• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Front Cover
 Introduction
 Review of literature
 Plan of investigation
 Results
 Discussion
 Summary
 Acknowledgement
 Literature cited






Group Title: Technical bulletin - Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Florida - 670
Title: Genetic aspects of actinomycosis and actinobacillosis in cattle
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027489/00001
 Material Information
Title: Genetic aspects of actinomycosis and actinobacillosis in cattle
Series Title: Research bulletin Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station
Physical Description: 24 p. : ill., chart ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Becker, R. B ( Raymond Brown ), 1892-1989
Publisher: University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1964
 Subjects
Subject: Actinomycosis   ( lcsh )
Actinobacillus   ( lcsh )
Cattle -- Diseases -- Genetic aspects   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 23-24.
Statement of Responsibility: R.B. Becker ... et al..
General Note: Cover title.
Funding: Bulletin (University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station) ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027489
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000929053
oclc - 18368246
notis - AEN9821

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Front Cover
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Introduction
        Page 3
    Review of literature
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Plan of investigation
        Page 8
    Results
        Page 8
        Lumpy jaw in dairy and beef bulls
            Page 8
            Page 9
        Pedigree study
            Page 10
            Page 11
            Page 12
            Page 13
        Lumpy jaw among ancestors of affected bulls
            Page 14
        An area survey four prevalence of lumpy jaw among cows
            Page 14
            Page 15
            Page 16
            Page 17
            Page 18
        Selected case histories within herds
            Page 19
            Page 20
    Discussion
        Page 21
    Summary
        Page 22
    Acknowledgement
        Page 23
    Literature cited
        Page 23
        Page 24
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida





SFlorida
Technical Bulletin 670


Ohio
Research Bulletin 938


Genetic Aspects of Actinomycosis

and Actinobacillosis in Cattle



Cooperative Publication


Florida Agricultural
Experiment Stations
Gainesville, Florida


Ohio Agricultural
Experiment Station
Wooster, Ohio


April 1964

















CONTENTS
Page

INTRODUCTION ..................- ......-.. -- ......-- ------- --------. --------- 3

REVIEW OF LITERATURE ....-..-...-.. -..-.. ....... ---.. ... ------------ 3

PLAN OF INVESTIGATION ... --... -- -.. -.. .......-...... .. ...-. ..- ... 8

RESULTS ...... ------......-....-... ----------- ---.. ----.------- .. ----------. 8

Lumpy Jaw in Dairy and Beef Bulls ..................---- ------.......... 8

Pedigree Study ....... ........ ..... ....... .. -------................ 10

Lumpy Jaw Among Ancestors of Affected Bulls ................--.........-- .... 14

An Area Survey for Prevalence of Lumpy Jaw Among Cows .......... 14

Selected Case Histories Within Herds .......-- .....---...--- ..--......-- .. 19

DISCUSSION ..-...- ....--....... -............ -----....... ....-.....-..... 21

SUMMARY ..-----....-...-...-...-----...--- -....-....----......-..-....-. 22

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................ ............. ................................ 23

LITERATURE CITED ....----.... ------------........------.....-....--........-- -- 23











University of Florida
Agricultural Experiment Stations
J. R. Beckenbach, Director
Gainesville, Florida
and
Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station
Roy M. Kottman, Director
W. E. Krauss, Associate Director
Wooster, Ohio




Cover photo: An early case of lumpy jaw actinomycosiss) affecting a
facial bone of a dairy cow.







Genetic Aspects of Actinomycosis and

Actinobacillosis in Cattle

R. B. BECKER, C. J. WILCOX, AND C. F. SIMPSON
Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations
and
L. O. GILMORE AND N. S. FECHHEIMER
Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station

INTRODUCTION
Actinomycosis is a disease that causes tumor-like swellings
in the jawbones of cattle (cover photo). Actinomycosis is com-
monly called lumpy jaw and usually involves the lower jaw. The
bony enlargement that it causes is characterized by formation
of pus cavities (abscesses) and tracts in the infected spongy
bone (Figure 1). Pus often drains to the outside through the
skin covering the spongy bone. Small hard yellow sand-like
granules are present in the pus from infected bones. These
granules can be crushed, stained, and identified under the micro-
scope as the cause of the disease. This condition and actinobacil-
losis (wooden tongue) were thought to be a single disease before
1930 and still are termed so popularly in the absence of clinical
diagnosis. It was recognized then that infections of the soft
tissues (lymph nodes, lungs, tongue, etc.) were caused by Acti-
nobacillosis lignieresi, and the disease was called wooden tongue
or actinobacillosis (Figure 2). Actinomycosis, on the other
hand, is responsible for lesions of the bone in cattle and moose,
and is caused by Actinomyces bovis. Although the specific
nature of the causative agent of actinomycosis is not completely
known, it is generally believed to be a fungus.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Actinomycosis occurs throughout the world (7)1. The organ-
ism of lumpy jaw was first observed in 1877 by Bollinger (5)
and Harz (cited by Merchant, 23), who first described it and
suggested the name Actinomycosis bovis.
The mode of infection with A. bovis is not definitely known,
although the organism has been recovered from the mouths of
apparently normal cattle (7, 11). It is probable that organisms
enter tissues of the jaw through the alveoli of teeth or through
injured mouth mucosa (14).
1 Numbers in parentheses refer to Literature Cited.







Genetic Aspects of Actinomycosis and

Actinobacillosis in Cattle

R. B. BECKER, C. J. WILCOX, AND C. F. SIMPSON
Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations
and
L. O. GILMORE AND N. S. FECHHEIMER
Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station

