Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T10:13:38.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of milk flow rate on new intramammary infection in dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

Robert J. Grindal  and
J. Eric Hillerton
Robert J. Grindal
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute for Animal Health, Compton Laboratory, Compton, Newsbury RG16 0NN, UK
J. Eric Hillerton
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute for Animal Health, Compton Laboratory, Compton, Newsbury RG16 0NN, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In a series of short-term experiments cows were subjected to exaggerated bacterial challenge and accentuated milking machine conditions known to predispose to new mammary infection. The incidence of new intramammary infection was significantly greater in quarters with peak flow rates > 1·6 kg/min whether they were exposed to impacts (P < 0·05) or milking without pulsation (P <0·001). The infection rates were much lower (P < 0·001) in quarters milked with ‘pulsation and shields’ to protect against these two machine factors. Despite this, quarters with peak flow > 1·6 kg/min still showed a 12-fold increase in mastitis incidence compared with quarters with peak flow < 0·8 kg/min. Rates of milk flow have increased dramatically in the last 40 years through selection and breeding: whole udder peak flow rates in heifers have doubled from 1·9 to 3·8 kg/min. Increased emphasis, therefore, should be placed on hygiene, husbandry and milking techniques to minimize bacterial numbers at teat ends to control mastitis as the drive for higher flow rate and yield make cows increasingly more susceptible to infection. These results suggest that the benefits of reduced infection rate from mastitis control are significantly underestimated since animals are now considerably more susceptible than 40 years ago.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , August 1991 , pp. 263 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1991

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Baxter, E. S., Clarke, P. M., Dodd, F. H. & Foot, A. S. 1950 Factors affecting the rate of machine milking. Journal of Dairy Research 17 117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramley, A. J., Griffin, T. K. & Grindal, R. J. 1978 Some investigations on the effect of continuous vacuum milking on new infection of the udder. Proceedings, Annual Meeting, National Mastitis Council pp. 291–300Google Scholar
Cousins, C. L., Thiel, C. C., Westgarth, D. R. & Higgs, T. M. 1973 Further short-term studies of the influence of the milking machine on the rate of new mastitis infections. Journal of Dairy Research 40 289–292CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. 1951 Machine milking rate and mastitis. Journal of Dairy Research 18 240–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, T. K., Bramley, A. J. & Dodd, F. H. 1980 Milking machine modifications in the control of bovine mastitis. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Machine Milking and Mastitis, Moorepark pp. 19–29 (Ed. O'Shea, J.) Moorepark, Fermoy: An Foras TalúntaisGoogle Scholar
Griffin, T. K., Grindal, R. J. & Bramley, A. J. 1988 A multi-valved milking machine cluster to control intramammary infection in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 55 155–169CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffin, T. K., Grindal, R. J., Williams, R. L., Neave, F. K. & Westgarth, D. R. 1982 Effect of the method of removal of the milking machine cluster on new udder infection. Journal of Dairy Research 49 361–367CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffin, T. K., Williams, R. L., Grindal, R. J., Neave, F. K. & Westgarth, D. R. 1983 Use of deflector shields to reduce intramammary infection by preventing impacts on the teat ends of cows during machine milking. Journal of Dairy Research 50 397–404CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hibbitt, K. G., Cole, C. B. & Reiter, B. 1969 Antimicrobial proteins isolated from the teat canal of the cow. Journal of General Microbiology 56 365–371Google Scholar
Jorstad, A., Farver, T. B. & Riemann, H. 1989 Teat canal diameter and other cow factors with possible influence on somatic cell counts in cow milk. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 30 239–245CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, R. B. 1937 Bovine mastitis. II. The production of mastitis by the suction of streptococci into the duct of the teat. Cornell Veterinarian 27 309–316Google Scholar
McEwen, A. D. & Cooper, M. B. 1947 Bovine mastitis. Veterinary Record 59 655–664Google ScholarPubMed
Murphy, J. M. 1944 The relationship of teat patency to udder infection. Cornell Veterinarian 34 64–68Google Scholar
Murphy, J. M. & Stuart, O. M. 1955 Teat canal length in the bovine and its relation to susceptibility to swab-induced infection with Streptococcus agalactiae. Cornell Veterinarian 45 112–122Google Scholar
Schultze, W. D. & Thompson, P. D. 1980 Intramammary coliform infection after heavy external contamination of teats. American Journal of Veterinary Research 41 1396–1401Google ScholarPubMed
Stuart, P. & Lancaster, J. E. 1949 Some factors which may be concerned in the susceptibility of the bovine udder to Str. agalactiae infection. Journal of Comparative Pathology 59 31–41CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thiel, C. C., Cousins, C. L., Westgarth, D. R. & Neave, F. K. 1973 The influence of some physical characteristics of the milking machine on the rate of new mastitis infections. Journal of Dairy Research 40 117–129CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed