Premilking teat sanitation reduces the load of bacteria on teat skin before milking and it is a fundamental practice used to ensure collection of high-quality milk. The objective of this study was to compare reduction in bacterial populations of teat skin after premilking preparation using either predipping with 0.5% iodine followed by drying (conventional; CONV) or using a semiautomated teat scrubber that uses chlorine dioxide (TS; FutureCow, Longwood, FL). Ten farms currently using a commercial teat scrubber system were enrolled. Cows (n=40 per farm) were assigned to CONV (n=198) or TS (n=196) premilking udder preparation. Teat skin swabs were collected before and after udder preparation and analyzed for total bacterial count (TBC), Streptococcus spp., Staphylococcus spp., and gram-negative bacteria (GNB). Reduction (RED) of each bacterial group was defined as the difference in the number of bacteria measured before and after udder preparation. Before udder preparation, Staphylococcus spp. (15,036 cfu/mL) and Streptococcus spp. (12,621 cfu/mL) were the most numerous microflora. Gram-negative bacteria were less numerous (1,538 cfu/mL). A significant treatment by farm interaction was identified for RED of all bacterial counts. Compared with teats prepared using TS, teats prepared using CONV preparation had greater RED of TBC on 3 farms, of Streptococcus spp. on 2 farms, and of Staphylococcus spp. on 1 farm. On all other farms, RED in TBC, Streptococcus spp., and Staphylococcus spp. did not differ based on teat preparation method. Use of TS resulted in greater RED of GNB of teats on 3 farms, but RED in GNB was greater for teats cleaned by CONV on 1 farm; for the other 6 farms, RED of GNB did not differ between methods. For all bacterial counts, an effect of chlorine dioxide concentration used in the teat scrubber was observed. Results from this study suggest both CONV and TS can effectively reduce bacterial counts, but farm conditions and management practices can have a significant effect on the effectiveness of teat disinfection.
Bacterial populations of teat skin are associated with risk of intramammary infection and may be influenced by anatomical characteristics of teats. The objective of this study was to evaluate associations of selected anatomical characteristics of teats with bacterial counts of teat skin of cows exposed to different types of bedding. Primarily primiparous Holstein cows (n = 128) were randomly allocated to 4 pens within a single barn. Each pen contained 1 type of bedding [new sand (NES), recycled sand (RS), deep-bedded manure solids (DBMS), and shallow-bedded manure solids over foam core mattresses (SBMS)]. During a single farm visit udders (n = 112) were scored for hygiene and 1 front (n = 112) and 1 rear teat (n = 111) of each enrolled cow were scored for hyperkeratosis (HK). Teat length, teat barrel diameter, and teat apex diameter were measured and teat skin swabs were systematically collected for microbiological analysis. Linear type evaluation data for udders of each cow were retrieved for each cow. Teat position (front or rear) was associated with occurrence of clinical mastitis during the 12 mo before the farm visit and more cases occurred in front quarters. The proportion of udders that were classified as clean (score 1 or 2) was 68, 82, 54, and 95% for cows housed in pens containing NES, RS, SBMS, and DBMS, respectively. No association was found between HK score and teat position and no association was found between HK score and teat skin bacterial count. Bacterial counts of teat skin swabs from front teats of cows in pens containing RS and SBMS were significantly less than those of rear teats of cows in pens containing DBMS or NES. Teat skin bacterial counts were significantly greater for swabs obtained from teats of cows with udder hygiene scores of 3 and 4 as compared with swabs obtained from cows with cleaner udders. Of all udder conformation traits evaluated, only narrower rear teat placement was positively associated with bacterial counts on teat skin.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.