Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T12:04:44.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

626. Udder infections in the ‘dry period’: IV. The relationship between the new infection rate in the early dry period and the daily milk yield at drying-off when lactation was ended by either intermittent or abrupt cessation of milking

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

J. Oliver ,
F. H. Dodd  and
F. K. Neave
J. Oliver
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
F. H. Dodd
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
F. K. Neave
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Records were collected from a herd where many cows were producing relatively high daily yields of milk at the time of drying-off. Animals giving 7 lb. of milk or less daily were dried off by intermittent milking, and those giving over 7 lb. daily were dried off by ‘stop’ milking. The data from 113 dry periods were analysed so that a comparison could be made of the new infection rate in the early dry period according to level of production at drying-off.

2. The new dry-period infection rate was found to increase with yield at drying-off. This was not due to age differences between the groups of cows.

3. The rise in total infection rate with yield was due mainly to an increase in Str. agalactiae infections.

4. A high proportion of clinical quarters were detected in the dry period by the cowmen.

5. The yield in the lactation following the dry period studied was not related to yield at drying-off.

6. New dry-period infections were significantly (P <0·01) more numerous in quarters of cows that had been hand-stripped during lactation compared with quarters of machinestripped cows.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , June 1956 , pp. 204 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1956

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

(1)Neave, F. K., Dodd, F. H. & Henriques, E. (1950). J. Dairy Res. 17, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1956). J. Dairy Res. 23, 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Neave, F. K., Higgs, T. M., Simpkin, D., Oliver, J. & Dodd, F. H. (1954). J. Dairy Res. 21, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H., Neave, F. K. & Bailey, G. L. (1956). J. Dairy Res. 23, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Wayne, R., Eckles, C. H. & Petersen, W. E. (1933). J. Dairy Sci. 16, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Wayne, R. & Macy, H. (1933). J. Dairy Sci. 16, 79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Steyn, H. P. (1940). J. S. Afr. vet. med. Ass. 11, 123.Google Scholar
(8)Espe, D. & Smith, V. R. (1952). Secretion of Milk, p. 263. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press.Google Scholar
(9)Motion, J. H. (1933). N.Z. Dairy Exptr. 8, 3.Google Scholar
(10)Rose, V. T. (1943). Vet. Med. 38, 14.Google Scholar
(11)Munch-Petersen, E., Murnane, D. & Bull, L. B. (1940). Bull. Coun. sci. industr. Res. Aust. 134, 22.Google Scholar
(12)Johnson, S. D. (1941). Cornell Vet. 31, 127.Google Scholar
(13)Chodkowski, A. (1949). J. comp. Path. 59, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(14)Taylor, J. I. (1949). Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
(15)Crossman, J. V., Dodd, F. H., Lee, J. M. & Neave, F. K. (1950). J. Dairy Res. 17, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16)Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1951). J. Dairy Res. 18, 240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(17)Dodd, F. H. & Foot, A. S. (1953). J. Dairy Res. 20, 138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar