Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:41:20.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Using lamb sales data to investigate associations between implementation of disease preventive practices and sheep flock performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2019

E. Lima*
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Leicestershire, United Kingdom
F. Lovatt
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Leicestershire, United Kingdom
P. Davies
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Leicestershire, United Kingdom
J. Kaler
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Leicestershire, United Kingdom
Get access

Abstract

Although the UK is the largest lamb meat producer in Europe, there are limited data available on sheep flock performance and on how sheep farmers manage their flocks. The aims of this study were to gather evidence on the types of disease control practices implemented in sheep flocks, and to explore husbandry factors associated with flock productivity. A questionnaire focusing on farm characteristics, general husbandry and flock health management was carried out in 648 farms located in the UK over summer 2016. Abattoir sales data (lamb sales over 12 months) was compared with the number of breeding ewes on farm to estimate flock productivity (number of lambs sold for meat per 100 ewes per farm per year). Results of a multivariable linear regression model, conducted on 615 farms with complete data, indicated that farms vaccinating ewes against abortion and clostridial agents and administering a group 4/5 anthelmintic to ewes (as recommended by the Sustainable Control of Parasites in Sheep Initiative) during quarantining had a greater flock productivity than farms not implementing these actions (P<0.01 and 0.02, respectively). Flocks with maternal breed types had higher productivity indexes compared with flocks with either pure hill or terminal breeds (P<0.01). Farms weighing lambs during lactation had greater productivity than those not weighing (P<0.01). Importantly, these actions were associated with other disease control practices, for example, treating individual lame ewes with an antibiotic injection, weaning lambs between 13 and 15 weeks of age and carrying out faecal egg counts, suggesting that an increase in productivity may be associated with the combined effect of these factors. This study provides new evidence on the positive relationship between sheep flock performance and disease control measures and demonstrates that lamb sales data can be used as a baseline source of information on flock performance and for farm benchmarking. Further research is needed to explore additional drivers of flock performance.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 7BE, United Kingdom

References

Bohan, A, Shalloo, L, Creighton, P, Boland, TM and Mchugh, N 2017. A survey of management practices and flock performance and their association with flock size and ewe breed type on Irish sheep farms. The Journal of Agricultural Science 155, 13321341.10.1017/S0021859617000399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradford, GE 1972. The role of maternal effects in animal breeding: VII. Maternal effects in sheep 1, 2. Journal of Animal Science 35, 13241334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxton, D, Maley, SW, Wright, SE, Rodger, S, Bartley, P and Innes, EA 2007. Toxoplasma gondii and ovine toxoplasmosis: new aspects of an old story. Veterinary Parasitology 149, 2528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Croston, D and Pollot, G 1994. Planned sheep production. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Davies, P, Remnant, JG, Green, MJ, Gascoigne, E, Gibbon, N, Hyde, R, Porteous, JR, Schubert, K, Lovatt, F and Corbishley, A 2017. Quantitative analysis of antibiotic usage in British sheep flocks. The Veterinary Record 181, 511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denney, GD, Ridings, HI and Thornberry, KJ 1990. An analysis of the variation in wool production between commercial properties from a survey of a wheat-sheep shire in New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 30, 329336.10.1071/EA9900329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillman, DA, Smyth, JD and Melani, L 2009. Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.Google Scholar
Dohoo, IR, Martin, W and Stryhn, HE 2003. Veterinary epidemiologic research. University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, Canada.Google Scholar
Doré, AC, Meek, AH and Dohoo, IR 1987. Factors associated with productivity in Canadian sheep flocks. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research = Revue Canadienne De Recherche Veterinaire 51, 3945.Google ScholarPubMed
Dorea, FC, Berghaus, R, Hofacre, C and Cole, DJ 2010. Survey of biosecurity protocols and practices adopted by growers on commercial poultry farms in Georgia, U. S. A. Avian Diseases 54, 10071015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Douglas, F and Sargison, ND 2018. Husbandry procedures at the point of lambing with reference to perinatal lamb mortality. The Veterinary Record 182, 52.10.1136/vr.104520CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, MD, Speijers, MHM, Theobald, VJ, Fychan, R and Jones, R 2004. Production performance and meat quality of grazing lambs finished on red clover, lucerne or perennial ryegrass swards. Grass and Forage Science 59, 345356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, JH 1991. Multivariate adaptive regression splines. The Annals of Statistics 19, 167.10.1214/aos/1176347963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A 2018. You need 16 times the sample size to estimate an interaction than to estimate a main effect. Retrieved on 3 March 2019 from https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2018/03/15/need-16-times-sample-size-estimate-interaction-estimate-main-effect/ Google Scholar
Glover, M, Clarke, C, Nabb, L and Schmidt, J 2017. Anthelmintic efficacy on sheep farms in south-west England. Veterinary Record 180, 1012.10.1136/vr.104151CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, LE, Berriatua, E and Morgan, KL 1998. A multi-level model of data with repeated measures of the effect of lamb diarrhoea on weight. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 36, 8594.10.1016/S0167-5877(98)00086-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamer, K, Bartley, D, Jennings, A, Morrison, A and Sargison, N 2018. Lack of efficacy of monepantel against trichostrongyle nematodes in a UK sheep flock. Veterinary Parasitology 257, 4853.10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.05.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, JP, Wear, AR, Lambton, SL, Smith, RP and Pritchard, GC 2011. Survey to determine the seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infection in British sheep flocks. Veterinary Record 169, 582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaler, J and Green, L 2013. Sheep farmer opinions on the current and future role of veterinarians in flock health management on sheep farms: a qualitative study. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 112, 370377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, RW and Johnstone, PD 1982. Reproductive performance of commercial sheep flocks in south island districts. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 519523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, M and Johnson, K 2013. Applied predictive modeling. New York, USA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMahon, C, McCoy, M, Ellison, SE, Barley, JP, Edgar, HWJ, Hanna, REB, Malone, FE, Brennan, GP and Fairweather, I 2013. Anthelmintic resistance in Northern Ireland (III): Uptake of ‘SCOPs’ (Sustainable Control of Parasites in Sheep) recommendations by sheep farmers. Veterinary Parasitology 193, 179184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan-Davies, C, Waterhouse, A, Milne, CE and Stott, AW 2006. Farmers’ opinions on welfare, health and production practices in extensive hill sheep flocks in Great Britain. Livestock Science 104, 268277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, CM, Waghorn, TS, Leathwick, DM, Candy, PM, Oliver, AMB and Watson, TG 2012. The production cost of anthelmintic resistance in lambs. Veterinary Parasitology 186, 376381.10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.11.063CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sargison, ND, Jackson, F, Bartley, DJ, Wilson, DJ, Stenhouse, LJ and Penny, CD 2007. Observations on the emergence of multiple anthelmintic resistance in sheep flocks in the south-east of Scotland. Veterinary Parasitology 145, 6576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Townsley, RJ and Parker, WJ 1987. Regression analysis of farm management survey data. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 15, 155162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walkom, SFA, Brien, FDA, Hebart, MLB, Fogarty, NMA and Hatcher, SA 2016. Season and reproductive status rather than genetics factors influence change in ewe weight and fat over time. 4. Genetic relationships of ewe weight and fat score with fleece, reproduction and milk traits. Animal Production Science 56, 708715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zou, H and Hastie, T 2005. Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 67, 301320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lima et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S4

Download Lima et al. supplementary material(File)
File 24.5 KB