INTRODUCTION
Actinomycosis is a disease that causes tumor-like swellings
in the jawbones of cattle (cover photo). Actinomycosis is com-
monly called lumpy jaw and usually involves the lower jaw. The
bony enlargement that it causes is characterized by formation
of pus cavities (abscesses) and tracts in the infected spongy
bone (Figure 1). Pus often drains to the outside through the
skin covering the spongy bone. Small hard yellow sand-like
granules are present in the pus from infected bones. These
granules can be crushed, stained, and identified under the micro-
scope as the cause of the disease. This condition and actinobacil-
losis (wooden tongue) were thought to be a single disease before
1930 and still are termed so popularly in the absence of clinical
diagnosis. It was recognized then that infections of the soft
tissues (lymph nodes, lungs, tongue, etc.) were caused by Acti-
nobacillosis lignieresi, and the disease was called wooden tongue
or actinobacillosis (Figure 2). Actinomycosis, on the other
hand, is responsible for lesions of the bone in cattle and moose,
and is caused by Actinomyces bovis. Although the specific
nature of the causative agent of actinomycosis is not completely
known, it is generally believed to be a fungus.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Actinomycosis occurs throughout the world (7)1. The organ-
ism of lumpy jaw was first observed in 1877 by Bollinger (5)
and Harz (cited by Merchant, 23), who first described it and
suggested the name Actinomycosis bovis.
The mode of infection with A. bovis is not definitely known,
although the organism has been recovered from the mouths of
apparently normal cattle (7, 11). It is probable that organisms
enter tissues of the jaw through the alveoli of teeth or through
injured mouth mucosa (14).
1 Numbers in parentheses refer to Literature Cited.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Thomassen (32) reported that wooden tongue of cattle re-
sponded to potassium iodide treatment. Nocard (26) distin-
guished the organism causing "farcin du boeuf" and confirmed
this observation. Norgaard and associates of the USDA cured
96 of 100 cases of lumpy jaw in cattle from the Chicago stock-
yards, as reported by Salmon (27). Two animals among 40 in
this trial still had internal actinomycosis lesions on examination.
The bone had not been involved in animals that recovered.
Lignieres and Spitz (21) isolated Actinobacillus lignieresi
from lesions resembling lumpy jaw among infected cattle in
Argentina. They called this condition affecting the skin and
soft tissues actinobacillosis. Dawson (10) mentioned that ac-
tinomycosis affected various parts of the body in man, cattle,
horses, sheep, and swine, but occurred more often among cattle.
He used potassium iodide treatment successfully. Higgins (16)
found A. lignieresi in soft tissues and lymph nodes of affected
cattle. Wright (36) isolated branching filamentous microorgan-
isms from 13 cases of actinomycosis in man and two in cattle.
Salmon (27) mentioned that Rivolta had observed actino-
myces in tumorous tissues as early as 1860 without regarding
them as the causative agents. Israel (19) and Wolff and Israel
(34) found the same fungus in man under the skin, in mucous
linings, tongue, sometimes in lungs, and in the jaw bone ulti-
mately. Griffith (13) found typical granules of the soft tissue
actinobacillosis in beef tongues imported from Argentina, North
America, and Siberia, as well as in 44 tongues obtained in Eng-
land. Forty cases were distinguished by Gram stain as actino-
bacillosis and four as streptothrix or the fungus type. Connaway
(8) mentioned the ray fungus (in pus) of lumpy jaw in cattle.
He did not distinguish the condition from wooden tongue, though
he reported yellowish sore spots with well-defined margins in
the mouth.
Bosworth (6) examined soft tissues of 21 cattle from the
Islington market affected with actinobacillosis, and 12 cases
with jaw bones and sometimes overlying soft tissues involved
with streptothrix. He reported:
When the streptothrix invades the bone it produces in its
immediate vicinity a rarefying ostitis. In parts a little more
remote from it there is a tendency to the formation of new
bone the bone becomes expanded and more porous in char-
acter. The spaces in its interior become widened and filled with
a soft greyish or pinkish granulation tissue in which the char-
acteristic greyish or yellowish-white granules are more numer-
ous. This tissue tends to become semi-purulent or even purulent.







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


Figure 1.-An advanced case of lumpy jaw actinomycosiss) with tracts
in the spongy bone of the right lower jaw.


Figure 2.-An advanced case of wooden tongue or actinobacillosis
in a beef animal.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


The cheek lesions take the form of a diffuse fibrous thickening
in which are found patches of soft tissue similar to that found
inside the bone and sometimes continuous with it at places where
the bone has been removed. The skin over this thickened area
is very adherent, and it may show ulcerations at some points
where fistulous canals open on to the surface and discharge a
yellowish-white creamy, non-glutinous pus containing colonies
of the organism. the granulous tissues (sometimes) form
a soft fleshy, projecting mass, often pedunculated and of mush-
room shape.

The cases of actinobacillosis involved fifteen head glands,
eight jawbones, seven soft tissues of the cheek and intermax-
illary space, four in the tongue, and one each of the hard palate
and interior of the pharynx. He described cases of actinobacil-
losis in soft tissues of the head thus:

soft granulation tissue of a greyish or yellowish color,
which contained typical granules and were surrounded by a cap-
sule of connective tissue. These nodules increase in size and
their interior becomes semi-purulent and ultimately breaks down
into actual pus, while the fibrous tissue around them continues
to develop. The glands consequently become much enlarged and
their normal substance entirely disappears. The pus they con-
tain is greenish-white or greenish-yellow in colour, thick and
viscid or glutinous in consistency, and contains the typical gran-
ules, which are ordinarily greyish and semi-translucent. Oc-
casionally they are calcified, especially in the jaw lesions, and
they then become yellowish-white and opaque.
In the tongue were found firm nodules of the size of a pea
embedded under the epithelium, which are sometimes shed, hav-
ing irregular patches of ulceration. Around the nodules there
was a diffuse increase of connective tissue, the presence of which
gave to the affected parts a firmer consistence than normal. The
nodules themselves were formed of a dense fibrous capsule en-
closing soft material in which colonies were numerous.

Davis and Torrence (9) believed before 1930 that the dis-
ease of the soft tissues and that typified by rarefying ostitis in
bones (with macroscopic actinomycosis granules in the pus)
were not the same disease. The latter involved infection of the
jawbone and adjacent soft tissues by Streptothrix actinomyces
(34).
Thompson (33) cultured Actinomyces bovis and Actinobacil-
lus lignieresi separately from affected cattle in the United States.
A. bovis caused lesions of the bone and was due to a Gram-posi-
tive rod-shaped or filamentous organism growing best under re-
duced oxygen tension. Actinobacillus lignieresi (the cause of
wooden tongue) was a small Gram-negative non-motile rod
growing best under aerobic conditions. Wooden tongue in Eu-
rope apparently was due wholly to it.






Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


Smith and Jones (29) distinguished causes of lumpy jaw as
A. bovis which ultimately involved the jawbones and/or skull,
and Actinobacillus lignieresi that infected the skin, lymph nodes
of the head and neck, and other soft tissues. Clinically, accord-
ing to Shahan and Davis (28), actinomycosis or lumpy jaw in
cattle included hard swellings of the tongue and other organs
(wooden tongue) as well as bony enlargements of the jaw. They
mentioned that intravenous sodium iodide injections were prac-
tically specific for actinobacillosis, but some question remained
as to effectiveness with actinomyces which involved the bony
tissues. They distinguished these organisms microscopically
and culturally from materials examined from 80 infected cattle.
Monlux and Davis (25) recommended separation of affected
cattle to prevent pus discharges from contaminating feed, wa-
ter, bedding, or abrasions of the skin of healthy animals. They
stated that A. lignieresi (which infected soft tissues) responded
to medication with antibiotics, iodides, and sulfanomides, as
well as to surgery in the early stages. Hagan and Brunner
(14) described pathogenicity of Actinomyces bovis and Actino-
bacillosis lignieresi and mentioned that they respond to differ-
ent treatments.
Mohler and Shahan (24) indicated that the frequency of an-
imals being condemned in whole or part was increasing at the
time, partly due to expanding meat inspection services. In
1936, parts of carcasses of 1.34 percent of cattle and calves were
condemned for lumpy jaw. One carcass in 11,912 (0.0084 per-
cent) was wholly condemned. However, frequencies had dropped
in 1961 (1) to 1.19 percent for partial condemnation, and 0.0024
percent for total condemnation. The two types of the condi-
tion have not been reported separately.
Lumpy jaw among bulls in natural and artificial service in
the United States and Canada was given by Becker, et al. (3)
as the leading disease condition for disposal of these animals.
The incidence was 3.69 percent of bulls in natural service born
prior to 1941. The proportion was 1.80 percent of bulls re-
moved from artificial service in 1954-59 (2).
Evaluation of genetic effects with diseases of known causa-
tive agents presents special problems. Frequencies are gen-
erally low, making it difficult to accumulate sufficient data to
make reliable estimates. Where many farms or studs are in-
volved, management practices vary considerably, and this may
affect the frequency of the condition. With the tendency for
related individuals to be on the same farm, a common environ-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


ment for relatives could lead to environmental correlations which
might be mistaken for genetic effects.
There are numerous reports of susceptibility to specific dis-
eases being genetically influenced, however. These involve small
and large animals and birds (18). With large animals in a single
herd, some of the evidence is admittedly meager. With cattle,
evidence of genetic effects on mastitis (20, 22), tuberculosis,
protozoan diseases, foot and mouth disease, and several others
(18) has been reported. The mechanisms of these apparent
differences in ability to resist disease are even less understood.
Biochemical aspects of several diseases, mostly with humans,
have been evaluated to some degree, such as reviewed by Sut-
ton (31).
Two preliminary reports of this investigation have been
presented (4, 12).

PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
The useful tenure and causes of losses of dairy bulls in nat-
ural service have been investigated for several years (3), with
similar study of dairy and beef bulls in artificial use (2). Rea-
sons for removal or causes of death of these animals were stated
by herdsmen or owners, and often were based on veterinary
diagnosis. The records represented a sample of leading dairy
bulls in Canada and the United States. Records of 16,261 bulls
were available, in addition to case studies from several cooperat-
ing dairy herds.
To investigate lumpy jaw among females, a survey was made
through the cooperation of dairymen in Ohio for information
on frequency, age of occurrence, and other aspects. Additional
records were obtained from case histories in selected herds.
The objectives of this investigation were (a) to establish
the frequency and distribution of lumpy jaw, and (b) to an-
alyze for possible genetic influences.

RESULTS
Lumpy Jaw in Dairy and Beef Bulls
Of the 15,867 bulls of the five major dairy breeds and Milk-
ing Shorthorns, 341 or 2.15 percent were discarded or died of
lumpy jaw. No lumpy jaw was reported among 12 Red Danes.
Five cases were reported among 382 (1.31 percent) beef bulls.
With these limited numbers, there was no evidence of a differ-
ence in frequency between beef and dairy bulls.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


ment for relatives could lead to environmental correlations which
might be mistaken for genetic effects.
There are numerous reports of susceptibility to specific dis-
eases being genetically influenced, however. These involve small
and large animals and birds (18). With large animals in a single
herd, some of the evidence is admittedly meager. With cattle,
evidence of genetic effects on mastitis (20, 22), tuberculosis,
protozoan diseases, foot and mouth disease, and several others
(18) has been reported. The mechanisms of these apparent
differences in ability to resist disease are even less understood.
Biochemical aspects of several diseases, mostly with humans,
have been evaluated to some degree, such as reviewed by Sut-
ton (31).
Two preliminary reports of this investigation have been
presented (4, 12).

PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
The useful tenure and causes of losses of dairy bulls in nat-
ural service have been investigated for several years (3), with
similar study of dairy and beef bulls in artificial use (2). Rea-
sons for removal or causes of death of these animals were stated
by herdsmen or owners, and often were based on veterinary
diagnosis. The records represented a sample of leading dairy
bulls in Canada and the United States. Records of 16,261 bulls
were available, in addition to case studies from several cooperat-
ing dairy herds.
To investigate lumpy jaw among females, a survey was made
through the cooperation of dairymen in Ohio for information
on frequency, age of occurrence, and other aspects. Additional
records were obtained from case histories in selected herds.
The objectives of this investigation were (a) to establish
the frequency and distribution of lumpy jaw, and (b) to an-
alyze for possible genetic influences.

RESULTS
Lumpy Jaw in Dairy and Beef Bulls
Of the 15,867 bulls of the five major dairy breeds and Milk-
ing Shorthorns, 341 or 2.15 percent were discarded or died of
lumpy jaw. No lumpy jaw was reported among 12 Red Danes.
Five cases were reported among 382 (1.31 percent) beef bulls.
With these limited numbers, there was no evidence of a differ-
ence in frequency between beef and dairy bulls.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


ment for relatives could lead to environmental correlations which
might be mistaken for genetic effects.
There are numerous reports of susceptibility to specific dis-
eases being genetically influenced, however. These involve small
and large animals and birds (18). With large animals in a single
herd, some of the evidence is admittedly meager. With cattle,
evidence of genetic effects on mastitis (20, 22), tuberculosis,
protozoan diseases, foot and mouth disease, and several others
(18) has been reported. The mechanisms of these apparent
differences in ability to resist disease are even less understood.
Biochemical aspects of several diseases, mostly with humans,
have been evaluated to some degree, such as reviewed by Sut-
ton (31).
Two preliminary reports of this investigation have been
presented (4, 12).

PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
The useful tenure and causes of losses of dairy bulls in nat-
ural service have been investigated for several years (3), with
similar study of dairy and beef bulls in artificial use (2). Rea-
sons for removal or causes of death of these animals were stated
by herdsmen or owners, and often were based on veterinary
diagnosis. The records represented a sample of leading dairy
bulls in Canada and the United States. Records of 16,261 bulls
were available, in addition to case studies from several cooperat-
ing dairy herds.
To investigate lumpy jaw among females, a survey was made
through the cooperation of dairymen in Ohio for information
on frequency, age of occurrence, and other aspects. Additional
records were obtained from case histories in selected herds.
The objectives of this investigation were (a) to establish
the frequency and distribution of lumpy jaw, and (b) to an-
alyze for possible genetic influences.

RESULTS
Lumpy Jaw in Dairy and Beef Bulls
Of the 15,867 bulls of the five major dairy breeds and Milk-
ing Shorthorns, 341 or 2.15 percent were discarded or died of
lumpy jaw. No lumpy jaw was reported among 12 Red Danes.
Five cases were reported among 382 (1.31 percent) beef bulls.
With these limited numbers, there was no evidence of a differ-
ence in frequency between beef and dairy bulls.











TABLE 1.-FREQUENCY AND AGE OF DISPOSAL OR DEATH OF MALES AFFECTED WITH LUMPY JAW.


Brown
Swiss


Guernsey Holstein Jersey


Milking
Shorthorn


Combined


Total Number of Males
4,079 5,369
Lumpy Jaw Males
1 -
3
6 2
18 2
37 10
47 5
25 3
19 3
32 3
25 3
11 1
11 1
6
2
1


243 33


3,525




3
4
2
8
6
4
3
4
2
2
1


352 15,867


0.61% 1.10%


1
3
12
28
52
63
35
30
41
36
14
15
7
2
2


341
2.15%


Ayrshire


1,467


months
year
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years
years


1,075




1
1


1

1
1

1


Total
Frequency


1.99%0


0.89%,


0.56%/


5.96%







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


The frequencies of lumpy jaw for six breeds, listed in Table
1, were subjected to chi-square analysis. Differences among
these breeds were significant (P < 0.001), obviously due to
the high frequency among Guernseys. When the five single
degrees of freedom were evaluated, only the comparison of
Guernsey versus other breeds was significant (P < 0.001), as
shown in Table 2.
The youngest animal disposed of for the condition was a
nine-month-old calf. Animals with the conditions) were re-
moved at various ages, the majority between three and nine
years. It was evident that some older affected animals were
housed separately, and used in service until advanced age. Ages
at disposal or death of affected bulls also are presented in
Table 1.

TABLE 2.-ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENCES AMONG BREED FREQUENCIES
OF LUMPY JAW.

Breed Comparison* Degrees of Freedom Chi-square

2 vs 4 1 0.014
1 vs 2, 4 1 0.449
5 vs 1, 2, 4 1 2.338
6 vs 1, 2, 4, 5 1 2.311
3 vs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 1 378.635**

Breeds are: (1) Ayrshire, (2) Brown Swiss, (3) Guernsey, (4) Holstein, (5) Jersey,
and (6) Milking Shorthorn.
** P < 0.001.

No attempt was made in the early years of the investiga-
tion to distinguish between the soft tissue and bone type of
infection, except as volunteered by cooperators at the time.
During the last two years of the investigation, however, an
attempt was made on recently disposed individuals, where type
of the disease had been diagnosed. Of 341 cases reported in
Table 1, 48 were distinguished as to type of infection, 20 being
in the soft tissue, and 28 in the bone. Method of disposal was
known in 171 cases; 138 were sent to market (at least two of
these were condemned), 20 died, and 13 were sacrificed.

Pedigree Study

Reasons for disposal of direct and collateral relatives of
lumpy jaw bulls were known in many cases. A pattern of lumpy
jaw seemed to exist among these relatives. In a few cases, re-







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


lated individuals contracted lumpy jaw at the same farm or
stud at about the same time. More frequently, however, sev-
eral years elapsed between observed cases. The related animals
were at different locations in many instances, even in different
states. Relationships and other pertinent data have been sum-
marized by breed.
Ayrshires.-There were 1,467 life records of Ayrshire bulls;
13 or 0.89 percent had lumpy jaw when discarded. One of them
died and two were removed when unable to eat or drink. Five
of the affected animals were related closely. They included a
sire, two sons, and two grandsons (full brothers). The dam
of the full brothers had a paternal brother with the condition.
One was known to have been bone-type, but type of infection was
not stated for the others.
Brown Swiss.-Six Brown Swiss bulls were removed for
lumpy jaw among 1,075 recorded. One bull had a son and grand-
son affected. Other relationships were too distant to indicate
a related source. One of these bulls died of wooden tongue (ac-
tinobacillosis) when 2.7 years old. One bull had the jaw and
teeth sockets affected, doubtless the bone type.
Guernseys.-Of 4,079 Guernsey bull records in this phase of
the study, 243 were reported with lumpy jaw. Many of the
cases occurred among closely related animals. A cow and her
full brother were in the pedigrees of many affected bulls. There
were frequent cases in certain family lines, largely independent
of the herd or area in which the animals were located at time
of disposal. The bull above started a line of five bulls in four
consecutive generations, all with the bone-type actinomycosis.
Although they were bred on one farm, these five animals were
used terminally on four separate farms. Seven pairs of sires
and sons were affected. In 15 instances, a bull and his grand-
son had the condition. Another bull, his sire, and both grand-
sires were affected. Eleven bulls had two affected sons each,
and two bulls had three sons each with the condition. Two dams
had two sons each that were affected. Eight Guernseys were
stated to have had the soft tissue (bacterial) type of lumpy
jaw, and 20 had the bone-type. It was stated that two of the
latter did not respond to treatment.
Cases of lumpy jaw occurring within family lines are sum-
marized in Table 3. Bull A was used until 12 years old, when
he became sterile. Bull C was killed and buried when 4.4 years
of age, the reason not being known by persons later managing







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


this farm. Bull D was removed at 5.9 years for an active case
of lumpy jaw, and sired one son reported with the condition.
Bull E was not reported as a lumpy jaw case. His usefulness as
a breeder terminated at 15.9 years of age with an abscess in the
lung, the cause of which was not stated. Bull F was killed be-
cause of impotency a year after his last productive natural serv-
ice at 12.8 years of age. Bull G lived over 4 years after his last
productive service. The imported bull H died at 11.7 years of
age, being sterile at the time. The imported bull I was dis-
carded for sterility at 11.5 years of age. These eight bulls and
one full sister had 8 sons, 38 grandsons, 58 great-grandsons, and
41 in the next two generations reported with lumpy jaw.

TABLE 3.-OCCURRENCE OF LUMPY JAW IN SEVERAL GUERNSEY LINES.

Parent Generation
1 2 3 4 5

Bull A 1 5 4 2 -
Cow B* 0 5 14 10 4
Bull C 1 5 12 4 4
Bull D 1 0 1 1 -
Bull E 1 7 4 -
Bull F 2 1 9 3 1
Bull G 0 4 10 5 5
Bull H** 0 4 3 2 -
Bull I** 2 7 1 -

Total 8 38 58 27 14

Full sister to Bull A.
** Imported bulls.

Holstein-Friesians.-Thirty-three cases of lumpy jaw were
reported among 5,369 Holstein bulls (0.61 percent). Cases oc-
curred in two paternal brothers on the same farm, with nearly
a three-year interval between tenures. Two affected bulls were
bred and kept on one farm for over two years. They were by
the same sire, and the dam of one was a full sister to the
other's maternal granddam. The sire of these two bulls also
appeared as maternal grandsire of a lumpy jaw bull in another
state. Other family names occurred in common only in the third
or fourth generation, and with little consistent connection in
this large population of bulls.
Jerseys.-Analysis of the records of 3,525 Jersey bulls re-
vealed 39 (1.10 percent) cases of lumpy jaw. Ten cases were






Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


distinguished as affecting soft tissues and three with bone af-
fected.
Five cases were among descendants of one bull imported
from the Island of Jersey and in service to past 16 years of age.
Reason for his disposal was not stated by the manager. An
imported son was operated on for soft tissue lumpy jaw affect-
ing the throat. Another son that became affected was born on
this farm one month before the throat operation on the first
son, and two months after the sire's last productive service.
Another son (full brother to the first son) was in another state
when removed for lumpy jaw. A fourth case in this family
(also soft tissue) was reported in a grandson. A fifth case
occurred in a great-grandson.
One large Jersey family included 10 affected bulls born over
a 33-year period and distributed in eight states. Despite this
wide distribution, two were grandsons and one a great-grand-
son of one bull. One cow was the granddam of one case and
great-granddam of another affected bull. Four of these 10 in-
dividuals were included in the closely related animals of the
preceding paragraph.
A bull and his grandson had lumpy jaw. Although on the
same farm, 2.3 years intervened between slaughter of the
older bull and birth of the grandson. Another bull in which
"abscesses caused sterility" when 12.3 years old had one son
that was discarded for lumpy jaw when 11.3 years old. Two
grandsons (paternal brothers) were discarded with the same
condition in different states. One was recognized as the soft-
tissue type. Two great-grandsons also had lumpy jaw. In an-
other line, two paternal brothers had lumpy jaw. Their pa-
ternal grandsire was the double great-grandsire of another case.
Two of these affected animals were used for a short time on
one farm, with a short interval between tenures.
Milking Shorthorns.-Of 352 completed records of Milking
Shorthorn bulls, seven individuals were removed for lumpy
jaw, one diagnosed as affecting the jaw bone. Three lumpy
jaw bulls were paternal brothers, owned in two different states.
Beef Breeds.-Some 382 records of disposals of beef bulls
included two lumpy jaw cases among 156 Angus (1.38 percent),
two of 176 Herefords (1.14 percent), one of 45 beef Shorthorns.
Three Brahman and two Red Poll bulls were unaffected. Type
of infection in these five cases was not reported.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Lumpy Jaw Among Ancestors of Affected Bulls
An attempt to quantify possible genetic effects was made
with Guernsey bulls. There were 87 cases among bulls used in
artificial insemination. A control group of 85 Guernseys serving
in the same studs at the same time was assembled. Reasons of
disposal were available on about 60 percent of the seven nearest
male ancestors of these two groups of bulls. The frequency of
lumpy jaw among male ancestors of lumpy jaw bulls was 10.0
percent, as compared to a frequency of 6.7 percent among an-
cestors of the control group. Chi-square analysis showed this
difference to have a level of probability of about 0.15.

