August 2024 - American Cattlemen

How to optimize your cattle deworming program?

Posted on August 31, 2024September 1, 2024 by Twin Rivers Media

How to optimize your cattle deworming program?

Three questions to improve ROI potential

By M. Wayne Ayers, DVM, Beef Cattle Technical Consultant, Elanco Animal Health

Beef producers understand how deworming helps to maximize animal health and contributes to operational profitability, but building a strategic deworming program that yields effective results and a positive return on investment can be a tricky task.

Answering three critical questions can help ensure cattle operations are set up for success by decreasing parasite burden and improving weight gain and performance.

1. Do I know what parasites are present?

Understanding what parasites are present in cattle is the first step to success. Of the nearly 15 species of worms that affect U.S. cattle, four parasites are responsible for the most significant economic losses – the brown stomach worm (Ostertagia osteragi), Barber’s pole worm (Haemonchus placei), cattle bankrupt worm (Cooperia spp.) and small stomach worm (Trichostrongylus axei).

Determining which cattle are infected with parasites, what species are represented and at what population level, using species-specific quantitative analysis, will help you choose the most effective deworming product and target the most susceptible cattle for more timely treatment.

2. Do I know which cattle are at the greatest risk?

When assessing your herd, youngstock are at the highest risk and stand to suffer the greatest potential economic loss due to parasitism. Even when subclinical infections occur without visible symptoms, internal parasites can decrease calf performance, including reduced growth rates. This can limit calves’ ability to reach their full genetic potential and can negatively impact an operation’s profitability.

As cattle age and their immune system has a history of parasite interaction, they become less susceptible to infection and other effects of parasites.

It’s also important to practice refugia when considering which cattle to treat. Refugia is a deworming strategy that maintains a low level of untreated sensitive parasite larvae on pastures, reducing selection pressure and resistance development that can result from repeated deworming.

Capitalizing on the ability of mature cattle to develop some degree of immunity to parasitism, Elanco developed a refugia strategy called “4 Score and 3 Years” for cattle. This resistance management strategy calls for mature cattle with a body condition score of greater than 4.5 and older than 3 years of age to remain unexposed to dewormer. All cattle three years of age and younger, regardless of body condition, should be dewormed.

Remember, what’s in the cow is what’s on the pasture, what’s on the pasture is what’s in the calf, and what’s in the calf is what causes economic loss. The “4 Score and 3 Years” strategy helps maintain a parasite pasture population that can be effectively managed in youngstock.

3. Am I using the most effective product?

Evaluating and choosing the dewormer best suited for your operation can be a daunting task.

As generic formulations are added to farm store shelves, it can be tempting to choose the lowest cost option. However, studies have demonstrated potential effectiveness differences between pioneer dewormers and generic formulations.^1,2 These studies raise the question of whether generic formulations are equally effective.

Achieving efficacy while reducing potential resistance development can be a difficult balance to strike, and reduced effectiveness often equals reduced profitability.

Cydectin^® is the pioneer moxidectin cattle dewormer with 25 years of demonstrated effectiveness. It provides broad-spectrum control of both internal and external parasites, including the four most economically significant parasites.

Cydectin’s active ingredient, moxidectin, has a novel molecular structure and is the only macrocyclic lactone class dewormer in the milbemycin subclass. With a lack of new dewormer molecules on the market, producers can reduce the risk of resistance development by leveraging this unique chemistry.

Compared to other common dewormers, Cydectin Pour-On has proven to reduce fecal egg counts and put more dollars in producers’ pockets by numerically increasing weight gain and additional profit per head³.
In one head-to-head study, Cydectin Pour On was proven to be effective in reducing fecal egg counts by 96.6% assessed by a fecal egg count reduction test (FECRT).3 This reduction was statistically (P<0.05) greater than Ivomec (FECRT = 43.6%). The researchers also found the following derived benefits of treating stocker cattle with Cydectin Pour On:

• +60 lbs. and $150/head more than the untreated control*
• +33 lbs. and $82.50/head more than Ivomec® Pour-On* (ivermectin)
• +16 lbs. and $40/head more than Dectomax® Pour-On (doramectin)
• +11 lbs. and $27.50/head more than Eprinex® Pour-On (eprinomectin)

*Significantly greater (P < 0.05)

(Weights with an asterisk are statistically different from Cydectin Pour On at P<0.05. Dollar differences calculated 07March2024 using $2.50/cwt value)

Implementing a strategic and well-rounded deworming program is essential to maintaining the health and productivity of beef cattle. Answering these three important questions ensures your deworming program further contributes to your operation’s profitability and sustainability.

