AJDI Update presented by Dr. Greg Keefe March 29, 2012 at Dairy Focus.

1. Oh Crap!
More on Johne’s
Dr. Greg Keefe
Dr. Shawn McKenna, AJDI Steering Committee, AJDI
Scientific Committee, Norman Wiebe and Dr. Karen
MacDonald-Phillips

2. Outline
 Reacquainting with Johne’s
 Other programs
 Atlantic Johne’s Disease Initiative
 Results to date
 Take home and a challenge

3. Overview of Disease
 Johne’s Disease (Yo-nees), Paratuberculosis
 Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP)
 Chronic, Infectious Enteritis
 Milk production losses
 Premature culling
 Reduced fertility
 Diarrhea and emaciation
Photos courtesy of
www.johnes.org

4. Transmission of Infection
 Ingest material contaminated with MAP
 Young Calves
 Manure of mature infected cow
 Colostrum and milk
 MAP is hardy
 Uninfected Herds
 Purchase of infected cow

5. Diagnosis
 Tip of the Iceberg Effect Clinical
Cow
Subclinical Cows
Infected Calves

6. Calf Heifer Infected cow Clinical cow
High risk of Incubating May shed Shedding
infection
Low risk of No overt signs Chronic weight
Fecal oral infection infection/shed loss
Lower production
Colostrum risk No overt signs Diarrhea
No outward signs Lower production
Median age between infection and shedding is 5 years
Most animals get culled for low production before clinical

7. Why Johne’s
 Economics
 Decreased milk production
 Culling and repro
UK study Sibley, Orpin, Pearce (ICP 2012)
Mean 305 day yield (Kg) Calving to conception
Whole herd current lactation 10,203 106
Whole herd previous lactation 10,130 102
Test positive in current lactation 9,424 136
 For 3rd lactation predicted production was 10,059 Kg and actual
was 8,562 Kg
 Cattle movement
 Infection reservoir cows
 Movement = spread
 Market access
 Competitive advantage for local genetics

8. Neilsen ICP 2009

9.  Programs in US (State run with national
standards)
 Programs in Australia
 Highlight
 Danish
 Dutch
 United Kingdom

10. Danish Program
 Initiated in 2006
 Voluntary 2/4
 Aggressive milk ELISA testing
1/4
 quarterly
 Risk management 0/4
 29% of herd participate

11. Dutch Quality Assurance
 Initiated in 2006
 Initial categorization by milk ELISA
 Negative test every other year “A” status
 Positive test annually
 Cull positives = “B”
 Retain positives = “C”
 Mandatory 2010 – Mandatory “B” 2011
 Allow culture confirmation of positives
 50% of “B” become “A” with culture
 Driven by processors (and $ support)

12. UK System
 Modular biosecurity program
 Myhealthyherd.com
 Risk management based
 BVD, IBR, Leptospirosis, TB, Bluetongue, Johne’s
and Neospora
 Johne’s module uses Danish system
 2500 herds enrolled (25%)

13. Canadian programs

14. Program Structure - all programs
 Voluntary
 4 Key Components:
 Education – All 4 programs – Most Important!
 Risk Assessment & Management Plan
 Testing – Different approaches
 Research – All 4 programs – variable funding

15. 2010
2007
2011
2010

16. Quebec
 Pre- program: (2007-08)
 Continuing education (75% of all AMVPQ)
 Client awareness (conference and publications)
 Laboratory testing capacity and expertise
 Prevention (2008-present)
 Risk assessment (Y 1)
 Environmental cultures (Y 2)
 Individual animal testing
 Only if farmer agrees to not sell/move positives
 Affidavit/ATQ

17. Ontario
 4 KEY Components:
 Education of Dairy Producers, Veterinarians and
Consumers
 Risk Assessment on EVERY dairy farm
ANNUALLY….goal
 Optional Testing of entire milking herd (funded
ONCE) over 4 years of program
 PERMANENT Removal of ALL HIGH positive
cows

18. Ontario

19. Alberta
 Similar to Atlantic
 Risk Assessment-based
 Environmental culture funding
 35% participation in Year 1
0 +ve 1 +ve 2 +ve 3 +ve 4 +ve 5 +ve 6 +ve Total
Frequency 136 15 8 4 2 7 5 177
Percentage 76 8 5 2 1 4 3 100
Ave. herd size 129 176 155 204 190 188 181
Orsel et al., ICP 2012

20. Atlantic Johne’s Disease Initiative
 Goal
 Reduce the Johne’s disease prevalence in
the Atlantic Canada dairy herds
 Program Pillars
 Education
 Infection control & prevalence reduction
 Research
MQM lab is USDA proficiency tested
for 5 Johne’s diagnostics

21. Management Structure
 Steering committee
 DFNB (R. Dykstra – Chair)
 DFPEI (J. Bysterveldt – vice Chair – lead Board)
 DFNL (Dr. Pauline Duivenvoorden)
 DFNS ( Phillip Vroegh)
 Scientific committee
 Drs. Frank Schenkels, Brian Hicks, Vicki O’Leary
John Drake

22. Funding partners

23. Program Launch
 Website (www.atlanticjohnes.ca)
 Direct Mailings
 Cowpies and brochures
 Media
 Regional Veterinarians
 47 Certified vets
Awareness Economics Biosecurity Heifers

24. Education
 Advisors – vets
 Online
 Seminars
Certification
 On farm
 Conference(s)
 Producers
 Web, Media, Mail Out
 Seminars
 One on One (vets)

25. Prevalence Reduction Program 2011-2014
Herd Categorization
Voluntary
Fully funded
Risk Assessment & Management Plan
Required if herd tested
Fully funded
Cow Testing
Voluntary - EC positive herds eligible
Partial funding

26. Herd Categorization
 Environmental Culture (EC)
 EC (-) versus EC (+)
 USDA-based protocol
 6 sites of well mixed manure
 Very prescriptive methodology
Norman Wiebe
 Third party collection of samples Coordinator
 Why Environmental Culture?
 No risk of false positives
 Herd sensitivity high
 Will not find all positive herds – no test will

27. 100
80
60
Ability of EC to detect herds at
different prevalence rates
Good when over 2%
40
Excellent once over 5%
20
0
0 5 10 15
Within Herd Test Prevalence (Fecal Culture)
Sensitivity CI_low
CI_high
EC Se 71.4% (49.2%-86.5%) Courtesy of Carrie Lavers
When prevalence ≥5%, Se ≥90%
Cow Fecal Culture Se 19-53%

28. Risk Assessment & Management
Plan (RA & MP = RAMP)
 Cornerstone of ALL Johne’s Programs
 Conducted only by AJDI certified vets
 Separate RA for EC (+) and EC(-) Herds
 Emphasis on external versus internal biosecurity
 Includes a Management Plan
 Individualized
 Best management practices
 Individual Cow Testing  EC (+)

29. Minnesota data
Fecal culture Serum ELISA
Impact of risk management over
Espejo et al., ICP 2012
time on new infections in heifers

30. Register of EC Negative Herds
 Biosecurity - goal no animal transfers
 Total Voluntary
 Two Level Program
 EC negative level 1 (Entry)
 All 6 samples negative
 Must re-test in 10-14 months
 EC Negative level 2 (Maintenance)
 All 6 samples negative
 Must re-test every other year
 Loss of EC Negative Status:
 a) Any positive samples
 b) Re-test not on schedule

31. Project status
 Outputs to Date
 Enrollment of Herds
 Sampling and Diagnostics
 RAMP Recommendations

32. Enrollment in the AJDI
 1st Year Goal: 50% of Atlantic Canada’s herds
 Target of 347 herds
 364 herds enrolled as of March 24
160.0%
140.0%
120.0%
100.0%
80.0%
141.9%
60.0%
106.9% 105.1% 105.1%
97.7%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
NB NS PE NL Total
Enrolment as a percent of initial goal

33. Project Outcomes
Value Number Percent
Total Herds Enrolled 364 herds 105% of goal (53% of herds)
Total Herds Sampled 251 herds 69% of enrolled
Total Herds Diagnosed 195 herds 78% of sampled
Total EC (+) 39 herds 20% of diagnosed
Total RAMPS Received 108 herds 55% of diagnosed

34. RAMP Recommendations
 Max 3 Recommendations per RAMP
 Rank in order of importance
 Producer and vet must agree and sign MP
Recommendation Freq. Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3
Animals are not purchased (closed herd) 62 37 12 13
>90% of calves removed <30 minutes 57 27 18 12
Colostrum and milk bottle/bucket fed 33 16 14 3
Non-saleable milk never fed to calves 21 6 6 9
No visitors or require clean clothing 21 4 9 8
Feed milk replacer/pasteurized milk 15 4 4 7
Calves born in designated calving area 14 5 6 3
No non-calving cows in calving area 13 3 7 3
Calf areas remote from cows/cow manure 9 2 4 3
Never more than a single cow in the 8 4 3 1
calving pen/area

35. Between herd biosecurity
1.3 Did you purchase animals in the last 5 years
30 Yes, from multiple herds
20 Yes, from two or less herds of unknown status
7 Yes, from two or less herds of known negative herd status
1 No animals have been purchased in the last 5 years
Comment: The introduction of infected animals from other infected herds is the way JD moves from herd to herd.
Introducing animals from multiple herds is associated with both an increased risk of introducing MAP, as well as with
having a higher percentage of the herd being test positive. If animals need to be purchased, buy from low risk herds
(herds with a testing history). Tests of individual animals prior to purchase do not provide evidence of the infection
status of that individual.

36. Calving pen and preweaning
2.7 What is the duration of exposure of the newborn calf to the cow?
10 Less that 10% of calves are removed from the dam within 30 minutes
7 Between 10 and 50% of calves are removed from the dam within 30 minutes
4 Between 50 and 90% of calves are removed from the dam within 30 minutes
1 More than 90% of calves are removed from the dam within 30 minutes
3.2 What is the source of colostrum fed to calves?
10 Calves are fed pooled colostrum or colostrum from multiple cows
5 Calves are fed colostrum from a cow other than their dam
1 ALL calves are fed colostrum only from their mother or a single low risk donor cow
Comment: Colostrum can be a source of infection for calves if there are undetected shedding animals in the herd.
For negative or low prevalence herds (environmental culture negative), the most practical risk control is to fed colostrum
from one cow to one calf. Testing of the status of donor cows or dams should be within the last year.

37. Take home
 Johne’s is a worldwide issue
 Production, reproduction, culling
 Developed dairy countries have programs
 Testing is challenging but control of spread is
understood
 Atlantic Canada has launched a very
successful initiative
 Risk-based (between and within herd)
 Minimal testing

38. Last Call
 Funding allows for
enrolment of 60% of
herds
 Currently at 53%
 If you are on the fence
now is the time to step
up!

39. Thanks
 Norman, Art, Tasha, Maria & Marcelo
 Certified Vets & Registered Producers
 Steering Committee & Scientific Committee
 Funding Agencies