Juan Caínzos

Anogenital distance (AGD) is a marker of the degree of prenatal exposure to androgens in multiple species, and it has been suggested that there is an inverse association between AGD and fertility. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of AGD and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentrations, an indirect marker of the follicular population, as predictors of future reproductive potential in Holstein cattle. The AGD was measured in 566 females from 9 dairy farms in Galicia (Spain). A group of 172 females underwent a second measurement 9 months after. Additionally, data on the age at first insemination (1stAI age), number of AI (AI-PREG), age at first pregnancy (1stPREG age), age at first calving (1stCAL age), and calving–pregnancy (CAL-PREG) and calving–calving (CAL-CAL) intervals were collected. Blood samples were collected from 80 heifers to determine AMH concentrations. Our results showed that AGD varied minimally with age, and that cows with short AGD had earlier 1stAI age, 1stPREG age, and 1stCAL age (p < 0.05) than cows with long AGD. No significant differences were observed for the CAL-PREG and CAL-CAL intervals. Additionally, no significant association was found between AMH concentration and AGD or reproductive parameters. Consequently, the results suggest the possibility of using AGD as a marker of future reproductive performance in Holstein heifers. However, there was insufficient evidence to associate AMH concentrations and reproductive performance, underlining the need for further studies with larger sample sizes.

A systematic review was conducted to assess the cost of ketosis in dairy cattle, and to elucidate how ketosis cost is estimated in each of the studies. Scientific papers addressing the economic impact of ketosis in dairy cows were identified through a search in 4 databases (Medline, ISI Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and Agricola). The literature search was conducted with no restrictions on the date of study publication, publication type, or language. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed regarding study design, data collection, and analysis and interpretation of the study results. Of 531 identified records, 10 were selected, of which 9 were published from 2015 onward. Of the 10 studies reviewed, 9 report cost of a case of ketosis, and the estimates vary widely, with values ranging from €19 to €812. Two studies report ketosis cost at a farm level (€3.6-€29/cow per year). Among the studies, we observed great variation not only in the estimation models and inputs used (costs and losses associated with the disease) but also in the definition of ketosis and its prevalence or incidence figures. Moreover, the cost of ketosis was estimated for dairy farms in the United States, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Norway, and India. Consequently, there was great heterogeneity regarding herd characteristics, milk production, milk prices, culled cows' value, feed prices, and costs of veterinary services. Ketosis cost estimates vary as a consequence of all these aspects. Therefore, although most of the studies were well-designed and used high-quality data, the systematic approach review does not allow combination of the cost estimates of into a single figure. In conclusion, our review highlights an overall considerable economic impact of ketosis in dairy cattle. Economic prevention and mitigation strategies should be taken according to herd- and country-specific conditions. Ketosis cost figures reported in economic studies should always be considered carefully and interpreted with appropriate consideration of the inputs of the estimation, country context, and herd parameters.