An Area Survey for Prevalence of
Lumpy Jaw Among Cows
Registered Guernsey and Holstein herds in Ohio were sur-
veyed for prevalence of lumpy jaw. Some 600 members of
the state Guernsey association and 2,600 members of the
state Holstein-Friesian association were surveyed through co-
operation of these organizations. Identical letters accompanied
the questionnaire pointing out that no herd would be identified,
this part being confidential. The form requested information
on numbers of cows in the milking herd as grouped by age:
one, two, three, four, five, six, and seven years or older; num-
bers of animals in the milking herd that had lumpy jaw, were
blind, or were tailless; and the age of each animal in these cate-
gories. Questions concerning tailless and blind animals were
included so that a comparison could be made with abnormalities
of low frequency. It was hoped that thus an unbiased estimate
of frequency of all three conditions would result. All questions
and blanks for appropriate responses were on a return-addressed
post card. Signature was voluntary.
Useful returns were received from 706 Holstein and 161
Guernsey breeders reporting on 24,185 and 4,997 cows respec-
tively. The records were summarized and analyzed statistically
using either the log-likelihood ratio (G) test (35), or the chi-
square test of heterogeneity (30), when large numbers made
the G-test more cumbersome. Differences between the two
breed means in age composition were tested by the "t" test (30).
Results of Survey.-Reliability of results based upon com-
parison of information gathered from the separate surveys de-
pends on comparability of the two sets of returns. The propor-






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Lumpy Jaw Among Ancestors of Affected Bulls
An attempt to quantify possible genetic effects was made
with Guernsey bulls. There were 87 cases among bulls used in
artificial insemination. A control group of 85 Guernseys serving
in the same studs at the same time was assembled. Reasons of
disposal were available on about 60 percent of the seven nearest
male ancestors of these two groups of bulls. The frequency of
lumpy jaw among male ancestors of lumpy jaw bulls was 10.0
percent, as compared to a frequency of 6.7 percent among an-
cestors of the control group. Chi-square analysis showed this
difference to have a level of probability of about 0.15.

An Area Survey for Prevalence of
Lumpy Jaw Among Cows
Registered Guernsey and Holstein herds in Ohio were sur-
veyed for prevalence of lumpy jaw. Some 600 members of
the state Guernsey association and 2,600 members of the
state Holstein-Friesian association were surveyed through co-
operation of these organizations. Identical letters accompanied
the questionnaire pointing out that no herd would be identified,
this part being confidential. The form requested information
on numbers of cows in the milking herd as grouped by age:
one, two, three, four, five, six, and seven years or older; num-
bers of animals in the milking herd that had lumpy jaw, were
blind, or were tailless; and the age of each animal in these cate-
gories. Questions concerning tailless and blind animals were
included so that a comparison could be made with abnormalities
of low frequency. It was hoped that thus an unbiased estimate
of frequency of all three conditions would result. All questions
and blanks for appropriate responses were on a return-addressed
post card. Signature was voluntary.
Useful returns were received from 706 Holstein and 161
Guernsey breeders reporting on 24,185 and 4,997 cows respec-
tively. The records were summarized and analyzed statistically
using either the log-likelihood ratio (G) test (35), or the chi-
square test of heterogeneity (30), when large numbers made
the G-test more cumbersome. Differences between the two
breed means in age composition were tested by the "t" test (30).
Results of Survey.-Reliability of results based upon com-
parison of information gathered from the separate surveys de-
pends on comparability of the two sets of returns. The propor-







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


tion of useful questionnaires returned (27.1 and 27.3 percent by
Guernsey and Holstein breeders, respectively) did not differ
significantly between breeds. The proportion of respondents
who signed the reports was not different for the breeds (70.4
percent for Holsteins and 65.9 percent for Guernseys).
It had been determined previously (15, 17) that tailless and
blindness were not highly heritable in cattle and were, like the
occurrence of lumpy jaw, relatively uncommon. Calves born
with these conditions usually are eliminated from the herd so
that most of those that occur in cows of milking age are at-
tributable to accident or disease. Much of the unilateral blind-
ness reported was ascribed to a prior infection of pink eye, i.e.,
contagious conjunctivitis. It was anticipated therefore that
the frequencies of these two conditions should not differ ma-
terially between breeds, and that if they did, bias should be sus-
pected in the report for lumpy jaw, the characteristic of pri-
mary interest. It can be seen in Table 4 that frequencies of
blindness and taillessness were low in both breeds, and in neither
case did the chi-square value reach a significant level. This in-
dicated that occurrence of these two conditions was not differ-
ent in the two breeds sampled.
There was no reason from these analyses to suspect that
samples from the two breeds were not comparable or that any
breed differences for lumpy jaw would be attributable to biased
samples.
Analysis of the reports on 24,185 Holstein cows revealed
that 35 (0.14 percent) were affected with lumpy jaw (Table 4);
21 of 4,997, or 0.42 percent, of the Guernsey cows were afflicted.

TABLE 4.-FREQUENCY OF BLIND, TAILLESS, AND LUMPY JAW COWS
REPORTED BY BREEDERS.

Afflicted Cows
Breed Total Lumpy
Cows Blind* Tailless* Jaw**
((No. ) o.) (%) (No.) (%) (No.) (%)

Holstein 24,185 56 0.23 25 0.10 35 0.14
Guernsey 4,997 16 0.32 3 0.06 21 0.42

Total 29,182 72 0.25 28 0.10 56 0.19

Breed frequencies not significantly different.
** Breed frequencies different (P < 0.0005).







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


The chi-square value associated with this three-fold difference
in frequency of the disease has a probability value of P < .0005.

TABLE 5.-AGE DISTRIBUTION OF GUERNSEY AND HOLSTEIN
Cows SURVEYED.

Years Guernsey* Holsteins*
(No.) (%) (No.) (/%)

2 918 18.4 4,643 19.2
3 9,50 19.0 4,716 19.5
4 799 16.0 4,142 17.1
5 686 13.7 3,537 14.6
6 557 11.2 2,843 11.8
7+ 1,087 21.8 4,304 17.8

Total 4,997 100.0 24,185 100.0

Breed differences in age distribution significant IP < 0.0005).

