Lee Tiffany L, Reinhardt Christopher D, Bartle Steven J, Schwandt Erin F, Calvo-Lorenzo Michelle S, Vahl Christopher, Hagenmaier Jacob A, Ritter Matthew J, Vogel Gary J, Thomson Daniel U
Department of Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
Reinhardt Nutrition Consulting, LLC, Katy, TX.
Transl Anim Sci. 2018 Jun 9;2(3):241-253. doi: 10.1093/tas/txy056. eCollection 2018 Sep.
Cattle mobility is routinely measured at commercial slaughter facilities. However, the clinical signs and underlying causes of impaired mobility of cattle presented to slaughter facilities are poorly defined. As such, the objectives of this study were 1) to determine the prevalence of impaired mobility in finished cattle using a 4-point mobility scoring system and 2) to observe clinical signs in order to provide clinical diagnoses for this subset of affected cattle. Finished beef cattle ( = 65,600) were observed by a veterinarian during the morning shift from six commercial abattoirs dispersed across the United States; the veterinarian assigned mobility scores () to all animals using a 1-4 scale from the North American Meat Institute's Mobility Scoring System, with 1 = normal mobility and 4 = extremely limited mobility. Prevalence of MS 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 97.02%, 2.69%, 0.27%, and 0.01%, respectively. Animals with an abnormal MS (MS > 1) were then assigned to one of five clinical observation categories: 1) lameness, 2) poor conformation, 3) laminitis, 4) Fatigued Cattle Syndrome (), and 5) general stiffness. Of all cattle observed, 0.23% were categorized as lame, 0.20% as having poor conformation, 0.72% as displaying signs of laminitis, 0.14% as FCS, and 1.68% as showing general stiffness. The prevalence of lameness and general stiffness was greater in steers than heifers, whereas the prevalence of laminitis was the opposite ( < 0.05). FCS prevalence was higher in dairy cattle than in beef cattle (0.31% vs. 0.22%, respectively; ≤ 0.05). These data indicate the prevalence of cattle displaying abnormal mobility at slaughter is low and causes of abnormal mobility are multifactorial.
牛的行动能力通常在商业屠宰场进行测量。然而,送至屠宰场的牛行动能力受损的临床症状和潜在原因却定义不清。因此,本研究的目的是:1)使用4分制行动能力评分系统确定育肥牛行动能力受损的患病率;2)观察临床症状,以便为这部分受影响的牛提供临床诊断。来自美国各地六个商业屠宰场的兽医在早班期间观察了育肥牛(n = 65,600);兽医使用北美肉类协会行动能力评分系统的1-4级量表为所有动物分配行动能力分数,其中1 = 行动能力正常,4 = 行动能力极度受限。行动能力评分为1、2、3和4的患病率分别为97.02%、2.69%、0.27%和0.01%。行动能力评分异常(MS > 1)的动物随后被归入五个临床观察类别之一:1)跛行,2)体型不佳,3)蹄叶炎,4)疲劳牛综合征(FCS),5)全身僵硬。在所有观察的牛中,0.23%被归类为跛行,0.20%体型不佳,0.72%表现出蹄叶炎症状,0.14%为FCS,还有1.68%表现出全身僵硬。公牛跛行和全身僵硬的患病率高于母牛,而蹄叶炎的患病率则相反(P < 0.05)。奶牛FCS的患病率高于肉牛(分别为0.31%和0.22%;P ≤ 0.05)。这些数据表明,屠宰时行动能力异常的牛的患病率较低,且行动能力异常的原因是多因素的。