ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF A BVDV CONTROL PROGRAN IN A BEEF HERD IN ARGENTINA*

GONZALEZ ALTAMIRANDA E; GOIZUETA M; SPETTER M; LOUGE URIATE E; VERNA A; LEUNDA MR; PEREYRA S; CASTELLANO A; SPÄTH E; ODEON ANSELMO

Congreso; INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM OF THE WORLD ASSOCIATION OF VETERINARY LABORATORY DIAGNOSTICIANS; 2017

ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF A BVDV CONTROL PROGRAN IN A BEEF HERD IN ARGENTINA*Erika A. González Altamiranda1,2, Mercedes E. Goizueta1, Maximiliano Spetter1,3, Enrique L. Louge Uriarte1, Andrea E. Verna1,2, María R. Leunda1, Susana B. Pereyra1, Andrés Castellano1, Ernesto J. Spath1, Anselmo C. Odeón1.1: Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), 2: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (CONICET), 3: Fondo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (FONCyT). ARGENTINA.INTRODUCTIONBovine Viral Diarrhea virus (BVDV) causes worldwide losses to cattle production. A relevant situation is the existence of persistently infected (PI) animals which are the main source of virus dissemination [1]. Consequently, detection and culling of PI cattle is essential for BVDV control. As in other infectious diseases, the losses due to BVDV are not easily quantifiable. Additionally, to carry out a control program it is essential to demonstrate that its adoption leads to real economic benefits. The goal of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of a strategy implemented to control BVDV in a beef herd in Argentina.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study was conducted in a beef cattle ranch (652 ha) located in Buenos Aires province, Argentina, and a total of 528 cows were included in this research. The veterinary services diagnosed mucosal disease (MD) in 2015 during episodes of mortality involving 29 yearling calves (18 females and 11 males). Moreover, 15 abortions and 30 deaths in neonatal calves were also recorded. Due to the presence of BVDV, it was decided to carry out a herd control program based on the detection and removal of PI cattle. The presence of viral RNA was analyzed in pools (5 samples each) and individual serum samples using a modified nested RT-PCR protocol [2]. Subsequently, an economic analysis was performed to estimate the losses associated to BVDV, and also to evaluate the efficacy of the control strategy during a 5-year period.RESULTS Y DISCUSSIONThe results were addressed considering three main aspects: 1) diagnosis of BVDV, 2) quantification of the economic losses due to the virus, and 3) valorization of the BVDV control program.The proportion of PI cattle was 0.56% (3/528), but considering that 29 deaths attributed to MD were also PI animals, this proportion would have reached 5.75%. In addition, BVDV could also be partially responsible for the abortions and neonatal deaths, since the herd was free of brucellosis and other reproductive or venereal diseases.The economic losses due to BVDV, with values updated to 2015, were estimated to be $ 360.747. Vaccination expenditures ($ 10.302) and revenues not perceived because of reproductive disorders and neonatal deaths, which totaled 45 cases, were also considered. Assuming that most of these losses were associated to BVDV, only 50% of these cases ($ 146.740; details in Table 1) and the mortality of 29 yearling calves (200 kg, average live weight; $ 152.200) were also charged. In addition, expenditures incurred by the diagnostic services, both at the recognition stage of the health problem ($ 3.080) and while conducting the control program ($ 42.125) were included. Moreover, the replacement cost of the PI cattle was also accounted ($ 6.300).An approximated value for the BVDV control strategy was estimated, and accordingly the income/expenses for a 5-year period were also calculated (Table 2). The year of 2015 (year 0) was considered as time of valuation,since the detection of PI animals and the proposal of control took place in that period. The cash flows in 2015 were only outcomes and, for the purpose of this analysis, 5 subsequent years were considered as constant flows, in which the expenditures were assigned to vaccination and surveillance. Incomes were those considered as disbursements (reproductive disorders and deaths) in the year 0, since once completed the health proposal these losses will not be incurred and additional meat production (kg) will be obtained.The example of this study allowed to validate the proposed BVDV control program and its potential use in a wide scale in Argentina. This assessment was positive, implying that not only the expenditures of the previous year were recoverd but also that there was an additional positive value for the operation unit.* ?Price Award Biogénesis-Bagó 2015?, National Academy of Agronomy and Veterinary, Argentina.** $ 1 (Argentinean Peso) is equivalent to USD ($) 9.81 or 11.5 EUR (?), 15.12.2015.REFERENCES[1] Nettleton PF and Entrican G. Ruminant pestiviruses. Br Vet J., 151(6):615-42. 1995.[2] Hyndman L, Vilcek S, Conner J, Nettleton PF. A novel nested reverse transcription PCR detects bovine viral diarrhoea virus in fluids from aborted bovine fetuses. J Virol Methods 71: 69-76. 1998.Table 1: Estimation of revenues not perceived by abortion and neonatal losses in 2015Rising costs for replacement of aborted cowsKg. per cow 400$ per Kg of values 2015 (settlement price) **$ 14Wholesale cows $ 5.600Buy of replacement cows $ 7.500Difference for cow replacement $ 1.900Aborted cows 50% of 45 23Total: replacement of aborted cow loss $ 43.700Income not earned by lower production of calvesKg. per calf weaning 160$ per Kg to 2015 values $ 28Income not perceived by calf weaning $ 4.480Aborted cows 50% of 45 23Total: revenue not collected by calf weaning $ 103.040Table 2: Valorization of the BVDV control program in a beef herdYear 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Vaccination $ - 10.302 $ - 10.302 $ - 10.302 $ - 10.302 $ - 10.302 $ - 10.302MD deaths / Surveillance $ - 51.505 $ - 500 $ - 500 $ - 500 $ - 500 $ - 500Abortion & neonatal losses $ - 298.940 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0Total outcome $ - 360.747 $ -10.802 $ -10.802 $ -10.802 $ -10.802 $ -10.802Income $ 0 $ 298.940 $ 298.940 $ 149.470 $ 149.470 $ 149.470Total income $ 0 $ 298.940 $ 298.940 $ 149.470 $ 149.470 $ 149.470Income less expenses $ - 360.747 $ 288.138 $ 288.138 $ 138.668 $ 138.668 $ 138.668Value of the implementedstrategy to 15% $ 207.467 Corresponds to the investment rate, which reflects an estimation of the opportunity cost in the analyzed beef ranch. This rate is a value assigned to estimate future income in the subsequent 5 years.