Impacto económico en los sistemas de producción de=
l cantón El Pangui, por la incidencia de leptospira Marcelo Eduardo Moscoso Gómez. [1], =
Diana
Elizabeth Loroña Alarcón. [2=
]
& Siza Amaguay Martha
Yolanda. [3] <=
/span>
Received: 10-02-2020 / Revised: 15-03-2020
/Acepted: 04-04-2020/ Published: 08-05-2020
Abstract. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33262/concienciadigita=
l.v3i2.1.1226
Leptospiros=
is
caused by bacteria is a disease that affects bovine production and can also
impact humans due to the zoonotic nature of its causative agent. In bovine
production, leptospirosis causes a high economic impact, which is one of the
main agents that cause abortions, fetal reabsorption, infertility, weak
neonates and decreased milk production. To corroborate the aforementioned, =
the
study was carried out in the south of the Ecuadorian Amazon, in the parishe=
s:
Tundayme, El Güismi, El Pangui and Pachicutza of the canton El Pangui, prov=
ince
of Zamora Chinchipe, Ecuador, located at 820 meters above sea level, with a=
sample
of 213 bovine females older than 2 years of age, not vaccinated against
leptospirosis. Once the study is completed, it can be concluded that 12.21%=
of
leptospirosis is found in the canton of El Pangui for bovine females of
reproductive age; the incidence being relatively low, compared to other
studies. In the financial analysis projected to 7 years of productive activ=
ity
of dual purpose cows, the financial profitability indicators TIR, VAN, B / C
were positive, as long as good sanitary practices are carried out and the
animals are not affected by any reproductive disease such as this is the ca=
se
of leptospirosis. The economic
impact of leptospirosis on the producer's family economy is evident in the
generation of abortions, with which the approximate value of $ 300 per year=
is
lost by the offspring, there is a loss in milk production and, in addition,=
the
sick animal can be transform into a contagious focus of infection for the
entire bovine and human population, assuming greater losses in the squalid =
peasant
economy.
Keywords:
Leptospirosis, cattle, produc=
tion
costs, economic impact
Resumen.
La leptospirosis causada por una bacteria, es una
enfermedad que afecta a la producción bovina y también puede impactar al ser
humano por el carácter zoonótico de su agente causal. En la producción bovi=
na, la
leptospirosis origina un alto impacto económico ya que es uno de los
principales agentes que provocan abortos, reabsorciones fetales, infertilid=
ad,
neonatos débiles y disminución de la producción de leche. Para corroborar lo
antes mencionado, se realizó el estudio al sur de la Amazonía ecuatoriana, =
en
las parroquias: Tundayme, El Güismi, El Pangui y Pachicutza del cantón El
Pangui, provincia de Zamora Chinchipe, Ecuador, ubicada a 820 msnm., con una
muestra de 213 hembras bovinas mayores de 2 años de edad, no vacunadas cont=
ra
leptospirosis. Una vez culminado =
el
estudio se puede concluir que, en el cantón El Pangui se registró el 12,21%=
de
leptospirosis para hembras bovinas en edad reproductiva; siendo la incidenc=
ia
relativamente baja, en comparación a otros estudios. En
el análisis financiero proyectado a 7 años de actividad productiva de vacas
doble propósito, resultaron positivos los indicadores de rentabilidad
financiera TIR, VAN, B/C, siempre y cuando se realice buenas prácticas
sanitarias y los animales no sean afectados por alguna enfermedad reproduct=
iva
como es el caso de leptospirosis. El impacto económico de la leptospirosis =
en
la economía familiar del productor está evidenciado en la generación de
abortos, con lo cual se pierde el valor aproximado de 300 dólares anuales p=
or
las crías, existe pérdida en la producción lechera y, además el animal enfe=
rmo se
puede transformar en un foco de infección contagiosa para toda la población
bovina y humana, asumiendo mayores pérdidas en la escuálida economía campes=
ina.
Palabras claves: Leptospirosis, bovinos, costos de producción, imp=
acto
económico
Introduction.
The leptospirosis is an
infectious disease caused by certain pathogens of the
genus Leptospira (OIE, 2014); It produces a high economic im=
pact
in the cattle activity since it is one of the main agents causing abortions
(Cantón et. al., 2014), fetal reabsorption, infertility, weak hatchlin=
gs
and decreased milk production. Furthermore, its diagnosis is essential=
to
differentiate this pathology from other reproductive diseases that affect t=
he
herd ( Rodríguez & Ramírez, 2011 =
;).
The pathology is caused by a
spirochete; there are more than 250 pathogenic serovars =
;for
its antigenic differences, so that each serovar has a typical antigenic
shape. The main sign of the disease is the loss of gestation,
a complex and multicausal phenomenon that is only diagn=
osed
in 25 to 40% of cases; In addition 90% of cases are of infectious origin (M=
eléndez,
et al., 2010). The disease has a worldwide distribution; appears with a
higher incidence in the subtropical regions of humid climate, the transmiss=
ion
of the disease increases in rainy periods (WHO, 2008).
Reproductive illnesses are among the m=
ost
important causes of economic losses in the livestock industry, due to the c=
ost
of treatments, veterinary services, and decreased production (Caravaca, et =
al.,
2003). In Ecuadorian livestock among the most impactful bovine diseases
that have been diagnosed are brucellosis and leptospirosis, which=
are
more relevant because they are transmissible to the human being. (Benítez,
2011).
On the other hand, this pathology woul=
d be
transmitted to the human through manipulation of body fluids from infected
cows, transforming it into a zoonotic disease. Hence, it is =
of
crucial importance to know its incidence in order to take preventive
measures in the management of bovine spike in general.
Methodology
The study was realized south of
the Amazon Ecuador, in parishes: Tundayme, El Güismi&nb=
sp;,
El Pangui and Pachicutza of Pangui’s canton, Zamo=
ra
Chinchipe province in Ecuador, located at 820 meters above sea level.
Sample Size.
It required 213 female bovines over 2
years of age, selected by a two-stage sampling. The first stage consisted of
the random selection of clusters represented by the farms (primary sampling
units), proportionally to the number in each parish,
the sampling frame consisted of the list of bovine holdings;=
while
the secondary sampling units were the bovine females selected according to =
the
inclusion criteria, randomly and according to the size of the holding (not =
less
than 25% of the animals of interest) (Ron 2012, cited by Díaz and Lami=
ña,
2013). The inclusion criteria for the selection of animals within the
study were as follows: bovine females older than two years of age, not
vaccinated against leptospirosis, who did not receive antibi=
otic
treatment in the last month with reference to the date of sample =
collection,
without race breed.
Analyzed variables
After analyzing the samples, the
prevalence of the test was calculated using the mathematical expression
of ( Ahlbom and Norell , 1992 ) :=
P (%) =3D (N° of seropositive sera /N° of sampled =
sera)
x 100
To determine the unit cost of producti=
on
of each lactating cow (cow in milk production and with normal reproductive =
activity),
descriptive statistic was used to process the data collected in each of the
production units; and the costs were determined in each item, during a
year of exercise for each cow. Subsequently, the total investments in 7
years of productive life of a bovine mother were established, as well as the
potential income it would produce in that period (calves and milk), in orde=
r to
compare the projected costs, projected revenues and establish the indicator=
s:
NPV, IRR and B / C.
Results
In El Pangui canto=
n ,
12.21% of leptospirosis was registered for bovine femal=
es
of reproductive age (Table 1 ) ; the incidence is relatively low, compared to
the studies by Román F & Chávez R & Luna J. 2014 , which
obtained 75% , and Albarracin C., 201 1, found
48.10% of infected bovine in Loja . This result shows a lower
level, reports from the year 2006 in
the Gualaquiza canton of the Morona Santiago
province ( 36.77% ) , probably due to maintenance hosts=
, the
realized period of time, and the number of serovars analyzed in t=
he
laboratory ( Pillacela , 2006 )
Table 1. Prevalence of bovine leptospirosis in El Pangui
canton
|
Parishes |
Negative |
Positive |
Total |
||
|
Number |
% |
Number |
% |
||
|
El Guismi |
45 |
21,13 |
8 |
3,76 |
53 |
|
El Pangui |
60 |
28,17 |
6 |
2,82 |
66 |
|
Pachicutza |
63 |
29,58 |
7 |
3,29 |
70 |
|
Tundayme |
19 |
8,92 |
5 |
2,35 |
24 |
|
Total general |
187 |
87,79 |
26 |
12,21 |
213 |
=
So=
urce: Own elaboration
Economic Analysis
In Table 2, the breakdown of
production costs to maintain a lactating bovine female in a total of 7 year=
s of
reproductive useful life can be seen; the same that on average would have 6
live and weaned calves. The first year due to the initial investment
requires approximately $ 1,009, to stabilize from the second at $ 210 / yea=
r /
cow.
Table 2. Unit cost of production for an adult lactating bovine=
in 7
years of reproductive life in the El Pangui canton, in US
dollars.
|
Detalle |
Year 0 |
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Year 4 |
Year 5 |
Year 6 |
Year 7 |
|
Bovine acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bovine female value |
800,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
0,00 |
|
Rope |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
18,00 |
|
halter includ chain |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
20,00 |
|
Hose |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
11,36 |
|
Workforce |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy
salary |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
90,75 |
|
Feeding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
34,28 |
|
Treacle |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
1,89 |
|
Mineral salts |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
2,43 |
|
Medicines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FMD vaccine |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
1,20 |
|
Rabies vaccine |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
|
Anthax vaccine |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
1,00 |
|
External dewormer x 3 applications |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
5,16 |
|
Internal dewormer x 1 aplicación |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
0,86 |
|
Vitamin x 1 application |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
0,68 |
|
Antibiotic Products |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
6,00 |
|
Healing / slaughterhouse |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
3,00 |
|
Other costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corral managment
sleeve |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
7,14 |
|
Chainsaw |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
1,14 |
|
Motor-scythe |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
2,85 |
|
Machetes |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
0,28 |
|
Horse (means of transport) |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
0,85 |
|
Total Costs |
1.009,87<= o:p> |
209,87 |
209,87 |
209,87 |
209,87 |
209,87 |
209,87 |
209,87 |
=
So=
urce: Own elaboration
Table 3 expresses the incomes projected that
would be obtained during the production of a cow raised in
Canton The Pangui; From the second year they initiate the
childbirth with 90 days of production and 2 liters of milk on average,
which would indicate 180 liters in their first lactation; later in the=
third year the projected production wo=
uld
stabilize at 610 liters for 305 days of production per
lactation; in addition, in the sector milk is delivered at a rate=
of
60 cents per liter at farm level. For this analysis, the production of
approximately 1 calf per year was also counted; the same that weaned c=
an
cost 300 US dollars on the market. With this antecedent, revenue =
in
the productive dynamics of a healthy cow in El Pangui; they =
are between
483 and 741 dollars per year.
Table 3. Income for an adult lactating bovine in 7 years of reproducti=
ve
useful life in the El Pangui canton , in US
dollars
|
Detail |
Year 0 |
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Year 4 |
Year 5 |
Year 6 |
Year 7 |
|
Milk production (lt/lactation) |
0,00 |
0,00 |
108,0 |
366,0 |
366,0 |
366,0 |
366,0 |
366,0 |
|
Breeding production at weaning |
0,00 |
0,00 |
300,0 |
300,0 |
300,0 |
300,0 |
300,0 |
300,0 |
|
Amortization for discard cow |
0,00 |
0,00 |
75,0 |
75,0 |
75,0 |
75,0 |
75,0 |
75,0 |
|
Total income |
0,00 |
0,00 |
483,0 |
741,0 |
741,0 |
741,0 |
741,0 |
741,0 |
So=
urce: =
Own elaboration.
For the financial projection (tab=
le
4) an update factor of 11% was used, which is the average rate in
Ecuador's financial dynamics; there being appreciated an updated clear
revenue for 615,95 American dollars in 7 years of economic exercise. In
reference to the cost benefit was 1.31, which would indicate a profit of 31
cents for each monetary unit invested, the net present value (NPV) was loca=
ted
at $ 2,822.92, while the internal rate of return was 22
6%, that is, 11.6% more than that determined in the country's financial
market (figure 1), which would express great potential for the production of
cattle in a sector as remote as El Pangui.
Table 4=
. Financial projection for an adu=
lt
lactating bovine in 7 years of reproductive life in the canton El =
;Pangui ,
in US dollars
|
Years |
Update Fa=
ctor |
Updated Income |
Updated C=
osts |
Updated N=
et
income |
|
|
0 |
1,000 |
- |
1.009,87<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> |
-
1.009,87 |
|
|
1 |
0,901 |
- |
189,07 |
- 189,07<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> |
|
|
2 |
0,812 |
392,01 |
170,34 |
221,68 |
|
|
3 |
0,731 |
541,81 |
153,46 |
388,36 |
|
|
4 |
0,659 |
488,12 |
138,25 |
349,87 |
|
|
5 |
0,593 |
439,75 |
124,55 |
315,20 |
|
|
6 |
0,535 |
396,17 |
112,21 |
283,96 |
|
|
7 |
0,482 |
356,91 |
101,09 |
255,82 |
|
|
Total |
2.614,77<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> |
1.998,82<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> |
615,95 |
Source:
Own elaboration
Figure 1. Comparison of the referential financial rate with =
the
IRR in bovine production of Pangui
Source: Own elaboration.=
If we consider the financial anal=
ysis
we could indicate with certainty that bovine production in El Pan=
gui is
very important, and could energizer the peasant family economy, as lon=
g as
they remain exemplary in good health, free of infectious diseases suc=
h as
the leptospirosis , and with adequate nutrition .
Otherwise, if the contaminated area is
maintained without a good prophylactic program, the economic and social
impact will be very significant. In the first case the presence
of this pathology , causes abortions occur, weak or dead
neonates (mummified); leading on the one hand to the
loss of $ 300 annually per concept of the young and on
the other hand would not be available from milk production,
although this is relatively low compared to dairy breeds, but if =
strongly
influences the family economy; On the other hand, socially t=
he
limitation is presented to be able to offer zootechnical products=
, as
well as the disease can become a focus of contagious infection for
the entire bovine population, and its surroundings , as for =
the
humans since this disease is zoonotic,
it can be transmissible , entering a serious global health problem.
Conclusions.
·
In El Pangu=
i canton,
12.21% of leptospirosis was registered for bovine females of
reproductive age; the incidence being relatively low, compared
to other studies.
· =
The production c=
ost
for keeping a bovine female infant in a total of 7 years of reproductive sh=
elf
life, the same as on average would have 6 live and weaned calves, is: in the
first year $1,009, due to the initial investments and from the second year
$210/year/cow.
· =
In the financial anal=
ysis
projected to 7 years of productive activity of dual - purpose cows , the financial p=
rofitability
indicators IRR, NPV, B / C were positive, as long as good sanitar=
y practices
are carried out and animals are not relevant affected by any reproductive
disease as is the case of leptospirosis.
·
The economic
impact of leptospirosis on the producer's family economy is
evidenced by generation of abortions, with which the approximate value of $=
300
per year is lost by the producer, there is also
a loss in milk production and, in addition the sick ani=
mal
would become a focus of contagious infection for the entire bovine populati=
on,
having greater economic losses.
Bibliographic references
Ahlbom
A & Norell S. 1992. Fundamentos de epidemiología. Madrid: Siglo XXI,
1987:VIII-IX. A, clínica e a epidemiologia. Salvador de Bahía: Apce-Abrasco.
