Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:38:55.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the mechanism of the whiteside mastitis test reaction*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

G. Nageswararao  and
J. B. Derbyshire
G. Nageswararao
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706, U.S.A.
J. B. Derbyshire
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The contribution of certain components of leucocytes and milk to the viscosity and precipitate which develop in the Whiteside mastitis test was studied to obtain information on the mechanism of the reaction. The viscosity obtained in the Whiteside test reaction was considerably less than that in the California mastitis test reaction and the Whiteside test was found to be more dependent on precipitation than increased viscosity.

Leucocyte nuclei were mainly responsible for the formation of the precipitate in the Whiteside reaction and CaCl2 dispersed the precipitate formed by the leucocyte nuclei into small clumps. Leucocyte protein and fibrinogen increased the amount of precipitate formed by the leucocyte nuclei. Fat globules also increased the amount of precipitate, probably by being trapped in the precipitate.

The addition of non-gelable or gelable nuclei resulted in the formation of similar amounts of precipitate in the modified Whiteside reaction. Furthermore, storage of milk for 5 days did not decrease the amount of precipitate formed, indicating that the DNA-protein complex of the leucocyte nuclei need not be present in the native form to contribute to the precipitate in this reaction.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , February 1970 , pp. 77 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1970

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

Dunn, H. O., Murphy, J. M. & Garret, O. F. (1943). J. Dairy Sci. 26, 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, J. M. (1942). Cornell Vet. 32, 439.Google Scholar
Murphy, J. M. & Hanson, J. J. (1941). Cornell Vet. 31, 47.Google Scholar
Nageswararao, G. & Derbyshire, J. B. (1969a). J. Dairy Sci. 52, 1451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nageswararao, G. & Derbyshire, J. B. (1969b). J. Dairy Res. 36, 359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, W. F., Grimmell, J. F. & Schipper, I. A. (1950). J. Dairy Sci. 33, 384.Google Scholar
Schalm, O. W. & Gray, D. M. (1954). Calif. Vet. 27, 27.Google Scholar
Schalm, O. W. & Noorlander, D. O. (1957). J. Am. vet. med. Ass. 130, 199.Google Scholar
Whiteside, W. H. (1939). Can. publ. Hlth J. 30, 44.Google Scholar