This highly significant breed difference might be associated
with factors primarily non-genetic in origin, such as a differ-
ence in average tenure in the milking herd or different geograph-
ical distribution, so that more cows of one breed were in con-
tact with more of the causative organisms than those of the
other breed. To investigate possible relation of age to lumpy
jaw, age distributions of cows of each breed were tabulated in
Table 5. Guernseys had a smaller proportion of animals in
each of the younger groups than did the Holsteins. However,
the incidence of lumpy jaw at various ages in the two breeds
did not exhibit significant heterogeneity, as shown in Table 6.
Affected Holsteins had a mean age of 4.9 years and a standard
deviation of 2.69 years; affected Guernseys, a mean age of 4.7
and a standard deviation of 1.77 years. Neither the mean dif-
ference nor the difference between variances was significant,

TABLE 6.-AGE DISTRIBUTION OF COWS WITH LUMPY JAW.

Years Guernseys* Holsteins* Combined

2 and 3 5 12 17
4 and 5 11 7 18
6 and 7+ 5 12 17

Total 21 31 52


* Breed differences in age at occurrence not significant.







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


indicating that animals of both breeds became afflicted with
lumpy jaw at about the same ages.
The records were grouped according to four geographical
areas. The test for heterogeneity of the data from the separate
breeds had a chi-square value of 5.00, and with three degrees
of freedom, this probability value of P = 0.2 to 0.1 indicated
no heterogeniety. Therefore, the data were combined; the re-
sulting chi-square value of 1.60, with three degrees of freedom,
gave a probability of P = 0.7 to 0.6 and indicated that the cases
of lumpy jaw reported were distributed in the four areas pro-
portionately to the numbers of cows. This is summarized in
Table 7. Data were analysed to see if the frequencies of lumpy
jaw were the same in different parts of Ohio.

TABLE 7.-DISTRIBUTION OF LUMPY JAW CASES IN DIFFERENT
GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OF OHIO.

Area Guernseys* Holsteins* Combined*
Lumpy Not Lumpy Not Lumpy Not
Jaw Affected Jaw Affected Jaw Affected

Northeast 10 1,559 15 12,119 25 13,678
Southeast 1 540 9 3,419 10 3,959
Southwest 6 1,352 3 3,389 9 4,741
Northwest 3 1,238 6 5,095 9 6,333

Total 20 4,689 33 24,022 53 28,711

*Differences in frequency among areas not significant within breeds or with breeds
combined.

Analysis of the data was carried out to determine whether
or not size of herd was a factor in incidence of lumpy jaw. As
shown in Table 8, although no heterogeneity existed between
the breeds in distribution of herds of various sizes in the four
geographic regions of the state, when all of the data were com-
bined, a pronounced and significant breed difference was seen.
More Holstein herds were observed in the larger herd size
groups and fewer in the small groups. Mean herd sizes of
the two samples were 34.21 (standard deviation of 20.47) and
29.28 (standard deviation of 16.99) for the Holstein and Guern-
sey breeds respectively. The differences between these means
and the variance associated with them were significant. How-
ever, as indicated in Table 9, this difference in mean herd size
was not an important factor in causing the three-fold breed







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


difference in incidence of lumpy jaw. It can be seen in both
breeds that heterogeneity existed in the number of herds of
various sizes from which lumpy jaw cases were reported. No
significant breed difference was apparent in the proportion of
lumpy jaw cases reported from herds differing in size.

TABLE 8.-DISTRIBUTION OF GUERNSEY AND HOLSTEIN HERDS OF
VARIOUS SIZES AMONG GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OF OHIO.


Area


Number of Cows in Herd


1-19 20-29


30-39 40-49 Over 50 Total

Guernsey**


46 50
28.6 31.0


135 188
19.2 26.7

181 238
20.9 27.5


33 1,
20.5
Holstein**


184 88
26.2 12.5


19 161
11.8 100


59 336
11 111
17 99
21 157

108 703
15.4 100


217 101 127 864
25.1 11.7 14.7 100


Within-breed differences in herd size among areas not significant.
** Between-breed differences in herd size significant (P < .025).

Discussion of Survey.-Although data obtained by survey
are frequently less than ideal, necessary requirements of a valid
survey were met. Equivalent samples of the two breeds were
obtained, as the proportion of replies from the two groups of
breeders was similar. There was similarity of incidence of tail-
less and blind animals, and a like proportion of the Guernsey
and Holstein breeders signed their replies. Differences in size
of herds and unequal distribution of breeds in the four parts of
the state were real, and agree with DHIA membership in the
state. For estimates to be valid, it must be assumed that
herds of the two breeds were managed similarly. The survey


Northeast*
Southeast
Southwest
Northwest

Total
Percent


Northeast*
Southeast
Southwest
Northwest


Total
Percent


Total
Percent







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


supplied no reports on this point. It would seem doubtful that
any slight differences in this respect would be reflected in the
large difference in number of lumpy jaw cases that were re-
ported. An even larger breed difference was noted in the sam-
ples of bulls, many of which were reported by A.I. associations
where animals of the two breeds are part of the same unit and
managed even more similarly than were the two large samples
of females.

TABLE 9.-HERD SIZES FROM WHICH CASES OF LUMPY JAW WERE REPORTED.

Size Guernsey* Holstein* Combined
Cases No Cases Cases No Cases Cases No Cases

Number of Herds
0-19 1** 45 1** 134 2 179
20-29 4 46 8 180 12 226
30-39 4 29 12 172 16 201
40-49 2 11 1 87 3 98
Over 50 6 13 8 100 14 113

Total 17 144 30 673 47 817

Between breed differences in frequency of cases in herds of different sizes not signifi-
cant.
** Differences in number of cases in herds of different sizes significant for each breed,
and for breeds combined (P < 0.01, P < 0.025, and P < 0.005, respectively).

Selected Case Histories Within Herds
Attention was called in 1952 to the occurrence of a daughter
and dam pair that had contracted lumpy jaw (V, B, and C,
Figure 3). The owner examined the herd records and found
an additional case, a paternal sister (VI, C) to the dam. Other
cases were reported in the following months, several of which
were by the same sire (VIII, E) as these two sisters. Another
case (VI, E) was a maternal sister to the sire of these affected
cows. A list of all 81 daughters by the sire was obtained through
the courtesy of the breed association together with their 29 last
recorded owners located in three states. These owners were
queried during October 1955 and again in March 1962 to find
out whether each named daughter was still in the herd and
whether she was normal in all respects. If she was not, the
owner was asked to state why she was removed from the herd.
Lumpy jaw was not mentioned in these inquiries, although it
was discussed with the original correspondent.








Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Responses were received from 20 herd owners of 76 daugh-
ters, 52 of which were no longer in the herd. Five owners ac-
counting for five cows did not respond. From the responses,
15 cases of lumpy jaw or wooden tongue were disclosed. Most
of these cases were diagnosed by one or more local veterinarians.
Seven cases (C) were by the sire in question. Two of these
were from cows sired by his maternal brother (VI, VII, C).
The survey also located cases of lumpy jaw in two granddaugh-
ters of the first bull, both from his daughters. (See Figure 3.)
Seven cases closely related in the ancestry were added later.

R
0
P
0
N
M
L 0 0
K


H
G




D


B
A


Figure 3.-Lumpy jaw cases among Guernsey cattle of known relation-
ship. Cases of lumpy jaw trace on both sides to the sire of an afflicted
son.