26. Disponible en https://books.google.com.ec
Benítez, J., 2011 Evaluación de la
incidencia de brucelosis bovina e las haciendas “ElPrado” y “Aycha picho”,
localizadas en laprovincia de Pichincha-Ecuador, mediante aplicación de
técnicas inmuno diagnósticas. Tesis Médico Veterinario. Recuperado desde
http://dspace.udla.edu.ec/handle/123456789/667
Cantón, G, et al., 2014. Alta incidenc=
ia
de Leptospira interrogans en la casuística de abortos bovinos registrados
durante 2013-2014 en INTA EEA Balcarce. Reunión Científico Técnica de La AA=
VLD.
San Miguel de Tucumán. AR. Recuperado desde http://www.cmva.com.ar/Leptospita=
.pdf
Caravaca, F. Castel JM. y otros (2003 –
2005) “Bases de la Producción Animal” primera edición 2003 y primera
reimpresión 2005 Secretariado de publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla
pág. 147 Fertilidad.
Díaz,
R., & Lamiña, O. (2013). Determinación de la Seroprevalencia y Análisis=
de
Factores de Riesgo de Brucelosis en Bovinos, en las Provincias de Zamora
Chinchipe, Loja y el Oro. Trabajo de grado. Universidad Central de Ecuador.
Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia. Quito, Ecuador.
OIE.
2004. Manual para el diagnóstico de la leptospirosis. Recuperado desde: http://int/eng/normes/mmanual/A_0=
0041.html. (10/10/2018).
Organización
Mundial de la Salud. (2008). Guía para el diagnóstico y control de la
leptospirosis humana. Brasil: Centro Panamericano de Fiebre Aftosa. Recuper=
ado
desde:https://iris.paho.org/bitstream/handle/10665.2/51096/01016970N12_spa.=
pdf?sequence=3D1&isAllowed=3Dy
Pillacela,
A, 2006. Prevalencia de la leptospirosis bovina en el cantón Gualaquiza,
provincia de Morona Santiago. Tesis de pregrado. Universidad Nacional de Lo=
ja.
Rodríguez, P.H., & Ramírez, A.
P. G. (2011). Leptospirosis: una zoonosis que afecta a la salud públ=
ica y
la producción pecuaria. Revista Ciencia Animal.
Recuperado desde: http://revistas.lasalle.edu.co/index.php/ca/article/view/=
313
Román
F & Chávez R & Luna J. 2014- Determinación de anticuerpos leptospir=
ales
en bovinos y en personal vinculado a la ganadería. Centro de
Biotecnología.2014; 3(1): Recuperado desde:
http://unl.edu.ec/sites/default/files/investigación/revistas/2014-12-1/bio_=
art2.pdf
PARA CITAR EL ARTÍCULO
INDEXADO.
Moscoso Gómez,=
M.
E., Loroña Alarcón, D. E., & Martha Yolanda, S. A. (2020). Impacto
económico en los sistemas de producción del cantón El Pangui, por la incide=
ncia
de leptospira. ConcienciaDigital, 3(2.1), 122-131. https://doi.org/10.33262/concienciadigital.v3i2.1.1226
El
artículo que se publica es de exclusiva responsabilidad de los autores y no
necesariamente reflejan el pensamiento de la Revista Conciencia Digital.
El
artículo queda en propiedad de la revista y, por tanto, su publicación parc=
ial
y/o total en otro medio tiene que ser autorizado por el director de la Revista Conciencia Digital.
[1]
Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo, Facultad de Ciencias
Pecuarias. Riobamba, Ecuador. marcelo.moscoso@espoch.edu.ec
[2] Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo, Facul=
tad
de Ciencias Pecuarias. Riobamba, Ecuador. diana.lorona@espoch.edu.ec=
[3] Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo, Facultad de Ciencias Pecuarias. Riobamba, Ecuador. martha.siza@espoch.edu.ec
www.concienciadigital.org