Abstract
All sectors of livestock production are in the process of shifting from small populations on many farms to large populations on fewer farms. A concurrent shift has occurred in the number of livestock moved across political boundaries. The unintended consequence of these changes has been the appearance of multifactorial diseases that are resistant to traditional methods of prevention and control. The need to understand complex animal health conditions mandates a shift toward the collection of longitudinal animal health data. Historically, collection of such data has frustrated and challenged animal health specialists. A promising trend in the evolution toward more efficient and effective livestock disease surveillance is the increased use of aggregate samples, e.g. bulk tank milk and oral fluid specimens. These sample types provide the means to monitor disease, estimate herd prevalence, and evaluate spatiotemporal trends in disease distribution. Thus, this article provides an overview of the use of bulk tank milk and pen-based oral fluids in the surveillance of livestock populations for infectious diseases.
Highlights
And locally, achieving the control of historically impactful infectious diseases of livestock continues to frustrate producers and challenge animal health specialists
The use of aggregate samples in veterinary surveillance has grown in tandem with developments in diagnostic technology, e.g. nucleic acid-based assays and antibody assays adapted to these specimens
The purpose of this article is to review the use of bulk tank milk and pen-based oral fluids in infectious disease surveillance of livestock populations
Summary
And locally, achieving the control of historically impactful infectious diseases of livestock continues to frustrate producers and challenge animal health specialists. The ongoing burden of disease in endemic areas and the expansion of infectious agents into previously free areas expose the frailty of current surveillance and response/control programs (Backer et al, 2009; Lee, 2015; Saeed et al, 2015; Neira et al, 2017). Foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) was identified in 1897, but 116 years later, endemic FMDV losses were estimated at $6.5–$21 billion dollars annually and only 66 of the 181 (36.5%) OIE-member countries are ‘FMD free where vaccination is not practiced’ (Longjam et al, 2011; Knight-Jones and Rushton, 2013; OIE, 2017a). Classical swine fever virus (CSFV) was identified in 1903 (de Schweinitz, Dorset, 1903), but in 2017, just 32 of the 181 (17.7%) OIE-member countries are considered free of CSFV (OIE, 2017b). Identified on the basis of outbreaks of unknown origin in the 1980s, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) was isolated in 1991 and has become endemic in most major pork-producing regions of the world (Wensvoort et al, 1991; Zimmerman et al, 2012). Holtkamp et al (2013) estimated the US pork producers’ losses to PRRSV at $664 million annually. Nathues et al (2017) estimated losses to European producers at €126.79 per sow per year and €3.77 per pig marketed in herds with ‘slight’ PRRS
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