Four of the herds were visited in the company of the orig-
inal correspondent during June 1954. Herd owners were in-
terrogated regarding their breeding programs and herd man-
agement. The breeding programs varied considerably, although
cattle were exchanged through sales among the various herds.
There was no overriding emphasis on inbreeding in any herd.
The management was good but not necessarily uniform. It was
practical from a farmer-breeder's standpoint.
The owner of a large registered Guernsey herd in another
state reported a cow, daughter, and granddaughter affected with
the soft-tissue type of lumpy jaw. The lesion of the youngest
cow was near the eye socket. The owner suspected that heredity







Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


was involved with this condition because of its occurrence in
this one female line.
In an institutional Guernsey herd, a bull was slaughtered
for lumpy jaw. Several daughters contracted the disease in
subsequent years. These were the only cases of lumpy jaw
which the manager recalled in the herd. The two grandsires
of this bull had four affected grandsons in other herds.

DISCUSSION
Both types of lumpy jaw, actinomycosis and actinobacillosis,
were reported in several breeds of cattle. The soft-tissue type
of infection is often treated with iodine compounds, but the
bone-type appears more resistant to treatment. Bone-type cases
sometimes respond to streptomycin.
Frequencies among beef and dairy bulls did not differ sig-
nificantly, but data on the beef breeds were very limited. The
frequency among Guernsey bulls was seven times that of the
other breeds. Among cows surveyed in Ohio, the Guernsey fre-
quency was three times that of Holsteins. To the extent that
breed differences may be called genetic, therefore, a heritable
susceptibility to lumpy jaw was indicated.
Several attempts were made to determine whether genetic
differences in lack of resistance existed within the breeds. Nu-
merous instances of lumpy jaw were observed among closely
related individuals. For example, four generations of males
contracted the condition. Three generations of females also
were affected. Many sires had sons and/or grandsons with the
condition, as well as other relatives. One sire appeared in the
pedigree of 12 cases within five generations, and 33 cases were
in four generations descended from his full sister. This pair
and seven other males appeared in the pedigrees of 145 cases
within five generations.
Attempts to evaluate these relationships quantitatively were
not markedly successful, perhaps because of the limited num-
bers of cases. The frequency of lumpy jaw cases among the
seven closest male ancestors of affected Guernsey males in arti-
ficial insemination was higher than among ancestors of a con-
trol group (10.0 percent versus 6.7 percent), but this difference
was associated with a probability level of only about 0.15.
When dealing with a pathogenic condition of known causa-
tive agents, incontestable proof of genetic influence on occur-
rence frequently has been difficult to obtain. The numbers of







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


cases generally have been small, and records difficult to accumu-
late. In this investigation, a population of over 45,000 individ-
uals was studied, with slightly more than 400 cases. Further-
more, it must be assumed that resistant animals would contract
the condition if exposure was great enough, and highly suscep-
tible individuals would not under reverse conditions. These fac-
tors tend to mask possible genetic effects.
An additional problem is that of environmental correlation.
Related individuals tend to live in the same environment (i.e.,
farm), and frequencies of any condition, genetically influenced
or not, tend to occur more often in some groups of related ani-
mals than others. Males, however, are usually housed sepa-
rately on farms and do not have close contact with other males
or females. This is especially true in artificial breeding studs.
In this investigation, the related lumpy jaw cases were fre-
quently on different farms or studs, many times being in other
states. Also, the time interval between occurrences generally
was long. With an average generation length in cattle of about
five years, a four-generation study would probably involve over
20 years. This would decrease or eliminate effects of a com-
mon environment even if all affected animals had been on the
same farm.
SUMMARY
Lumpy jaw accounted for death or disposal of 2.13 percent
of 16,249 males of the various beef and dairy breeds. A dis-
tinction into cases of soft-tissue or bone-type was not reported
in some instances. In a survey of 29,182 cows, 0.2 percent
were reported with the condition.
Frequencies among dairy bulls averaged 2.15 percent and
among beef bulls, 1.31 percent. These differences were not sig-
nificant, there being only 382 completed records of beef bulls.
Among dairy bulls, the frequency was seven times as great
among Guernseys as in the other breeds. The other breeds did
not differ significantly from each other. Among females, the
frequency of infection was three times higher in Guernseys than
in Holsteins.
There were many cases of related individuals with the con-
dition, frequently at different farms or studs, and with a num-
ber of years between time of contraction. The evidence of ge-
netic differences in susceptibility was convincing. It was not
possible to quantify the genetic portion of the variability, which
would doubtless necessitate designed experimentation.






Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The dairy breed associations have cooperated fully on in-
quiries concerning particular animals. The National Associa-
tion of Artificial Breeders sponsored and contributed partial
support toward the investigation since 1954. Original records
were contributed by herdsmen, managers, and owners of bulls
in natural service and artificial use in Canada and the United
States. Some 867 breeders in Ohio replied concerning their
milking herds. Other breeders replied to inquiries on individual
animals in this study. C. W. Brown, M. S. Herschler, Cyril
Moore, Phillip Moore, Ernest Petrie, M. Roberts, C. L. Ward,
Jr., and Dr. Earl Weaver made key contributions. Robert Thorn-
hill tabulated a large portion of bull pedigrees used to trace
family relationships. Other owners replied to specific inquiries
on selected animals. Photographs for the cover and Figure 2
were contributed by Dr. V. L. Tharp, Director of the Veterinary
Clinic, Ohio State University. Dr. D. R. Corey, Head of Vet-
erinary Pathology of the University of California School of
Veterinary Medicine contributed Figure 1. Thanks are ex-
tended to all persons and organizations who cooperated with
any part of these studies.

LITERATURE CITED
1. Anonymous. Summary of activities. Meat Inspection Division. 1961.
USDA Agr. Research Service ARS-93-2-5. 1961.
2. Becker, R. B. Life span of bulls in A.I. Proceedings Natl. Assoc.
Artif. Breeders. 13th Ann. Cony., pages 77-84. August 24, 1960.
3. Becker, R. B., P. T. D. Arnold, and A. H. Spurlock. Productive life-
span of dairy cattle. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 540. 1954.
4. Becker, R. B., C. J. Wilcox, and W. R. Pritchard. Lumpy jaw: Is
lack of resistance hereditary? Jour. Animal Sci. 21: 969. 1962.
5. Bollinger, O. Ueber eine neue Pilzkrankheit beim Rinde. Centralbl.
f. d. med. Wiss. 15: 481-485. 1877.
6. Bosworth, T. J. The causal organism of bovine actinomycosis. Jour.
Comp. Path. and Ther. 36: 1-22. 1923.
7. Conant, N. F., D. M. Smith, R. D. Baker, J. L. Callaway, and D. S.
Martin. Manual of clinical mycology. 2nd ed. W. B. Saunders Com-
pany, Philadelphia. 1954.
8. Connaway, J. W. Actinomycosis (lumpy jaw, big jaw, and wooden
tongue) in cattle. Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 186. 1921.
9. Davis, G. 0., and H. L. Torrence. Observations regarding the etiology
of actinomycosis in cattle and swine. Jour. Comp. Path. and Ther.
43: 216-233. 1930.
10. Dawson, C. F. Lumpy jaw. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Press Bull. 26.
1902.
11. Frost, B. A study of the actinomyces in the mouths of normal cattle.
Thesis. Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 1940.
12. Gilmore, L. O., N. S. Fechheimer, and M. S. Herschler. Evidence for
inherited susceptibility to lumpy jaw. Jour. Animal Sci. 21: 972. 1962.






Actinomycosis and Actinobacillosis in Cattle


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The dairy breed associations have cooperated fully on in-
quiries concerning particular animals. The National Associa-
tion of Artificial Breeders sponsored and contributed partial
support toward the investigation since 1954. Original records
were contributed by herdsmen, managers, and owners of bulls
in natural service and artificial use in Canada and the United
States. Some 867 breeders in Ohio replied concerning their
milking herds. Other breeders replied to inquiries on individual
animals in this study. C. W. Brown, M. S. Herschler, Cyril
Moore, Phillip Moore, Ernest Petrie, M. Roberts, C. L. Ward,
Jr., and Dr. Earl Weaver made key contributions. Robert Thorn-
hill tabulated a large portion of bull pedigrees used to trace
family relationships. Other owners replied to specific inquiries
on selected animals. Photographs for the cover and Figure 2
were contributed by Dr. V. L. Tharp, Director of the Veterinary
Clinic, Ohio State University. Dr. D. R. Corey, Head of Vet-
erinary Pathology of the University of California School of
Veterinary Medicine contributed Figure 1. Thanks are ex-
tended to all persons and organizations who cooperated with
any part of these studies.

LITERATURE CITED
1. Anonymous. Summary of activities. Meat Inspection Division. 1961.
USDA Agr. Research Service ARS-93-2-5. 1961.
2. Becker, R. B. Life span of bulls in A.I. Proceedings Natl. Assoc.
Artif. Breeders. 13th Ann. Cony., pages 77-84. August 24, 1960.
3. Becker, R. B., P. T. D. Arnold, and A. H. Spurlock. Productive life-
span of dairy cattle. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 540. 1954.
4. Becker, R. B., C. J. Wilcox, and W. R. Pritchard. Lumpy jaw: Is
lack of resistance hereditary? Jour. Animal Sci. 21: 969. 1962.
5. Bollinger, O. Ueber eine neue Pilzkrankheit beim Rinde. Centralbl.
f. d. med. Wiss. 15: 481-485. 1877.
6. Bosworth, T. J. The causal organism of bovine actinomycosis. Jour.
Comp. Path. and Ther. 36: 1-22. 1923.
7. Conant, N. F., D. M. Smith, R. D. Baker, J. L. Callaway, and D. S.
Martin. Manual of clinical mycology. 2nd ed. W. B. Saunders Com-
pany, Philadelphia. 1954.
8. Connaway, J. W. Actinomycosis (lumpy jaw, big jaw, and wooden
tongue) in cattle. Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 186. 1921.
9. Davis, G. 0., and H. L. Torrence. Observations regarding the etiology
of actinomycosis in cattle and swine. Jour. Comp. Path. and Ther.
43: 216-233. 1930.
10. Dawson, C. F. Lumpy jaw. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Press Bull. 26.
1902.
11. Frost, B. A study of the actinomyces in the mouths of normal cattle.
Thesis. Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 1940.
12. Gilmore, L. O., N. S. Fechheimer, and M. S. Herschler. Evidence for
inherited susceptibility to lumpy jaw. Jour. Animal Sci. 21: 972. 1962.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


13. Griffith, F. On the pathology of bovine actinomycosis. A preliminary
report. Jour. Hygiene 15: 195-207. 1916.
14. Hagan, W. A., and D. W. Bruner. The infectious diseases of domestic
animals. 4th ed. Comstock Publ. Assoc., Ithaca, N. Y. 1961.
15. Herschler, M. S., N. S. Fechheimer, and L. O. Gilmore. Congenital
abnormalities in cattle: Their association with hereditary and environ-
mental factors. Jour. Dairy Sci. 45: 1493-1499. 1962.
16. Higgins, C. H. Report of the committee on diseases. Proc. Amer. Vet.
Med. Assoc. 131-134. 1904.
17. Huston, K., and S. Wearden. Congenital taillessness in cattle. Jour.
Dairy Sci. 41: 1359-1370. 1958.
18. Hutt, F. B. Genetic resistance to disease in domestic animals. Com-
stock Publ. Assoc., Ithaca, N. Y. 1958.
19. Israel, J. Neue Beobachtungen auf dem Gebeite der Mykosen des
Menschen. Arch. f. Path. Anat. Physiol. 74: 15-53. 1878.
20. Legates, J. E., and C. D. Grinnells. Genetic relationships in resistance
to mastitis in dairy cattle. Jour. Dairy Sci. 35: 829-833. 1952.
21. Lignieres, J., and G. Spitz. L'Actinobacillose. Rev. de la Soc. Med.
Argentina, 10: 5. 1902. Also Bull. Soc. Centr. Med. Vet. 20:487-
535. 1902.
22. Lush, J. L. Inheritance of susceptibility to mastitis. Jour. Dairy
Sci. 33: 121-125. 1950.
23. Merchant, I. A., and R. A. Packer. Veterinary bacteriology and virol-
ogy. Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa. 1958.
24. Mohler, J. R., and M. S. Shahan. Lumpy jaw or actinomycosis. USDA
Circ. 438. 1937.
25. Monlux, A. W., and C. L. Davis. Actinomycosis and actinobacillosis.
USDA Yearbook of Agriculture. Animal Diseases, pages 265-268.
1956.
26. Nocard, M. E. Note sur la maladie des boeufs de la Guadelope. Ann.
Inst. Pasteur 2: 293-302. 1888.
27. Salmon, D. E. Report upon investigation relating to the treatment
of lumpy jaw or actinomycosis. USDA Bur. Animal Industry Bull 2.
1893.
28. Shahan, M. S., and C. L. Davis. The diagnosis of actinomycosis and
actinobacillosis. Amer. Jour. Vet. Research 3: 321-329. 1942.
29. Smith, H. A., and T. C. Jones. Veterinary pathology, pages 371-376.
1957. Revised edition, pages 409-414. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.
1961.
30. Snedecor, G. W. Statistical methods. 5th ed. Iowa State College
Press, Ames, Iowa. 1956.
31. Sutton, H. E. Genes, enzymes, and inherited diseases. Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, New York. 1961.
32. Thomassen, M. (Utrecht). Cited by Mohler and Shahan (24) USDA
Circ. 438. 1937.
33. Thompson, Luther. Actinobacillosis in cattle in the United States.
Jour. Infect. Dis. .52: 223-229. 1933.
34. Wolff, M., and J. Israel. Ueber Reincultur des Actinomyces and seine
Uebertragbarkeit auf Thiere. Virchow's Archiv. f. path. Anat. u.
Physiol. u. f. Klin. Med. 126: 11-59. 1891.
35. Woolf, B. The log likelihood ratio test (the G-test). Methods and
tables for tests of heterogeneity in contingency tables. Ann. Hum.
Genet. (London). 21: 397-409. 1957.
36. Wright, J. N. The biology of the micro-organisms of actinomyces.
Jour. Med. Research n.s. 8: 349-404. 1905.
7




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs