Effects of Lamb Sucking on the Bacterial Flora of Teat Duct and Mammary Gland of Ewes

Abstract

We aimed (i) to determine differences in bacterial flora of teat duct and mammary gland of ewes before and after suckling, (ii) to evaluate factors potentially affecting those. We collected samples of teat duct material and mammary secretion from 11 ewes immediately before and after sucking by lambs, as well as 120 min later. We processed samples bacteriologically and compared changes in infection by the Sign Test. We isolated bacteria from 3.5% duct and 1.5% secretion samples before suckling. Respective figures post-suckling were 10.6% and 2.0%, and 120 min later 6.8% and 1.5%. We recorded differences in infection of duct samples before and after suckling in 40 cases; bacteria were isolated before suckling from six samples, whereas after it from 34 (p < 0.001). Also, we recorded differences in samples collected after suckling and 120 min later in 12 cases; bacteria were isolated immediately post-suckling from eight samples, whereas 120 min later from four (p = 0.375). No significant changes were seen for secretion. We found neither difference between ewes with single or twin lambs, nor among stages of lactation. Mostly, we isolated staphylococci: 70% of isolates before suckling, 80% of isolates after it, 91% of isolates 120 min later. After suckling we also isolated two Mannheimia haemolytica strains. Suckling predisposes to entrance of bacteria into the teat; however, increased teat infections did not result in mammary infections. Isolation of M. haemolytica post-suckling indicates that lambs act as source of infection for this pathogen.

Role of staphylococci in mastitis in sheep

“…Other potential sources of bacteria include the nasopharynx of sucking lambs (Gougoulis et al ., 2008), staphylococci already present in the teat duct (Fragkou et al ., 2007) and staphylococci present on the udder skin (Mavrogianni et al ., 2007). Albenzio et al .…”

“…As Laukova and Marounek (1992) have isolated staphylococci form the upper alimentary tract of lambs, it is evident that the bacteria can transmit to the teat during sucking As the lower part of the teat comes into contact with the pharynx of the lamb (Titchen, 1977) the bacteria subsequently enter the duct; perhaps; the tongue of the lamb may ‘push’ the bacteria upwards into the duct. Isolation of the microorganism after only a short (1 min) sucking activity indicates the speed by which the whole process can take place (Gougoulis et al ., 2008). Staphylococci have been found as resident flora of the teat duct of healthy ewes (Fragkou et al ., 2007, Mavrogianni et al ., 2007).…”

Experimental Study of the Potential Role of Salmonella enterica subsp. diarizonae in the Diarrhoeic Syndrome of Lambs

“…We postulate that as the lower part of the teat comes into contact with the pharynx of the lamb [ 28 ], the organism was attached thereon, subsequently entering into the duct; perhaps the tongue of the lamb might have “pushed” the bacteria upwards into the duct. In previous studies [ 29 ], we have presented evidence that bacteria can be transferred from the mouth of lambs to the teat duct of their dams even after a short (1 min) sucking activity.…”

Predisposing factors and control of bacterial mastitis in dairy ewes

“…However, some authors have reported outbreaks where the incidence of clinical mastitis ranged from 30% to 50% (Lafi et al, 1998;Calavas et al, 1998), with an increased incidence of clinical mastitis being observed in the early lactation until weaning (Mork et al, 2007;Arsenault et al, 2008;Gougoulis et al, 2008). In the case of subclinical mastitis, a prevalence ranging from 5% to 30% has been found Contreras et al, 2003;Berthelot et al, 2006).…”