Do organic, conventional, and intensive approaches in livestock farming have an impact on the circulation of infectious agents and antimicrobial resistance? A systematic review, focused on dairy cattle

Massimo Pajoro, Matteo Brilli, Giulia Pezzali, Miriam Vadalà, Laura Kramer, Paolo Moroni, Claudio Bandi
{"title":"Do organic, conventional, and intensive approaches in livestock farming have an impact on the circulation of infectious agents and antimicrobial resistance? A systematic review, focused on dairy cattle","authors":"Massimo Pajoro, Matteo Brilli, Giulia Pezzali, Miriam Vadalà, Laura Kramer, Paolo Moroni, Claudio Bandi","doi":"10.3389/fsufs.2024.1397095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A common thought is that extensive and organic breeding systems are associated with lower prevalence of infections in livestock animals, compared to intensive ones. In addition, organic systems limit the use of anti-microbial drugs, which may lead to lower emergence of antimicrobial resistances (AMR).To examine these issues, avoiding any a priori bias, we carried out a systematic literature search on dairy cattle breeding. Search was targeted to publications that compared different types of livestock farming (intensive, extensive, conventional, organic) in terms of the circulation of infectious diseases and AMR.A total of 101 papers were finally selected. These papers did not show any trend in the circulation of the infections in the four types of breeding systems. However, AMR was more prevalent on conventional dairy farms compared to organic ones. The prevalence of specific pathogens and types of resistances were frequently associated with specific risk factors that were not strictly related to the type of farming system. In conclusion, we did not find any evidence suggesting that extensive and organic dairy farming bears any advantage over the intensive and conventional ones, in terms of the circulation of infectious agents.","PeriodicalId":504481,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","volume":"120 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1397095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A common thought is that extensive and organic breeding systems are associated with lower prevalence of infections in livestock animals, compared to intensive ones. In addition, organic systems limit the use of anti-microbial drugs, which may lead to lower emergence of antimicrobial resistances (AMR).To examine these issues, avoiding any a priori bias, we carried out a systematic literature search on dairy cattle breeding. Search was targeted to publications that compared different types of livestock farming (intensive, extensive, conventional, organic) in terms of the circulation of infectious diseases and AMR.A total of 101 papers were finally selected. These papers did not show any trend in the circulation of the infections in the four types of breeding systems. However, AMR was more prevalent on conventional dairy farms compared to organic ones. The prevalence of specific pathogens and types of resistances were frequently associated with specific risk factors that were not strictly related to the type of farming system. In conclusion, we did not find any evidence suggesting that extensive and organic dairy farming bears any advantage over the intensive and conventional ones, in terms of the circulation of infectious agents.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
畜牧业中的有机、常规和集约化方法对传染病菌的流通和抗菌药耐药性有影响吗?以奶牛为重点的系统综述
人们普遍认为,与集约化养殖系统相比,粗放型和有机养殖系统的牲畜感染率较低。此外,有机养殖系统限制了抗微生物药物的使用,这可能会降低抗微生物耐药性(AMR)的出现。为了研究这些问题,避免任何先验偏见,我们对奶牛养殖进行了系统的文献检索。我们对奶牛饲养进行了系统的文献检索,目标是比较不同类型的畜牧业(集约型、粗放型、传统型、有机型)在传染病传播和 AMR 方面的差异。这些论文没有显示出四种养殖系统中传染病流行的任何趋势。不过,与有机奶牛场相比,AMR 在传统奶牛场更为普遍。特定病原体的流行和抗药性类型往往与特定风险因素有关,而这些因素与养殖系统类型并无严格关联。总之,我们没有发现任何证据表明,就传染源的流通而言,粗放型有机奶牛场比集约型常规奶牛场更具优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fish kills and insecticides: historical water quality patterns in 10 agricultural watersheds in Prince Edward Island, Canada (2002–2022) Bedding material properties and slurry C/N ratio affect the availability of nitrogen in cattle slurry applied to soil Editorial: Agrochemicals in agricultural and non-agricultural settings: fate, distribution, and potential human and environmental health hazards Analysis of the driving path of e-commerce to high-quality agricultural development in China: empirical evidence from mediating effect models Unravelling the synergistic effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and vermicompost on improving plant growth,nutrient absorption, and secondary metabolite production in ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1