to create a holistic picture of a problem due to the long study period needed to monitor the animal and the many factors to control. For this reason the cost of coccidia infections and the benefits of control remains an estimate.
One of the most recognized estimates is by Fitzgerald (1980) who estimated that Eimeria at the time on a global scale cost 723 US$/year in lost earnings, or as a rule of thumb: 1 US$/calf/year. Adjusting the value to inflation this would amount to around 1,600 US$/year today. However, this estimate was based on current understanding of weight losses of calves infected with pathogenic Eimeria, mortalities, and assumptions on treatments with related costs. Doing so it only calculated calf-associated expenses, and not the long term effects or considering the management choices and herd dynamics throughout the life of the cattle.
In the summary presented here are based on the results from the article by Lassen and Østergaard (2012) where we present the outcome of simulating the effects of Eimeria on a herd of 100 animals over 10 years. The model (SimHerd v4) is a dynamic model that takes changes into account on weekly basis, has been designed using experimental data and an extensive understanding of management dynamics. In addition prices and expenses are part of the simulation so that also a balanced financial outcome of changes can be estimated.
Our experiment included a raised mortality in the scenario containing an endemic infection of Eimeria in the herd and a slower weight gain of the animals. As a result of slower weight gains a delay in reaching a weight suitable for the first insemination of cattle was adjusted in the model setup.
Results showed that mortality of calves had little impact on the production as a whole while slower weight gains showed to be an expensive additional expense in extra food requirements to fatten the cows. The delay in the first insemination had the largest impact and caused losses due to delay in entering the production.
Compared to a hypothetical parasite free herd, the best estimate of Estonian conditions made an annual 8% negative balance of the balanced income of the farmer.
In addition the study tried to estimate the benefits of prevention and control.
Timely supportive treatment and isolation of infected animals showing symptoms of coccidiosis increases the calves chances of survival dramatically. This was included in the model scenarios. Treating preventally with anti-coccidials would lower the infection pressure in the herd, but not remove the parasite. It was thus estimated that prevention would be equal to a lower infection pressure with less impact on weights and mortalities. Good hygiene measures may achieve similar effects.
Cost-benefit of treating with anti-coccidial drugs was very small if only considering the value of a calf. This may also be why this option is not favoured. However, when considering the effects over time and for the herd, the economic benefits was substantial.
READ MORE IN THE ARTICLE:
Lassen, B., Østergaard, S. Estimation of the economical effects of Eimeria infections in Estoniandairy herds using a stochastic model. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 106 (2012) 258–265.
