Effect of a monovalent vaccine against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis on fertility in Holstein dairy cattle

Amanda H. Plunkett Department of Animal Science, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616.
Veterinary Consulting Services, 1124 Pistachio Ct, Davis, CA 95618.

Search for other papers by Amanda H. Plunkett in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS
,
Thomas W. Graham Veterinary Consulting Services, 1124 Pistachio Ct, Davis, CA 95618.

Search for other papers by Thomas W. Graham in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MPVM, PhD
,
Thomas R. Famula Department of Animal Science, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616.

Search for other papers by Thomas R. Famula in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD
, and
Anita M. Oberbauer Department of Animal Science, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616.

Search for other papers by Anita M. Oberbauer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether vaccination with a monovalent vaccine against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis would improve reproductive efficiency in Holstein cattle in a commercial dairy setting.

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—1,894 Holstein cows and heifers from a Central California dairy.

Procedures—Cattle were assigned to undergo SC administration of a monovalent vaccine against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis (n = 986) or a placebo (lactated Ringer's solution; 908). At the end of their lactation period, cows received 2 doses of the vaccine or placebo, 28 to 35 days apart, with the initial dose administered in conjunction with oxytetracycline. Heifers received the same treatments, with the second dose administered at least 2 weeks before their entrance into the heifer breeding pen. Urine and blood samples were collected from randomly selected cattle immediately before and 1 year after the trial began and submitted for fluorescent antibody and microscopic agglutination testing to identify any infecting Leptospira serovar.

Results—The initial herd prevalence of active infection with strain hardjobovis was 13% (6/46 tested cattle), followed by 15% (6/40) 1 year after the trial began. The odds of heifers conceiving over the period at risk for conception, regardless of vaccination, was approximately 2.8 times as high as for primiparous and pluriparous cows. Survival analysis of days from parturition to conception revealed that the vaccine protocol had no effect on the probability of conception between the vaccinated and control groups. The vaccine protocol had no impact on pregnancy loss.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The evaluated vaccination protocol against Leptospira strain hardjobovis was not effective in improving reproductive efficiency in commercial Holstein dairy cows or in decreasing urine shedding of leptospires.

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether vaccination with a monovalent vaccine against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis would improve reproductive efficiency in Holstein cattle in a commercial dairy setting.

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—1,894 Holstein cows and heifers from a Central California dairy.

Procedures—Cattle were assigned to undergo SC administration of a monovalent vaccine against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis (n = 986) or a placebo (lactated Ringer's solution; 908). At the end of their lactation period, cows received 2 doses of the vaccine or placebo, 28 to 35 days apart, with the initial dose administered in conjunction with oxytetracycline. Heifers received the same treatments, with the second dose administered at least 2 weeks before their entrance into the heifer breeding pen. Urine and blood samples were collected from randomly selected cattle immediately before and 1 year after the trial began and submitted for fluorescent antibody and microscopic agglutination testing to identify any infecting Leptospira serovar.

Results—The initial herd prevalence of active infection with strain hardjobovis was 13% (6/46 tested cattle), followed by 15% (6/40) 1 year after the trial began. The odds of heifers conceiving over the period at risk for conception, regardless of vaccination, was approximately 2.8 times as high as for primiparous and pluriparous cows. Survival analysis of days from parturition to conception revealed that the vaccine protocol had no effect on the probability of conception between the vaccinated and control groups. The vaccine protocol had no impact on pregnancy loss.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The evaluated vaccination protocol against Leptospira strain hardjobovis was not effective in improving reproductive efficiency in commercial Holstein dairy cows or in decreasing urine shedding of leptospires.

  • 1. Grooms DL. Reproductive losses caused by bovine viral diarrhea virus and leptospirosis. Theriogenology 2006; 66: 624628.

  • 2. Dhaliwal GS, Murray RD, Dobson H, et al. Reduced conception rates in dairy cattle associated with serological evidence of Leptospira interrogans serovar hardjo infection. Vet Rec 1996; 139: 110114.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. Kasimanickam R, Whittier WD, Collins JC, et al. A field study of the effects of a monovalent Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo strain hardjobovis vaccine administered with oxytetracycline on reproductive performance in beef cattle. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007; 231: 17091714.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Kingscote BF. Diagnosis of Leptospira serovar hardjo infection in cattle in Canada. Can Vet J 1985; 26: 270274.

  • 5. LeFebvre RB, Thiermann AB, Foley J. Genetic and antigenic differences of serologically indistinguishable leptospires of serovar hardjo. J Clin Microbiol 1987; 25: 20942097.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Alves D, McEwen B, Hazlett M, et al. Trends in bovine abortions submitted to the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 1993–1995. Can Vet J 1996; 37: 287288.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. Ellis WA, O'Brien JJ, Neill SD, et al. Bovine leptospirosis: serological findings from an aborted bovine fetus. Vet Rec 1982; 99: 458459.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Ellis WA, O'Brien JJ, Bryson DG, et al. Bovine leptospirosis: some clinical features of serovar Hardjo infection. Vet Rec 1985; 117: 101104.

  • 9. Zuerner RL, Ellis WA, Bolin CA, et al. Restriction fragment length polymorphisms distinguish Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo type hardjo-bovis isolates from different geographical locations. J Clin Microbiol 1993; 31: 578583.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Bolin CA. Diagnosis and control of bovine leptospirosis, in Proceedings. 6th Western Dairy Manage Conf 2003;155159.

  • 11. Naiman BM, Alt D, Bolin CA, et al. Protective killed Leptospira borgpetersenii vaccine induces Th1 immunity comprising responses by CD4 and gamma-delta T lymphocytes. Infect Immun 2001; 69: 75507558.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Little TWA, Hathaway SC, Broughton ES, et al. Control of Leptospira hardjo infection in beef cattle by whole-herd vaccination. Vet Rec 1992; 131: 9092.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, et al. Diseases associated with Leptospira spp. In: Veterinary medicine. 10th ed. St Louis: WB Saunders Co, 2007; 10941123.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Hairgrove TB. Leptospirosis in cattle, in Proceedings. 37th Annu Conv Am Assoc Bovine Pract 2004; 3639.

  • 15. Wikse SE, Rogers GM, Ramachandran S, et al. Herd prevalence and risk factors of Leptospira infection in beef cow/calf operations in the United States: Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo. Bovine Pract 2007; 41(1):1523.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Bolin CA. Bovine leptospirosis prevalence in US dairy herds. Bovine Veterinarian 2003;Feb:1415.

  • 17. Alt DP, Zuerner RL, Bolin CA. Evaluation of antibiotics for treatment of cattle infected with Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001; 219: 636639.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. Wikse SE. Update on Leptospira hardjo-bovis control in beef herds, in Proceedings. 39th Annu Conv Am Assoc Bovine Pract 2006; 7987.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. MacKay RD. The economics of herd health programs. Vet Clin North Am Large Anim Pract 1981; 3: 347374.

  • 20. Dohoo IR. Cost of extended open period in dairy cattle. Can Vet J 1982; 23: 229230.

  • 21. Brown JA, LeFebvre RB, Pan MJ. Protein and antigen profiles of prevalent serovars of Leptospira interrogans. Infect Immun 1991; 59: 17721777.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22. Bolin CA, Alt DP. Use of a monovalent leptospiral vaccine to prevent renal colonization and urinary shedding in cattle exposed to Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 9951000.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Guard CL, Nydam DV, Eicker SW. Field trial of vaccination against Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo bovis in a single New York dairy herd, in Proceedings. 39th Annu Conv Am Assoc Bovine Pract 2006; 160161.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. Rajeev S, Berghaus RD, Overton MW, et al. Comparison of fluorescent antibody and microscopic agglutination testing for Leptospira in pregnant and nonpregnant cows. J Vet Diagn Invest 2010; 22: 5154.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25. Arrayet JL, Oberbauer AM, Famula TR, et al. Growth of Holstein calves from birth to 90 days: the influence of dietary zinc and BLAD status. J Anim Sci 2002; 80: 545552.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26. Graham TW, Breher JE, Farver TB, et al. Biological markers of neonatal calf performance: the relationship of insulin-like growth factor-I, zinc, and copper to poor neonatal growth. J Anim Sci 2010; 88: 25852593.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27. Pursley JR, Kosorok MR, Wiltban MC. Reproductive management of lactating dairy cows using synchronization of ovulation. J Dairy Sci 1997; 80: 301306.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28. Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 1972; 34: 187220.

  • 29. Lee LA, Ferguson JD, Galligan DT. Effect of disease on days open assessed by survival analysis. J Dairy Sci 1989; 72: 10201026.

  • 30. A package for survival analysis in S. R, version 2.35–8. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: CRAN.R-project.org/web/packages/survival/survival.pdf. Accessed Jun 1, 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31. Graham TW, Thurmond MC, Gershwin ME, et al. Serum zinc and copper concentrations in relation to spontaneous abortion in cows: implications for human fetal loss. J Reprod Fertil 1994; 102: 253262.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32. Kinship: mixed-effects Cox models, sparse matrices, and modeling data from large pedigrees. R, version 1.1.0–23. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: CRAN.R-project.org/package=kinship. Accessed Jun 1, 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33. Hillers JK, Senger PL, Darlington RL, et al. Effects of production, season, age of cow, days dry, and days in milk on conception to first service in large commercial dairy herds. J Dairy Sci 1984; 67: 861867.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34. Ray DE, Halbach TJ, Armstrong DV. Season and lactation number effects on milk production and reproduction of dairy cattle in Arizona. J Dairy Sci 1992; 75: 29762983.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35. Diskin MG, Morris DG. Embryonic and early foetal losses in cattle and other ruminants. Reprod Domest Anim 2008; 43: 260267.

  • 36. Ayalon N. A review of embryonic mortality in cattle. J Reprod Fertil 1978; 54: 483493.

  • 37. Forar AL, Gay JM, Hancock DD. The frequency of endemic fetal loss in dairy cattle: a review. Theriogenology 1995; 43: 9891000.

  • 38. BonDurant RH. Selected diseases and conditions associated with bovine conceptus loss in the first trimester. Theriogenology 2007; 68: 461473.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39. Thiermann AB. Experimental leptospiral infections in pregnant cattle with organisms of the Hebdomadis serogroup. Am J Vet Res 1982; 43: 780784.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40. Smith CR, McGowan MR, McClintock CS, et al. Experimental Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo infection of pregnant cattle. Aust Vet J 1997; 75: 822826.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41. Murray RD. A field investigation of causes of abortion in dairy cattle. Vet Rec 1990; 127: 543547.

  • 42. Thurmond MC, Picanso JP. A surveillance system for bovine abortion. Prev Vet Med 1990; 8: 4152.

  • 43. Givens MD. A clinical, evidence-based approach to infectious causes of infertility in beef cattle. Theriogenology 2006; 66: 648654.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44. Bielanski AB, Surujballi O. Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar hardjo type hardjobovis in bovine embryos fertilized in vitro. Can J Vet Res 1998; 62: 234236.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement