USAHA News
United States Animal Health Association
Contact:  Larry Mark - (703) 451-3954 - ldmark@erols.com


For immediate release:

BETTER TESTING REAGENT NEEDED FOR RAM EPIDIDYMITIS

	HERSHEY, Pa., Nov. 8, 2005 - Better testing for ram epididymitis, a disease that causes 
infertility, was a main topic of discussion at the meeting of the U.S. Animal Health Association 
(USAHA) Committee on Sheep and Goats here this week.

	Committee members called on USDA’s National Veterinary Services Laboratories 
(NVSL) in Ames, Iowa, to develop better reagents for detecting Brucella ovis, the cause of ram 
epididymitis.  The six laboratories in the United States that run tests for this disease have been 
getting a number of aberrant test results.  This is an important trade issue because 70 percent of 
the western states require a negative test for entry of rams from other states.  NVSL officials at 
the meeting said they were committed to resolving the problem.

      In other committee matters, Dr. Cleon Kimberling of Colorado State University reported 
on a project involving use of radio frequency identification tags in a 4,000-ewe flock in Colorado 
to measure the economic effects of Ovine Progressive Pneumonia (OPP).  In this project, (1) 
ewes were tagged with an electronic tag, (2) blood samples were taken, (3) the tag was scanned 
with a reader connected to a barcode printer, which produced a label, (4) the label was attached 
to the blood tube, (5) the laboratory scanned the bar code and tested the blood sample, (6) test 
information was downloaded, (7) ewes were run through a chute where their tags were read, and 
(8) positive and negatives ewes were separated as they came through the chute.  

	Dr. Kimberling pointed out that use of the electronic ID tags reduced human error and 
speeded up the process.  OPP causes chronic pneumonia and leads to poor milk production.  
Measuring the lamb production of the positive ewes versus their negative counterparts will help 
determine the economic effects of OPP.  He noted that each producer must explore the cost 
benefit of control or eradication of the disease from the flock and that economic consequences 
are different with each production system.  Flocks with a low prevalence of infection may appear 
to be free of symptoms.  Also, only about 30 percent of infected animals go on to develop 
clinical disease.

                                                              ###