Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T02:42:16.853Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Monitoring major mastitis pathogens at the population level based on examination of bulk tank milk samples

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Dusan Rysanek ,
Monika Zouharova  and
Vladimir Babak
Dusan Rysanek*
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00Brno, Czech Republic
Monika Zouharova
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00Brno, Czech Republic
Vladimir Babak
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00Brno, Czech Republic
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: rysanek@vri.cz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective was to determine the proportions and bacterial counts of major mastitis pathogens in samples of bulk tank milk (BTM), as well as to clarify the relationship between these bacteria counts and bulk tank somatic cell count (BTSCC). The purpose was to judge the importance of the counts of mammary pathogens for BTSCC at the population level. Samples of BTM were collected from 268 randomly selected anonymous dairy herds (with approximately 29 000 dairy cows). Staphylococcus aureus, other coagulase-positive staphylococci, Streptococcus agalactiae and Streptococcus dysgalactiae were grouped as contagious pathogens, and Streptococcus uberis, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium as environmental pathogens. Based on assessment of the dominant pathogen in each herd, environmental pathogens were found to dominate. Counts of specific mammary pathogens in BTM samples did not exceed a geometric mean of 1000 cfu/ml. Significant differences were documented in BTSCC between BTM samples containing Str. agalactiae, Staph. aureus, and Str. dysgalactiae and BTM samples that were pathogen-free. Geometric means of BTSCC associated with these pathogens were noticeably higher than the overall BTSCC (Str. agalactiae 243 628; Staph. aureus 205 610; Str. dysgalactiae 203 978; overall 173 000 cells/ml). It follows that the somatic cell count (SCC) associated with these pathogens contributed substantially to the overall BTSCC. Environmental pathogens predominated in samples of BTM with SCC <300×103/ml and contagious mastitis pathogens predominated in BTM samples with SCC >300×103/ml. No correlation was detected between bacterial counts of specific pathogens and BTSCC. This study revealed that the assessment of bacterial counts of mammary pathogens in samples of BTM in relation to BTSCC is applicable for the monitoring of changes in the occurrence of major mastitis pathogens in dairy herds at a national level.

Keywords

Bulk tank milk samplemammary pathogen countsomatic cell count
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 76 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 117 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2009

