Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T14:42:12.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variations in the susceptibility of lactating and non-lactating bovine udders to infection when infused with Escherichia coli

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

A. J. Bramley
A. J. Bramley
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading, RG2 9AT
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Small numbers of Escherichia coli were infused into both lactating and non-lactating udders. Twelve of the 17 lactating quarters infused became infected, and all 12 showed clinical symptoms of udder disease. The 5 lactating quarters which did not become infected all had pre-infusion somatic cell counts > 300000 cells/ml milk, whilst all the quarters which became infected had cell counts < 300000 cells/ml milk. E. coli was subsequently recovered from only 6 of the 16 non-lactating quarters infused. In only 2 of these quarters did clinical infection follow, both quarters being in a cow infused 2 d before calving. The remaining 4 quarters from which E. coli was recovered were all negative within 5 d of infusion. These differences in susceptibility are discussed, particularly with reference to the frequent occurrence of coliform mastitis at and shortly after calving.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , June 1976 , pp. 205 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1976

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

Bramley, A. J. & Neave, F. K. (1975). British Veterinary Journal 131, 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, E. J., Jain, N. C., Schalm, O. W. & Lasmanis, J. (1973). American Journal of Veterinary Research 34, 1143.Google Scholar
Dodd, F. H., Oliver, J. & Neave, F. K. (1957). Journal of Dairy Research 24, 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P. R. & Ewing, W. H. (1972). Identification of Enterobacteriaceae, 3rd edn.Minneapolis, Minn.: Burgess Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Gwatkin, R., LeGard, H. M. & Hadwen, S. (1938). Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine 2, 155.Google Scholar
Jasper, D. E. (1973). Proceedings Annual Meeting, National Mastitis Council, p. 59.Google Scholar
Murphy, J. M. & Hanson, J. J. (1943). Cornell Veterinarian 33, 61.Google Scholar
Reiter, B. & Bramley, A. J. (1975). Annual Bulletin International Dairy Federation, Doc. 85, p. 210.Google Scholar
Reiter, B. & Oram, J. D. (1967). Nature 216, 328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, M. & Reiter, B. (1972). Journal of General Microbiology 71, vi.Google Scholar
Schalm, O. W., Lasmanis, J. & Carroll, E. J. (1964 a). American Journal of Veterinary Research 25, 75.Google Scholar
Schalm, O. W., Lasmanis, J. & Carroll, E. J. (1964 b). American Journal of Veterinary Research 25, 83.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. L., Neave, F. K., Dodd, F. H. & Higgs, T. M. (1972). Journal of Dairy Research 39, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar