Search

Research suggests that many sheep farmers continue to carry out traditional antibiotic use practices despite new 'good practice' recommendations. The aim of this study was to group farmers depending on their attitudes around antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance, and determine the behaviours that are associated with the farmers in these groups. In 2017, a flock health survey was sent to British sheep farmers. K-means cluster analysis was used to identify groups of farmers with similar attitudes towards antibiotic use and resistance. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to determine the associations between farmers' past behaviours and their antibiotic attitude group. There were 461 responses. Two groups of farmers were identified based on their antibiotic attitudes. Cluster 1 were defined as the "discordant" group who had positive views of using antibiotics prophylactically and negative views of reducing antibiotic use. Cluster 2 were defined as the "concordant" group who were positive about reducing antibiotic use and had negative views about using antibiotics prophylactically. Using antibiotics in all lambs (OR = 2.689, CI = 1.571, 4.603), using antibiotics in all ewes (OR = 3.388, CI = 1.318, 8.706), always trimming diseased feet over the past three years (OR = 2.487, CI = 1.459, 4.238), not using a computer to record information over the past three years (OR = 1.996, CI = 1.179, 3.381), not changing worming practices over the past three years (OR = 1.879, CI = 1.144, 3.087), and farmers' perceptions that their sheep flock did not make a financial loss in the past three years (OR = 2.088, CI = 1.079, 4.040) were significantly associated with belonging to the discordant group. Talking to their veterinarian about antibiotic use or the frequency of veterinary visits were not associated with antibiotic attitude group. These results suggest that farmers who had attitudes relating to antibiotic use that did not align with current recommendations carried out more traditional practices, which were strengthened by their positive perceptions of profitability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resistance to antimicrobials is one of the biggest challenges worldwide for public health. A key strategy for tackling this is ensuring judicious use of antimicrobials in human and veterinary medicine. Whilst there are many studies in human medicine investigating prescribing behaviour of doctors, there is limited work to understand what factors influence veterinarian prescribing behaviour. Veterinarians often prescribe antimicrobials to sheep and beef farmers in contexts other than at a clinical consultation, and decision-making behind this has not been explored. The aim of this study was to measure, for the first time, the influence of factors from social theories on veterinarians’ decision to prescribe antimicrobials to sheep and beef farmers without a clinical consultation, using a factorial survey approach. Respondents were presented with eight vignette scenarios, where a farmer asks for antimicrobials at the veterinary practice. Seven factors, identified from constructs of social theories, were included in the vignettes. Random intercept and random slope models were built to estimate the effects of the vignette factors and vet characteristics on the respondents’ willingness to prescribe ratings. A total of 306 surveys were completed. The vignette factors: case type, farmer relationship, other veterinarians in practice, time pressure, habit, willingness to pay, and confidence in the farmer, were significant in the decision to prescribe. Confidence in the farmer was the most influential vignette variable, and was included as a random slope effect. Respondent variables with significant influence on the decision to prescribe were agreeableness personality score, region of veterinary practice, and presence of a small animal department. These influential factors could be considered to target interventions in beef and sheep farm animal veterinary practice for improved antimicrobial stewardship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Responsibility for biosecurity in UK farming is being devolved from government to industry, with a greater emphasis on the veterinarian (vet)‐farmer relationship. Although social science has shown that care for animals is part of ‘good farming’, the British dairy sector sees a need to improve biosecurity. This research uses the good farmer concept to compare how vets and dairy farmers define good farming for biosecurity based on qualitative interviews with 28 vets and 15 dairy farmers in England. The results revealed two conflicting ‘good farmer’ identities: the large, commercial farmer who has the economic capital to invest in biosecurity and veterinary services; and the self‐sufficient stock keeper whose cultural and social capital lead them to manage herd health independently. These identities reflect changing ‘rules of the game’, following Bourdieu's use of the term, and increasing penetration of vets’ cultural capital into the sector. They involve different constructions of risk which need to be recognised within debates about good biosecurity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disease prevention and control practices are frequently highlighted as important to ensure the health and welfare of farmed animals, although little is known as to why not many practices are carried out. The aim of this study was to identify the motivators and barriers of dairy cattle farmers towards the use of biosecurity measures on dairy farms using a health psychology approach. Twenty-five farmers on 24 farms in Great Britain (GB) were interviewed using the Theory of Planned Behaviour framework. Results indicated that farmers perceived they had the ability to control what happened on their farms in terms of preventing and controlling disease, and described benefits from being proactive and vigilant. However, barriers were cited in relation to testing inaccuracies, effectiveness and time-efficiency of