Remember, a healthy herd is a productive herd, and an investment in deworming goes a long way to ensuring the success of your beef cattle business.

Visit CydectinBeef.com or talk to your local Elanco representative about how Cydectin can benefit your strategic deworming protocol.

Related product/portfolio pages

• https://farmanimal.elanco.com/us/beef/products/cydectin-pour-on
• https://campaign.elanco.com/en-us/elanco-cydectin-injectable/
• https://farmanimal.elanco.com/us/beef

Keep Cydectin out of reach of children.

References

¹ Lifschitz A, Sallovitz J, Imperiale F, et al. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of four ivermectin generic formulations in calves. Vet Parasitol. 2004:119(2-3):247-57.
² Yazwinski TA, Tucker CA, Miles DG, et al. Evaluation of generic injectable ivermectin for control of nematodiasis in feedlot heifers. Bov Pract. 46(1):60-65.
³ Williams JC, et al. A comparison of persistent anthelmintic efficacy of topical formulations of doramectin, ivermectin, eprinomectin and moxidectin against naturally acquired nematode infections of beef calves. Vet Parasitol. 1999:85:277-288.

ASI and NCBA Release Video on Public Lands Movement Criteria During FMD Outbreak

Posted on August 26, 2024 by Twin Rivers Media

ASI and NCBA Release Video on Public Lands Movement Criteria During FMD Outbreak

WASHINGTON (August 22, 2024) – The American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) worked with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and other stakeholders to develop movement decision criteria guidance addressing unique scenarios that would arise for federal lands grazers in the event of a foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreak. A 5-minute video describes the project and resources and can be viewed on the Secure Sheep and Wool Supply (SSWS) and Secure Beef Supply (SBS) websites under the Public Land Grazing pages. This has resulted from a multi-year cooperative project funded by a grant from the USDA National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Program (NADPRP).

“ASI appreciates the time and effort put in by the Advisory Group as well as Dr. Danelle Bickett-Weddle, consultant with Preventalytics, in the creation of materials. This effort had multiple groups contribute to unique resources for sheep and cattle producers to prepare for, respond to, and enhance their resiliency for an FAD event,” said ASI Executive Director Peter Orwick. “This collaboration across the sheep and cattle industries with state and federal partners demonstrates impactful results for business continuity and a secure food supply.”

“An FMD outbreak on U.S. soil is expected it would cost the U.S. economy hundreds of millions of dollars. For years, the resources we have prepared have focused on mitigating losses on private land. Now, with the help of a wide spectrum of organizations including USDA, the Public Lands Council, State Animal Health Officials, and many more, we have comprehensive resources to help public lands ranchers whose livestock may be far from any infected herd have predictability for their operations in the event of an FMD outbreak,” said NCBA Executive Director of Government Affairs Kaitlynn Glover. “Livestock producers in the West are now more prepared than ever to work with federal lands agencies and animal health officials to make movement decisions with the development of this collaborative guidance.”

These resources are in addition to the enhanced biosecurity plans found on the SSWS and SBS websites. Industry input and participation was critical to identifying gaps for federal lands grazers and establishing the need for these specialized documents. The sheep and beef industries continue to work together to provide educational resources to best prepare producers, veterinarians, and other industry stakeholders before an FMD outbreak occurs.

Background

The U.S. is currently free of the FMD virus. The Secure Sheep and Wool Supply (SSWS) Plan and Secure Beef Supply (SBS) Plan for continuity of business provides opportunities for industry partners to voluntarily prepare before an FMD outbreak. If FMD were found in U.S. livestock, regulatory officials will limit the movement of animals and animal products to try and control the spread of this very contagious animal disease. Control areas will be established around infected premises and movement restrictions will be implemented. Given the nature of federal lands grazing, containment of livestock and mitigation of risk will require different strategies than private land containment measures. When the control areas encompass part or all of a public land grazing allotment, in one or more states, there are unique challenges for sheep and cattle producers to mitigate disease exposure risks. FMD is not a threat to public health or food safety.

###

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has represented America’s cattle producers since 1898, preserving the heritage and strength of the industry through education and public policy. As the largest association of cattle producers, NCBA works to create new markets and increase demand for beef. Efforts are made possible through membership contributions. To join, contact NCBA at 1-866-BEEF-USA or membership@beef.org.

CONTACT:
Hunter Ihrman, hihrman@beef.org
Steve Johnson, srjohnson@beef.org

The Threat of Beef Heifer Mastitis

Posted on August 15, 2024August 26, 2024 by Twin Rivers Media

The Threat of Beef Heifer Mastitis

Article and Photo courtesy of Central Life Sciences

Cattlemen know that protecting their cattle operations from threats is essential to remaining profitable and productive. Heifer mastitis in beef herds is a potentially devastating threat for cattle herds, as it can quickly spread and have a significant impact on both animal health and your bottom line. Heifer mastitis, characterized by the inflammation and infection of one or more teats prior to the heifer’s first calf, can destroy the milk-producing tissues within the affected teats and often leads to the development of blind quarters. Blind quarters result in decreased milk production for life and will affect future calf weaning weights.

The first step in protecting your cattle against the damaging threat of heifer mastitis is understanding the disease and the role horn flies play. Then, you can better implement a plan to protect the future of your herd.

The Role of Horn Flies in Mastitis Spread

One of the key contributors to heifer mastitis is the presence of horn flies. These persistent insects are known to feed on the blood vessels in the skin of the teats, causing irritation and transferring mastitis-causing bacteria. Horn flies can carry these harmful bacteria from one animal to another, allowing the bacteria to enter the teat and move throughout the quarter, inflicting damage on the milk-producing tissues. The potential for the rapid spread of mastitis within a herd is supported by the horn fly’s close association with the herd and the need for frequent blood meals.

According to Dr. Steven Nickerson at the University of Georgia, 75% of retained heifer herds surveyed had incidences of heifer mastitis. If the herd had a fly control program, incidents of heifer mastitis dropped by 55%. By implementing an effective fly control program to help prevent cases of mastitis, you can improve the overall health of the herd and protect the future productivity of the heifers.

Implementing Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan is a decisive plan to control a pest that incorporates multiple forms of pest control. The IPM can be tailored based on the herd’s needs and limitations of labor, time or cost. The key component to any IPM program is PIE – Plan – Implement – Evaluate. Planning your IPM can start with identifying your unique needs and the target pest. Once a plan is created, implement the IPM for your herd and evaluate it to adjust it as needed effectively. Cattle producers can ensure optimal herd performance and well-being while contributing to a healthier bottom line by utilizing a targeted Integrated Pest Management plan.

To have an effective IPM program, one should include the following tactics:

Evaluate the horn fly population by on-animal counts. While establishing a solid Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program is crucial, monitoring is just as vital. Regularly assessing fly populations on the cattle with population estimates or fly counts allows cattle operators to evaluate and fine-tune their strategies. The economic threshold for horn flies on beef cattle is 200 horn flies per animal. Control methods must be implemented when populations exceed 200 per animal to avoid impacting the herd’s bottom line.
Protect the horn flies’ natural enemies. Avoid spraying general insecticides and limit the use of systemic pour-on endectocides to help conserve the naturally found dung beetles and other predatory beetles that feed on the larvae found in the manure pats. By protecting the horn flies’ natural enemies, cattle producers can utilize biological control as an eco-friendly approach to pest management.
Rotate the Mode of Action. When using topical insecticides like insecticidal ear tags, sprays, and pour-ons, rotate the Mode of Action, not the active ingredient, to avoid contributing to the horn fly populations’ genetic insecticidal resistance.
Be preventative. Use a targeted preventative product, like Altosid® IGR, a labor-free feed-through fly control product.

Targeted Horn Fly Treatment Program

Altosid^® IGR is a feed-through fly-control solution containing the active ingredient (s)methoprene, mimicking a unique biochemical in insects responsible for insect development. When fed to heifers in their daily mineral supplement, Altosid^® IGR moves through the digestive system and treats their manure, effectively controlling the horn fly population by treating where horn flies develop. In more than 30 years of use, there have been no known cases of insecticide resistance to Altosid^® IGR. Altosid^® IGR is effective in controlling horn flies that are resistant to organophosphates and pyrethroids commonly used in conventional topical horn fly control products.

By controlling horn flies, producers can take the first step to reduce the occurrence and impact of heifer mastitis and blind quarters in their herd. By implementing a targeted horn fly treatment program established around the preventative control of Altosid^® IGR, producers can keep cattle healthy and productive now and for years to come.

Trust the first and proven feed-through for horn fly control that delivers proven ROI. For more information, visit AltosidIGR.com.