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

Anonymous 2006 National Mastitis Council: Using Bulk Tank Milk Cultures in a Dairy Practice. WI, USA. http://www.nmconline.org/bulktank.htm. Accessed 24 August 2008Google Scholar
Barkema, HW, Schukken, YH, Lam, TJ, Beiboer, ML, Wilmink, H, Benedictus, G & Brand, A 1998 Incidence of clinical mastitis in dairy herds grouped in three categories by bulk milk somatic cell counts. Journal of Dairy Science 81 411–419Google Scholar
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1662/2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin. 6 November 2006. 10 pp.Google Scholar
Czech-Moravian Society of Stock Breeders 2007 Cattle breeding in the Czech Republic in year 2006. 99 pp. http://www.cmsch.cz/docs/celek_skot_2007.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2008Google Scholar
Czech Statistical Office 2007 Results of cattle breeding in second half year 2006, 1 p. http://www.czso.cz/csu/2006edicniplan.nsf/p/2122-06. Accessed 20 February 2008Google Scholar
EUROPEAN STANDARD (EN ISO 707) 1997 Milk and milk products – Guidance on sampling. 41 pp.Google Scholar
EUROPEAN STANDARD (EN ISO 6888-1) 1999 Microbiology of Food and Animal Feeding Stuffs-Horizontal Method for the Enumeration of Coagulase-Positive Staphylococci (Staphylococcus aureus and other species): Part 1. Technique Using Baird-Parker Agar Medium. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva. 16 pp.Google Scholar
EUROPEAN STANDARD (EN ISO 13366-2) 2006 Milk – Enumeration of somatic cells – Part 2: Guidance on the operation of fluoro-opto-electronic counters. 13 pp.Google Scholar
Farnsworth, RJ 1993 Microbiologic examination of bulk tank milk. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 9 469–474Google Scholar
FDA 2001 US Department of Health and Human Services; US Food and Drug Administration; Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition: Grade ‘A’ Pasteurized Milk Ordinance 2001 Revision May 15, 2002, Section 6. The Examination of Milk and Milk ProductsGoogle Scholar
Fenlon, DR, Logue, DN, Gunn, J & Wilson, J 1995 A study of mastitis bacteria and herd management practices to identify their relationship to high somatic cell counts in bulk tank milk. British Veterinary Journal 151 17–25Google Scholar
Fox, LK & Gay, JM 1993 Contagious mastitis. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 9 475–487Google Scholar
Gonzalez, RN, Jasper, DE, Bushnell, RB & Farver, TB 1986 Relationship between mastitis pathogen numbers in bulk tank milk and bovine udder infections in California dairy herds. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 189 442–445Google Scholar
Harmon, RJ 1994 Physiology of mastitis and factors affecting somatic cell counts. Journal of Dairy Science 77 2103–2112Google Scholar
Hayes, MC, Ralyea, RD, Murphy, SC, Carey, NR, Scarlett, JM & Boor, KJ 2001 Identification and characterization of elevated microbial counts in bulk tank raw milk. Journal of Dairy Science 84 292–298CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holm, C, Jepsen, L, Larsen, M & Jespersen, L 2004 Predominant microflora of downgraded Danish bulk tank milk. Journal of Dairy Science 87 1151–1157Google Scholar
Howard, P 2006 Mastitis pathogens present in bulk tank milk from seven dairy herds in the Waikato region, New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 54 1–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jayarao, BM & Wolfgang, DR 2003 Bulk-tank milk analysis. A useful tool for improving milk quality and herd udder health. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 19 75–92Google ScholarPubMed
Jayarao, BM, Pillai, SR, Sawant, AA, Wolfgang, DR & Hegde, NV 2004 Guidelines for monitoring bulk tank milk somatic cell and bacterial counts. Journal of Dairy Science 87 3561–3573CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lukas, JM, Hawkins, DM, Kinsel, ML & Reneau, JK 2005 Bulk tank somatic cell counts analysed by statistical process control tools to identify and monitor subclinical mastitis incidence. Journal of Dairy Science 88 3944–3952Google Scholar
McDougall, S 2003 Management factors associated with the incidence of clinical mastitis over the non-lactation period and bulk tank somatic cell count during the subsequent lactation. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 51 63–72Google Scholar
Murphy, SC & Boor, KJ 2008 Sources and cases of high bacteria counts in raw milk: An abbreviated review. 6 p. http://www.extension.org/pages/Sources_and_Causes_of_High_Bacteria_Counts_in_Raw_Milk:_An_Abbreviated_Review. Accessed 24 August 2008Google Scholar
Niza-Ribeiro, J, Noordhuizen, JP & Menezes, JC 2004 Capability index – a statistical process control tool to aid in udder health control in dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 87 2459–2467CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olde Riekerink, RG, Barkema, HW, Veenstra, S, Poole, DE, Dingwell, RT & Keefe, GP 2006 Prevalence of contagious mastitis pathogens in bulk tank milk in Prince Edward Island. Canadian Veterinary Journal 47 567–572Google ScholarPubMed
Pritchard, DE 2004 Monitoring Bulk Tank Milk. 2 p. http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/an_sci/extension/dairy/newsletters/1004nlet.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2008Google Scholar
Rysanek, D, Babak, V & Zouharova, M 2007 Bulk tank milk somatic cell count and sources of raw milk contamination with mastitis pathogens. Veterinarni Medicina 52 223–230. http://www.vri.cz/docs/vetmed/52-6-223.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2008Google Scholar
Sawant, AA, Pillai, SR & Jayarao, BM 2002 Evaluation of five selective media for isolation of catalase-negative Gram-positive cocci from bulk tank milk. Journal of Dairy Science 85 1127–1132Google Scholar
Schukken, YH, Wilson, DJ, Welcome, F, Garrison-Tikofsky, L & Gonzales, RN 2003 Monitoring udder health and milk quality using somatic cell counts. Veterinary Research 34 579–596CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zadoks, RN, Gonzalez, RN, Boor, KJ & Schukken, YH 2004 Mastitis-causing streptococci are important contributors to bacterial counts in raw bulk tank milk. Journal of Food Protection 67 2644–2650Google Scholar