Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T19:18:20.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evidence of penetration of the bovine teat duct by Escherichia coli in the interval between milkings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

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

Summary

In 3 consecutive experiments, each using 20 cows, the application of Escherichia coli to teat ends after milking led to high rates of intramammary infection. These infections were not prevented by disinfection of the teats before milking, by the installation of shields in the short milk tubes of the milking cluster or by the use of an individual quarter milking cluster. Rates of infection were significantly lower when teat contamination was applied 1 h before milking compared to contamination applied immediately after milking.

These data suggest that penetration of the teat duct by the E. coli occurred in the period between contamination and milking. Seventy four percent of infections occurred in hindquarters and there were variations in the susceptibility of cows to infection.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , October 1981 , pp. 379 - 386
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1981

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

Bramley, A. J. (1974). Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Bramley, A. J., King, J. S., Higgs, T. M. & Neave, F. K. (1979). British Veterinary Journal 135, 149–162.Google Scholar
Bramley, A. J. & Neave, F. K. (1975). British Veterinary Journal 131, 160–169.Google Scholar
Cowan, S. T. (1974). Cowan & Steel's Manual for the identification of medical bacteria, 2nd Edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dodd, F. H. & Neave, F. K. (1970). Biennial Reviews, National Institute for Research in Dairying, pp. 21–60.Google Scholar
Espe, D. & Cannon, C. Y. (1942). Journal of Dairy Science 25, 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, T. K., Mein, G. A., Westgarth, D. R.,Neave, F. K., Thompson, W. H. & Maguire, P. D. (1980). Journal of Dairy Research 47, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, A. C. & Jeffrey, D. C. (1975). Veterinary Record 96, 442–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Dairy Federation (1971). Annual Bulletin, part 2, appendix 1.Google Scholar
Milne, J. R. (1978). Proceedings, Annual Meeting, National Mastitis Council 17, 57–62.Google Scholar
Schalm, O. W. & Ziv-Silberman, G. (1968). Veterinary Record 82, 100–103.Google Scholar
Schultze, W. D., Bright, S. C. & Sauls, J. N. (1979). Journal of Dairy Science Suppl. 1, 123–124.Google Scholar
Schultze, W. D., Thompson, P. D. & Bright, S. A. (1978). American Journal of Veterinary Research 39, 785–790.Google Scholar
Thiel, C. C., Cousins, C. L., Westgarth, D. R. & Neave, F. K. (1973). Journal of Dairy Research 40, 117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiel, C. C., Thomas, C. L., Westgarth, D. R. & Reiter, B. (1969). Journal of Dairy Research 36, 279–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titterton, M. & Oliver, J. (1979). Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 17, 19–29.Google Scholar
Wilson, C. D. & Kingwill, R. G. (1975). Bulletin, International Dairy Federation (Document 85), 422–438.Google Scholar