Search

Introduction: This study assessed the risk of first treatment for bovine respiratory disease (BRD) given detection of nasopharyngeal bacteria (Mannheimia haemolytica, Pasteurella multocida, and Histophilus somni) and corresponding likelihood of antimicrobial susceptibility (C/S) at two time points during the early feeding period. Relationships between C/S results and later treatment for BRD were evaluated at both the calf-level and pen-level. The association between calf-level and pen-level C/S findings during the early feeding period and subsequent C/S results at BRD treatment were also reported. Methods: Auction-sourced, recently-weaned beef calves (n = 1,599 steers) were placed in adjacent feedlot pens (8 × 100 calves) in two subsequent years. Deep nasopharyngeal (DNP) swabs were collected from all calves at time of arrival processing (1DOF) and before metaphylaxis administration with either tulathromycin or oxytetracycline, 12 days later (13DOF), and at the time of first treatment for BRD. All samples were tested for C/S. Results: Several pen-level and individual calf-level C/S measures of interest were associated with future treatment for BRD and C/S at the time of treatment. The median DOF for first BRD treatment was 24 days following tulathromycin metaphylaxis and 11 days following oxytetracycline. Overall, sampling at 13DOF resulted in the best fit for more models of subsequent treatment for BRD and C/S results at BRD treatment than for sampling at arrival. In individual calves, recovery of M. haemolytica, P. multocida, or H. somni at 13DOF was associated with subsequent treatment for BRD within 45DOF. Pen-level prevalence of Pasteurellacea bacteria with tetracycline or macrolide resistance at arrival and 13DOF were associated with detection of bacteria with antimicrobial resistance (AMR) at BRD treatment, as were individual calf results at 13DOF. Discussion: These findings suggest that the bacteria and AMR outcomes recovered from cattle near two weeks on feed can inform the prediction of future BRD risk and concurrent antimicrobial susceptibility results at time of first BRD treatment. Notably, the associations between pen-level C/S results from previous testing and corresponding findings in calves with BRD from the same pen suggested potential testing strategies to inform antimicrobial use protocols for feedlot cattle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Veterinary Journal / Revue Vétérinaire Canadienne is the property of Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Veterinary Journal / Revue Vétérinaire Canadienne is the property of Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Veterinary Journal / Revue Vétérinaire Canadienne is the property of Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

While all anthropological experts take pride when their evidence plays a vital role in securing protection for an asylum applicant, we also acutely remember the cases in which our research and reports were rejected, particularly when our reports appear to be unfairly rejected. In this paper, I discuss two cases in which the British Home Office argued that an asylum applicant was not entitled to protection because he participated in war crimes/crimes against humanity. However, the evidence provided by War Crimes Unit in the United Kingdom's Home Office took the form of assertions based on a very poor understanding of Ethiopian politics and limited research. In the first case, the Immigration Judge accepted the evidence submitted by the Home Office and refused the applicants claim for asylum, but on appeal the Home Office withdrew the case against the applicant. In the second case, the Immigration Judge adopted some of my evidence for the applicant but denied his claim. This paper explores the pitfalls of litigation and the ability of the state to tilt the scales of justice against asylum claimants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]