Document Type : Original Article


1 DVM Graduate, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran‎

2 Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

3 Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran


Bovine digital dermatitis (BDD) is a contagious infectious disease which causes lameness in dairy cows. It has a multifactorial etiology which is not yet fully understood but Treponema spp. seem to play a significant role in development of BDD lesions. This study evaluated the presence of Treponema phylotypes commonly associated with BDD (T. medium/T. vincentii, T. phagedenis and T. putidum/T. denticola), in four farms different areas in Iran. Single biopsies were taken from 113 Holstein cows with active BDD lesions (scored according to size) on the farms and polymerase chain reaction assays used to detect 16S rRNA nucleotide fragments of three BDD Treponema phylotype groups: ‘‘T. medium/T. vincentii’’, ‘‘T. phagedenis’’ and ‘‘T. putidum/T. denticola’’ (now T. pedis). Over 95.00% of samples were positive for at least one of phylotypes, with 89.00%, 91.00 %, and 66.00% of samples were positive for T. putidum/T. denticola, T. phagedenis and T. medium/T. vincentii, respectively. Out of the 113 samples, 60.00% were positive for all three phylotypes, the detection of T. putidum/T. denticola was positively associated with detection of both T. phagedenis and T. medium/T. vincentii. No association between lesion size and phylotypes identified was found but there were significant differences between farms in the proportion of each phylotypes identified. Further research is required to establish the factors influencing the proportions of individual phylotypes, especially at the farm level.



    1. Evans NJ, Murray RD, Carter SD. Bovine digital dermatitis: Current concepts from laboratory to farm. Vet J 2016; 211: 3-13.
    2. Bruijnis MRN, Beerda B, Hogeveen H, et al. Assessing the welfare impact of foot disorders in dairy cattle by a modeling approach. Animal 2012; 6(6): 962-970.
    3. Cha E, Hertl JA, Bar D, et al. The cost of different types of lameness in dairy cows calculated by dynamic programming. Prev Vet Med 2010; 97(1): 1-8.
    4. Whillshire JA, Bell NJ. An economic review of cattle lameness. Cattle Pract 2009; 17(2): 136-141.
    5. Holzhauer M, Hardenberg C, Bartels CJM, et al. Herd- and cow-level prevalence of digital dermatitis in the Netherlands and associated risk factors. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89(2): 580-588.
    6. Yang DA, Heuer C, Laven R, et al. Farm and cow-level prevalence of bovine digital dermatitis on dairy farms in Taranaki, New Zealand. N Z Vet J 2017; 65(5): 252-256.
    7. Nowrouzin I. Digital Dermatitis; an unrecognised epidemic in dairies in Iran. In proceeding: British cattle veterinary association, Liverpool, UK 1991; 84-95.
    8. Nadi P, Azizzadeh M, Mohamadnia AR. Incidence of hoof lesions in dairy farms in Iran. In proceedings: The first regional conference on cow comfort and lameness, Tehran, Iran 2016; 126-127.
    9. Read DH, Walker, RL. Papillomatous digital dermatitis (footwarts) in California dairy cattle: clinical and gross pathologic findings. J Vet Diagn Invest 1998; 10(1): 67-76.
    10. Yano T, Moe KK, Yamazaki K, et al. Identification of candidate pathogens of papillomatous digital dermatitis in dairy cattle from quantitative 16S rRNA clonal analysis. Vet Microbiol 2010; 143(2-4): 352-362.
    11. Evans NJ, Brown JM, Demirkan I, et al. Three unique groups of spirochetes isolated from digital dermatitis lesions in UK cattle. Vet Microbiol 2008; 130(1-2): 141-150.
    12. Klitgaard K, Nielsen MW, Ingerslev HC, et al. Discovery of bovine digital dermatitis-associated Treponema spp. in the dairy herd environment by a targeted deep-sequencing approach. Appl Environ Microbiol 2014; 80(14): 4427-4432.
    13. Krull AC, Shearer JK, Gorden PJ, et al. Deep sequencing analysis reveals temporal microbiota changes associated with development of bovine digital dermatitis. Infect Immun 2014; 82(8): 3359-3373.
    14. Santos TM, Pereira RV, Caixeta LS, et al. Microbial diversity in bovine papillomatous digital dermatitis in Holstein dairy cows from upstate New York. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2012; 79(2): 518-529.
    15. Klitgaard K, Foix Bretó A, Boye M, et al. Targeting the
      treponemal microbiome of digital dermatitis infections by high-resolution phylogenetic analyses and comparison with fluorescent in situ J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51(7): 2212-2219.
    16. Nally JE, Hornsby RL, Alt DP, et al. Phenotypic and proteomic characterization of treponemes associated with bovine digital dermatitis. Vet Microbiol 2019; 235: 35-42.
    17. Brandt S, Apprich V, Hackl V, et al. Prevalence of bovine papillomavirus and Treponema DNA in bovine digital dermatitis lesions. Vet Microbiol 2011; 148(2-4): 161-167.
    18. Nordhoff M, Moter A, Schrank K, et al. High prevalence of treponemes in bovine digital dermatitis-a molecular epidemiology. Vet Microbiol 2008; 131(3-4): 293-300.
    19. Klitgaard K, Boye M, Capion N, et al. Evidence of multiple Treponema phylotypes involved in bovine digital dermatitis as shown by 16S rRNA gene analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46(9): 3012-3020.
    20. Beninger C, Naqvi SA, Naushad S, et al. Associations between digital dermatitis lesion grades in dairy cattle and the quantities of four Treponema species. Vet Res 2018; 49(1): 111. doi: 10.1186/s13567-018-0605-z.
    21. Zinicola M, Lima F, Lima S, et al. Altered microbiomes in bovine digital dermatitis lesions, and the gut as a pathogen reservoir. PLoS One 2015; 10(3): e0120504. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120504.
    22. Zuerner RL, Heidari M, Elliott MK, et al. Papillomatous digital dermatitis spirochetes suppress the bovine macrophage innate immune response. Vet Microbiol 2007; 125(3-4): 256-264.
    23. Elliott MK, Alt DP, Zuerner RL. Lesion formation and antibody response induced by papillomatous digital dermatitis-associated spirochetes in a murine abscess model. Infect Immun 2007; 75(9): 4400-4408.
    24. Döpfer D, Koopmans A, Meijer FA, et al. Histological and bacteriological evaluation of digital dermatitis in cattle, with special reference to spirochaetes and Campylobacter faecalis. Vet Rec 1997; 140(24):
    25. Berry SL, Read DH, Famula TR, et al. Long-term observations on the dynamics of bovine digital dermatitis lesions on a California dairy after topical treatment with lincomycin HCl. Vet J 2012; 193(3): 654-658.
    26. Hernandez J, Shearer JK. Efficacy of oxytetracycline for treatment of papillomatous digital dermatitis lesions on various anatomic locations in dairy cows. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000; 216(8):1288-1290.
    27. Evans NJ, Brown JM, Demirkan I, et al. Association of unique, isolated treponemes with bovine digital dermatitis lesions. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47(3):689-696.
    28. Alsaaod M, Locher I, Jores J, et al. Detection of specific Treponema species and Dichelobacter nodosus from digital dermatitis (Mortellaro's disease) lesions in Swiss cattle. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 2019; 161(4): 207-215.
    29. Nascimento LV, Mauerwerk MT, Dos Santos CL, et al. Treponemes detected in digital dermatitis lesions in Brazilian dairy cattle and possible host reservoirs of infection. J Clin Microbiol 2015; 53(6): 1935-1937.
    30. Döpfer D, Anklam K, Mikheil D, et al. Growth curves and morphology of three Treponema subtypes isolated from digital dermatitis in cattle. Vet J 2012; 193(3): 685-693.