English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

To evaluate, in a pasture-based dairy herd, the response to a three-time point hoof trimming regime on lameness incidence and time from calving to observation of an elevated locomotion score (LS). This study was conducted on a 940-cow spring-calving herd in New Zealand’s North Island between May 2018 and May 2019. Cows (n = 250) were randomly allocated to the hoof trimming group, with the remainder assigned to the non-trim cohort. One trained professional hoof trimmer used the five-step Dutch method to trim the hind feet of the trimming group. Throughout the subsequent production season, the whole herd was locomotion-scored fortnightly using the 4-point (0–3) Dairy NZ lameness score. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used to assess the univariable effect of trimming on the interval between calving and first LS of ≥ 2 and first LS ≥ 1. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to further evaluate the effect of trimming on time to elevated LS. Mean lameness (LS ≥ 2) prevalence was 2.6%, with 30% of cows having ≥ 4 observations during the study period when at least one LS was ≥ 2. For LS ≥ 1, mean prevalence was 40%, with 98.6% of cows having ≥ 4 observations during the study period when at least one LS was ≥ 1 during lactation. Hoof trimming had no apparent effect on the incidence of clinical lameness (LS ≥ 2) (trimmed  vs.  non-trimmed: 33.2%  vs.  28.8%, respectively), but for LS ≥ 1, there was a small decrease in the incidence of LS ≥ 1 (trimmed  vs.  non-trimmed: 96.9%  vs . 99.3%, respectively). The hazard of a cow having a first observed LS ≥ 2 in the control group was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.66–1.14) times that of the trimmed group; however, the hazard of a cow having a first LS ≥ 1 was 1.60 (95% CI = 1.37–1.88) times higher in the control than in the trimmed group. On this farm, prophylactic hoof trimming had no clinically relevant impact on the incidence of clinical lameness and was not associated with clinically beneficial reductions in time to first observed LS ≥ 2. This may be because claw horn imbalance was not pronounced on this farm, with 53% of cows needing no trim on either hind limb on the first trimming occasion. Further research on the response to prophylactic trimming in pasture-based dairy cattle is required.

new zealand veterinary journal

Investigating the effect of prophylactic claw trimming on the interval between calving and first observed elevated locomotion score in pasture-based dairy cows