Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:36:31.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relationship between the number of mastitis pathogens placed on the teats of dry cows, their survival, and the amount of intramammary infection caused

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

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

Summary

When the teats of dry cows were dipped in a culture containing 3–25 × 106 mastitis organisms/ml only 25% of 71 quarters acquired an intramammary infection. Small numbers of organisms applied to teats caused negligible infection. The degree of contamination also determined the survival of the organisms on the exterior of teats, which was much greater at the teat apex than on the body of the teat.

There was no evidence that swabbing the teat apex increased the chance of intramammary infection. Washing the udder of infected cows with a disinfectant increased the chance of recovering the organisms from the teat skin.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , February 1962 , pp. 79 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1962

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

Garvie, E. I., Higgs, T. M. & Neave, F. K. (1961). J. Path. Bact. 81, 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1959). Bulletin, no. 177, p. 104. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
National Institute for Research in Dairying (1957). Annu. Rep. p. 27.Google Scholar
Neave, F. K., Dodd, F. H. & Henriques, E. (1950). J. Dairy Res. 17, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neave, F. K., Higgs, T. M., Simpkin, D., Oliver, J. & Dodd, F. H. (1954). J. Dairy Res. 21, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neave, F. K., Sharpe, M. E. & Oliver, J. (1962). In preparation.Google Scholar
Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1956 a). J. Dairy Res. 23, 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1956 b). J. Dairy Res. 23, 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1956 c). J. Dairy Res. 23, 204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, J., Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1956 d). J. Dairy Res. 23, 212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venzke, C. E. (1940). J. Amer. vet. med. Ass. 96, 170.Google Scholar