practices, and disease transmission route (e.g., airborne transmission). Farmers reported they were positively influenced by veterinarians and negatively influenced by the government (Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA)) and the general public. Decisions to implement practices were influenced by the perceived severity of the disease in question, if disease was diagnosed on the farm already, or was occurring on other farms. Farmers described undertaking a form of personal risk assessment when deciding if practices were worth doing, which did not always involve building in disease specific factors or opinions from veterinarians or other advisors. These results indicate that further guidance about the intricacies of control and prevention principles in relation to specific animal diseases may be required, with an obvious role for veterinarians. There appears to be an opportunity for farm advisors and herd health professionals to further understand farmer beliefs behind certain attitudes and target communication and advice accordingly to further enhance dairy cattle health and welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) causes substantial economic losses to the cattle industry; however, control and eradication can be achieved by identifying and removing persistently infected cattle from the herd. Each UK nation has separate control programmes. The English scheme, BVDFree, started in 2016 and is voluntary. Methods: We analysed the test results submitted to BVDFree from 5847 herds between 2016 and 2020. Results: In 2020, 13.5% of beef breeders and 20.0% of dairy herds that submitted tests had at least one positive (virus/antibody) test result. Although lower than in previous years, there was no clear trend in the proportion of positive tests over time. In virus testing herds, 0.4% of individual tests were positive in 2020, and 1.5% of individual tests were positive in BVDV‐positive virus testing herds. Dairy herds and larger herds were more likely to join BVDFree, and dairy herds were also more likely to virus test than beef breeder herds. Larger herds, herds that used virus testing and herds that had BVDV‐positive test results were more likely to continue submitting tests to BVDFree. Conclusions: The findings provide a benchmark for the status of BVDV control in England; continued analysis of test results will be important to assess progress towards eradication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A 2009 UK Government report on veterinary expertise in food animal production highlighted that there was insufficient herd health expertise among veterinarians and lack of appropriate business models to deliver veterinary services to the livestock sector. Approximately two thirds of sheep farmers only contact their veterinarian for emergencies and one fifth have all year round contact. The aim of the current study was to understand sheep farmers’ perception, the current and future role of veterinarians in flock health management using qualitative methodology. The eligibility criteria were male farmers with a flock size of at least 200 adult sheep. Seven focus groups of farmers (n =45) stratified by three regions and two age groups (≤50 and >50) were conducted. Thematic analysis of the discussions indicated that most farmers considered and used their veterinarian as a fire-fighter, whilst other advice was gathered free of charge when the veterinarian was on the farm for other reasons (typically seeing cattle) or by telephone. A small group of farmers were using their veterinarian or a sheep consultant proactively with regular contact and found this financially beneficial. Farmers indicated that the key barriers to using a veterinarian proactively were inconsistent service, high turnover of veterinarians, lack of expertise of sheep farming among veterinarians and concern about independence of advice. Although economics was also mentioned as a key barrier to using veterinarians more proactively, most farmers did not know where they gained and lost income from their flock; there was heavy reliance on the single farm payment scheme (SPS) and very few farmers kept records from which they could investigate where there were inefficiencies in production. Overall sheep farmers considered sheep farming complex and that each farm was unique and that they themselves were the experts to manage their flock. We conclude that there is an impasse: veterinarians might need to provide consistency and wide expertise beyond knowledge of disease and a model of how flock planning would be financially beneficial but until sheep farmers keep production records flock health planning cannot be rigorous and the financial benefits cannot be evaluated. Given the reliance on SPS by farmers an alternative model would be to require farmers to keep production records to comply with SPS. This might lead to flock health planning being adopted at a faster rate and so develop the UK sheep industry and make it more environmentally sustainable by reducing waste from disease and low productivity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Currently, the dairy industry is facing many challenges that could affect its sustainability, including climate change and public perception of the industry. As a result, interest is increasing in the concept of identifying resilient animals, those with a long productive lifespan, as well as good reproductive performance and milk yield. There is much evidence that events in utero, that is, the developmental origins of health and disease hypothesis, alter the life-course health of offspring and we hypothesized that these could alter resilience in calves, where resilience is identified using lifetime data. The aim of this study was to quantify lifetime resilience scores (LRS) using an existing scoring system, based on longevity with secondary corrections for age at first calving and calving interval, and to quantify the effects of in utero events on the LRS using 2 datasets. The first was a large dataset of cattle on 83 farms in Great Britain born from 2006 to 2015 and the second was a smaller, more granular dataset of cattle born between 2003 and 2015 in the Langhill research herd at Scotland's Rural College. Events during dam's pregnancy included health events (lameness, mastitis, use of an antibiotic or anti-inflammatory medication), the effect of heat stress as measured by temperature-humidity index, and perturbations in milk yield and quality (somatic cell count, percentage fat, percentage protein and fat:protein ratio). Daughters born to dams that experienced higher temperature-humidity indexes while they were in utero during the first and third trimesters of pregnancy had lower LRS. Daughter LRS were also lower where milk yields or median fat percentages in the first trimester were low, and when milk yields were high in the third trimester. Dam LRS was positively associated with LRS of their offspring; however, as parity of the dam increased, LRS of their calves decreased. Similarly, in the Langhill herd, dams of a higher parity produced calves with lower LRS. Additionally, dams that recorded a high maximum locomotion score in the third trimester of pregnancy were negatively associated with lower calf LRS in the Langhill herd. Our results suggest that events that occur during pregnancy have lifelong consequences for the calf's lifetime performance. However, experience of higher temperature-humidity indexes, higher dam LRS, and mothers in higher parities explained a relatively small proportion of variation in offspring LRS, which suggests that other factors play a substantial role in determining calf LRS. Although "big data" can contain a considerable amount of noise, similar findings between the 2 datasets indicate it is likely these findings are real. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence suggests that UK sheep farmers experience lower productivity and profit margins than other livestock sectors and that they do not necessarily know where they gain or lose income from their flocks. More efficient use of precision technology has been identified as a potential way of addressing this problem. The mandatory requirement for Electronic Identification (EID) tags to be placed on all sheep offers an opportunity for sheep farmers to adopt precision technologies to manage herd health and maximise production and profit. Although the charactistics of farmers that are associated with adoption or non adoption of technology have been identified little is known about the social processes, meanings and experiences that influence uptake. This paper is novel as it draws on data from 36 sheep farmers in the UK and applies Normalization Process Theory (NPT) to gain an understanding of the reasons they do or do not use EID related precision technology on their farms. The interviews were tape recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using NVivo. Although respondents acknowledged the potential value of precision technology to improve their farm businesses they appeared to have alternative beliefs that were counter productive. Their beliefs that using precision technology posed a threat to their role as a good stockman, that it could not replace the need for hands-on interaction with their animals and that it was costly and difficult to use created an implementation gap. The use of NPT as an evaluation framework provided a valuable tool for increasing the understanding of contextual characteristics that undermine the routine embedding of such technology by sheep farmers. The data suggests that normalisation of the use of precision technology amongst sheep farmers could potentially be increased if manufacturers/suppliers co-design and work with farmer's to ensure that the technology enables the farmer to be in control and operates as an aid to achieving high quality stockmanship rather than a mechanism for profit maximisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sheep scab is endemic in Great Britain with an estimated national herd-level prevalence of 10.9% from a surveyed population of sheep farms. Previous studies have investigated how sheep farmers manage sheep scab on their farms in Great Britain, but there have not been any qualitative studies investigating sheep farmers perceptions on the roles different stakeholders have in the management of sheep scab. This qualitative study aims to explore how sheep farmers perceive their role and the different stakeholders' roles in the management of sheep scab, and how they would like sheep scab to be managed going forward. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 sheep farmers from England, Scotland, and Wales. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, through the theoretical lens of Foucault's notion of 'biopower'. Two themes were generated: 'The feeling of powerlessness leads to a need of rules and regulations', with sub-themes: 'The need for governmental rules and regulations' and 'The need for rules and regulation at livestock markets', and 'An apparent lack of sheep scab surveillance', with sub-themes: 'The farmers perceive that the veterinarians have control over surveillance' and 'The farmers have control over surveillance on their farms'. In the first theme, the respondents suggested that more rules and regulations to control the management of sheep scab was required. This included reinstating of sheep scab as a notifiable disease in England and Wales, as well as more regulations at livestock markets to prevent the trading of infested sheep; both of which would subject the farmers to regulatory power mechanisms. The second theme centred around who has the control of surveillance on the farms. Most of the respondents perceived that the veterinarians had knowledge and expertise of the local area on sheep scab, which they were able to relay to the farmers. Thus, veterinarians exerted disciplinary power by creating 'docile' bodies. However, it also appeared that veterinarians were not regularly called onto farms. Although disciplinary power flows through the interactions between the farmer and veterinarian, the techniques currently used are not always having their desired effect. The study demonstrated that how sheep farmers want sheep scab to be managed is, at times, conflicting and contradictory, which highlights the complexity of sheep scab as a disease to manage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicting views between the dairy industry and the public about how dairy cows should be managed, together with an increase in the availability of alternatives to dairy foods, challenge future markets for milk producers. Members of the public value animal welfare as well as naturalness and grazing, but neither the relative importance of specific aspects of management nor the diversity of views underlying these preferences have been established. To better understand these issues, 2,054 UK citizens recruited through a research panel took part in an online survey. They were asked to rank 17 attributes relating to dairy cow management and milk production through the novel application of best–worst scaling, a discrete choice methodology that allows a trade-off between items. Hierarchical Bayesian analysis of the results revealed 3 attributes of equal top importance: (1) access to grazing, (2) cow health and welfare, and (3) cow comfort. Alongside this overarching ranking, underlying differences in preferences were identified in 6 approximately equally sized citizen groups within the sample, which were identified through latent class analysis. Each latent class expressed significantly different priorities from the other, and each had different indicative sociodemographic, attitudinal, experiential, and value-oriented characteristics, as established through a multinomial logistic model. If the diversity of preference between the citizen groups found in the sample is reflected within wider populations, there may be opportunities for the dairy industry to improve communication about positive practices, develop new dairy product markets, and consider changes to dairy farming systems to better meet different citizens' needs. Furthermore, the defining characteristics and priorities of each group raise the question of whether grazing in particular, but also other attributes presented within the study, is understood in different ways by different subgroups of citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ovine psoroptic mange (commonly known as sheep scab) is, arguably, one of the most important ectoparasitic diseases of sheep in the UK. Although research has been conducted on the practices and knowledge of British sheep farmers regarding the management of sheep scab, recent data is limited. During October 2021 an online survey was completed by 725 British sheep farmers. Most respondents farmed in England (63.0%, 457/725), followed by Wales (20.6%, 149/725) and Scotland (16.4%, 119/725). Over half (53.0%, 384/725) of the respondents had experienced sheep scab in their flocks before, and 38.3% (147/384) of respondents experienced sheep scab twice or more in the previous ten years. The estimated prevalence of sheep scab from these surveyed farmers was 10.9% (79/725). Of the farmers who had experienced sheep scab before, only 36.2% (139/384) reported using skin scrapes and 12.5% (48/384) reported using blood tests for diagnosis. Over three-quarters of farmers quarantined all new sheep (76.6%; 498/650), but fewer quarantined returning sheep (28.6%; 83/290). Many of the respondents (43.7%, 252/577) did not quarantine new sheep for the suggested minimum 21 days. In addition, only 53.0% (384/725) of respondents answered all three of the knowledge questions regarding sheep scab correctly. The analysis illustrates that there is scope to improve the use of diagnostics, which suggests that misdiagnosis of sheep scab may be high and thus inappropriate treatments may be used, or treatments may not be used at all. It also demonstrated that there is scope for improvement in farmers' knowledge regarding sheep scab, particularly that sheep scab could be detected via a blood test and that the disease could present without visible signs. Our results further support that sheep scab is a large-scale endemic issue, potentially with an increasing prevalence in Great Britain. Future control interventions need to focus on improving knowledge exchange, raising awareness of best practice controls to ensure that better management strategies are employed by farmers, including improved control at livestock markets to reduce the national transmission and thus focus on coordinated control interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biosecurity, defined as a series of measures aiming to stop disease-causing agents entering or leaving an area where farm animals are present, is very important for the continuing economic viability of the United Kingdom dairy sector, and for animal welfare. This study gathered expert opinion from farmers, veterinarians, consultants, academics, and government and industry representatives on the practicality and effectiveness of different biosecurity measures on dairy farms. The study used best-worst scaling, a technique that allows for greater discrimination between choices and avoids the variability in interpretation associated with other methods, such as Likert scales and ranking methods. Keeping a closed herd was rated as the most effective measure overall, and maintaining regular contact with the veterinarian was the most practical measure. Measures relating to knowledge, planning, and veterinary involvement; buying-in practices; and quarantine and treatment scored highly for effectiveness overall. Measures relating to visitors, equipment, pest control, and hygiene scored much lower for effectiveness. Overall, measures relating to direct animal-to-animal contact scored much higher for effectiveness than measures relating to indirect disease transmission. Some of the most effective measures were also rated as the least practical, such as keeping a closed herd and avoiding nose-to-nose contact between contiguous animals, suggesting that real barriers exist for farmers when implementing biosecurity measures on dairy farms. We observed heterogeneity in expert opinion on biosecurity measures; for example, veterinarians rated the effectiveness of consulting the veterinarian on biosecurity significantly more highly than dairy farmers, suggesting a greater need for veterinarians to promote their services on-farm. Still, both groups rated it as a practical measure, suggesting that the farmer-veterinarian relationship holds some advantages for the promotion of biosecurity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent independent UK government reports and studies have highlighted the importance, but lack, of flock health services provided by veterinarians. Qualitative interviews were analysed by thematic analysis to construct belief statements to understand veterinarians’ opinions on preventative advice and drivers for current services to sheep farmers. A postal questionnaire was sent to 515 sheep practices registered with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeon (RCVS) in England and Wales in 2012 to gather quantitative data on these belief statements and to gather demographic information and current services provided by the veterinarian. Exploratory factor analysis with heuristic approaches was conducted on the respondents' belief statements to identify common factors of veterinarian beliefs. Three main factors were identified: motivation for proactiveness, perceived capability to offer preventative services and perceived opportunity to deliver these services. A beta regression model was built to identify the factors significantly associated with the time veterinarians spent in an advisory role. The relative proportion of time increased by 10% (1.01–1.19), 16% (1.03–1.30) and 29% (CI: 1.09–1.53) for each unit increase in score for factor 1 motivation, factor 2 capability and factor 3 opportunity respectively, indicating that these latent factors explained time veterinarians spent in an advisory role with sheep clients. There was a significant correlation between these factors suggesting influence of the associated beliefs between factors. This study provides insight into the nature and drivers of veterinarians' current behaviour and beliefs. These results could be further tested in behaviour intervention studies and help in designing efficient strategies aiming at promoting proactive health services offered by veterinarians on sheep farms in England and Wales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a lack of robust data on antibiotic use on sheep and beef farms in the UK, particularly for farms with mixed species. On mixed farms, quantification of antibiotic use is reliant on accurate farmers' records as veterinary prescription data does not provide information at the species level. Previous studies that have investigated multiple antibiotic use collection methods were conducted on single species farms and failed to collect data on the reasons why differences in methods may exist. This study aimed to evaluate sheep and beef farmers' antibiotic recording practices by comparing quantities of antibiotics measured from medicine records and empty antibiotic packaging collection bins, and identify barriers and facilitators of the antibiotic use collection methods. Thirty-five farms were followed for a year period. Farmers were asked to record their antibiotic treatments and deposit empty antibiotic packaging used in sheep or beef cattle into a bin. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted to understand the experiences of farmers taking part in the study and explore the possible differences in methods. Bins and medicine records were collected and the mass of active ingredient (mg) was calculated. The level of agreement between the two antibiotic use collection methods was measured using rank parameters of Kendall's T a. The bins were 67 % (CI = 29–87 %) more likely to measure more antibiotic use than the medicine records. The scale of variability of the measurements between two random farms was 33 % (CI = 6–56 %) larger for the antibiotic waste bins than the scale of variability between the medicine records. Sheep farmers often missed neonatal lamb treatments off their medicine records, with a median of 32.5 missing treatments per farm (IQR = 18–130). Of the mixed species farms, 28 % of treatment entries were missing the species the antibiotic was used in. Farmers reported that the bin was easy to use but they also reported that there was a tendency to under-report actual use where there were multiple workers on the farm or where treatments were administered by the veterinarian. The qualitative analysis identified contextual barriers to accurate medicine recording, such as difficulties with animal identification, with recording in the field, and with recording during lambing time. This study demonstrated that there were significant differences in antibiotic use measured by the bins and the medicine records. The mixed-methods approach provided an understanding of the contextual barriers that impacted farmers' medicine recording and use of the bin. This information on the contextual barriers can be used to inform the design of data collection methods to improve antibiotic consumption data in the sheep and beef sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The routine use of antibiotics for prevention of disease in neonatal lambs has been highlighted as inappropriate, yet research suggests that many farmers in the UK still carry out this practice. The aim of the study was to understand farmers' naturalistic decision-making around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs. Data from 431 posts by 133 different users of an online discussion forum were analysed quantitatively using natural language processing and qualitatively using a grounded theory approach. Results from the qualitative analysis identified five categories that influenced farmers risk perceptions around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs: anticipated regret, negative emotions and experiential avoidance; economic considerations; farmer identity; perception of capability; and perception of social judgement. Natural language processing analysis of the posts by the study group were compared to posts on topics unrelated to antibiotic use by control groups from the same forum to understand the underlying style and tone within the text. Analytical thinking and authenticity scores were significantly lower in the study group compared to the control groups (P < 0.01). Words relating to cognitive processes were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control groups (P < 0.01). Results of the qualitative and quantitative analysis were integrated to assess the fit of the data and enhance findings from either method alone. The key findings were the identification of reasons why farmers used antibiotics prophylactically in neonatal lambs. Farmers disassociated the use of oral antibiotics in neonatal lambs from other types of antibiotics within sheep farming. Farmers used the concept of luck and uniqueness to justify their prophylactic antibiotic use. This may explain farmers' low analytical thinking scores as this reflects a more personal style of thinking as farmers express their thoughts on antibiotic use on an individual basis. Farmers' felt that they did not have the capabilities to control neonatal disease without antibiotics during busy periods and this was exacerbated by external economic constraints. For farmers' who used antibiotics for therapeutic use, fear of social judgement was an important factor in their perceptions of risk around antibiotic use. The high frequency of negations and conjunctions suggested feelings of moral duty. As such, antibiotic use has developed into a symbol of their good farming identity which conflicted with the identity held by those who used antibiotics prophylactically. These results can be used to inform knowledge exchange around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs to improve antibiotic stewardship in the sheep farming sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The profitability of UK sheep farms is variable with many farms making a net loss. For economic sustainability, farms have to be profitable, therefore it is important to maximise income whilst controlling costs. The most important source of income in sheep flocks is from lamb production but there is little information on factors that explain variability between farms in revenue from lamb sales. The aim of this research was to identify farm, farmer and management factors likely to have the largest, most reliable associations with lamb-derived revenue. From a population of 830 sheep farms, 408 farmers completed an online questionnaire comprising over 300 variables. Total lamb-derived revenue was calculated for each farm using abattoir information including carcass classification. The median flock size was 560 ewes, median land size 265 acres, median revenue per acre from lambs sold was £197 (IQR = 120–296) and median revenue per ewe £95 (IQR = 72–123). A robust analytic approach using regularised (elastic net) regression with bootstrapping was implemented to account for multicollinearity in the data and to reduce the likelihood of model over-fitting. To provide model inference and allow ranking of variables in terms of relevance, covariate stability and coefficient distributions were evaluated. Factors with high stability and relatively large positive associations with revenue per acre were (median effect size (£); 95 % bootstrap probability interval); an increased stocking rate of 0.2 ewe/acre (13; 6–17), fertilizer being used on most of the grazing land (18; 0.1–37), the use of rotational grazing (13; 0.3–34), decreased proportion of ewes with prolapses (4; 0.3–9), separation of lame sheep from the rest of the flock (16; 0.9–37), selecting ewes for culling based on prolapses (20; 0.2–55) and infertility (20; 2–46), conducting body condition scoring of ewes at lambing (28; 3–58), early lactation (21; 1–54) or weaning (25; 2–70), increased farmer education (20; 2–54) and farmers with a positive business attitude (15; 0.2–38). Additional factors with a high stability and relatively large associations with increased revenue per ewe were; never trimming diseased feet of lame ewes (9; 0.8–22) and making use of farm records (5; 0.3–12). This is the first study in animal health epidemiology to use bootstrapped regularised regression to evaluate a wide dataset to provide a ranking of the importance of explanatory covariates. We conclude that the relatively small set of variables identified, with a potentially large influence on lamb-derived revenue, should be considered prime candidates for future intervention studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sheep lameness is a major concern among farmers and policymakers with significant impacts on animal welfare standards as well as financial and production performance. The present study attempts to identify the relative importance of environmental and farm-level management characteristics on sheep lameness., Method: To address this objective, data were derived from the SPiLaMM project from 18 farms that used smartphone app to collect data, the British Geological Survey and the Meteorological Office over 2016-2018. Data were analysed using a multilevel Poisson regression model., Results: Temperature and higher length of pasture had a positive relationship with lameness while concentration of Selenium in soil and flock size had a negative relationship with lameness. In addition, results showed lower lameness levels for the bedrock class mudstone, siltstone, limestone and sandstone in comparison to sandstone and finally, lambs and ewes younger than 1year old had lower levels of lameness than older ewes., Conclusion: Findings of the present approach show the potential use of data collected via a smartphone app to study the epidemiology of disease. Furthermore, factors identified could be validated in intervention studies and generate data-driven disease predictive models., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)