Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T08:56:06.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Milk emission and udder health status in primiparous dairy cows during lactation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2009

Alberto Tamburini ,
Luciana Bava ,
Renata Piccinini ,
Alfonso Zecconi ,
Maddalena Zucali  and
Anna Sandrucci
Alberto Tamburini*
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Luciana Bava
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Renata Piccinini
Affiliation:
Veterinary Pathology, Hygiene and Public Health Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 10, 20133 Milano, Italy
Alfonso Zecconi
Affiliation:
Veterinary Pathology, Hygiene and Public Health Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 10, 20133 Milano, Italy
Maddalena Zucali
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Anna Sandrucci
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: alberto.tamburini@unimi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To investigate the relationships between milk flow traits and udder health status in primiparous cows, 74 primiparous Holstein cows were randomly selected in 5 herds and monitored monthly throughout the whole lactation. A total of 2902 quarter milk samples were collected for bacteriological analyses and the determination of lysozyme, N-acetyl-β-glucosaminidase (NAGase) and somatic cell count (SCC). Milk flow curves of the whole udder of each cow were registered with continuous electronic milk flow meters. Teat conditions and teat thickness changes during milking were assessed monthly. Quarters, udders and cows were classified as healthy, latent, inflamed and subclinical depending on SCC and the results of bacteriological analyses. Lysozyme in milk, teat apex score and teat thickness change did not vary with udder health status while NAGase in milk significantly increased as udder health status worsened (P<0·001). Milk production (P<0·001) and time of plateau phase (P<0·05) were significantly lower in subclinical cows in comparison with the others. Animals with a high frequency of bimodal curves in the first 100 days in milk showed the worst udder health status during the whole lactation (P<0·01). Moreover, cows classified as subclinical in the first 3 months of lactation had higher peak milk flow than healthy cows (3·81 v. 3·48 kg/min; P<0·05) and shorter duration of plateau phase, expressed both as minutes and as percentage of time of milk flow (pTPL; P<0·001). Multivariate logistic analysis showed udder health status to be associated with duration of plateau phase, time of milk flow, bimodality and duration of overmilking phase. With short time of plateau phase (pTPL <25%), short time of milk flow (<5 min), presence of bimodality and long overmilking phase (>0·8 min) there was an increased risk of poor udder health status. These milk flow traits can be predictive indicators of udder health status; time of plateau phase, expressed as percentage of time of milk flow, can also be a useful parameter for animal selection.

Keywords

Milk emissiondairy cowsudder health

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 13 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2009

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

Bade, RD, Reinemann, DJ, Zucali, M, Ruegg, PL & Thompson, PD 2009 Interactions of vacuum, b-phase duration, and liner compression on milk flow rates in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92 913–921CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bansal, BK, Hamann, J, Grabowski, NT & Singh, KB 2005 Variation in the composition of selected milk fraction samples from healthy and mastitic quarters, and its significance for mastitis diagnosis. Journal of Dairy Research 72 144–152CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barkema, HW, Schukken, YH, Lam, TJGM, Beiboer, ML, Benedictus, G & Brand, A 1999 Management practices associated with the incidence rate of clinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 82 1643–1654CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruckmaier, RM 2001 Milk ejection during machine milking in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 70 121–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM & Blum, JW 1996 Simultaneous recording of oxytocin release, milk ejection and milk flow during milking of dairy cows with and without prestimulation. Journal of Dairy Research 63 201–208CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruckmaier, RM & Hilger, M 2001 Milk ejection in dairy cows at different degrees of udder filling. Journal of Dairy Research 68 369–376CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Vliegher, S, Barkema, HW, Opsomer, G, de Kruif, A & Duchateau, L 2005a Association between somatic cell count in early lactation and culling of dairy heifers using cox frailty models. Journal of Dairy Science 88 560–568CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Vliegher, S, Barkema, HW, Stryhn, H, Opsomer, G & de Kruif, A 2005b Impact of early lactation somatic cell count in heifers on milk yield over the first lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 88 938–947CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodenhoff, J, Sprengel, D, Duda, J & Dempfle, L 1999 Studies of udder health using Lactocorder Zuchtungskunde 71 459–472Google Scholar
Dzidic, A, Macuhova, J & Bruckmaier, RM 2004 Effects of cleaning duration and water temperature on oxytocin release and milk removal in an automatic milking system. Journal of Dairy Science 87 4163–4169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IDF 1995 Milk: Enumeration of somatic cells. International IDF Standard 148A, 1–8Google Scholar
Gäde, S, Stamer, E, Bennewitz, J, Junge, W & Kalm, E 2007 Genetic parameters for serial, automatically recorded milkability and its relationship to udder health in dairy cattle. Animal 1 787–796CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grindal, RJ & Hillerton, JE 1991 Influence of milk flow rate on new intramammary infection in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 58 263–268CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamann, J 1990 Machine-induced teat tissue reactions with emphasis on beta-adrenoceptor stimulation. Milchwissenschaft 45 782–786Google Scholar
Hamann, J & Zecconi, A 1998 Evaluation of the electrical conductivity of milk as a mastitis indicator. Fil- Bulletin International of Dairy Federation 334 5–22Google Scholar
Hamann, J & Mein, GA 1990 Measurement of machine-induced changes in thickness of the bovine teat. Journal of Dairy Research 57 495–505CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamann, J, Mein, GA & Wetzel, S 1993 Teat tissue reactions to milking: effects of vacuum level. Journal of Dairy Science 76 1040–1046CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hillerton, JE, Pankey, JW & Pankey, P 2002 Effect of over-milking on teat condition. Journal of Dairy Research 69 81–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mijic, P, Knezevic, I, Domacinovic, M, Ivankovic, A & Ivkic, Z 2005 Relationship between various phases of milk flow at mechanical milking system and the somatic cell count in cows' milk. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 14 483–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neijenhuis, F, Barkema, HW, Hogeveen, H & Noordhuizen, JPTM 2001 Relationship between teat-end callosity and occurrence of clinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 84 2664–2672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NMC 1999 Laboratory Handbook on Bovine Mastitis. Madison WI, USA: National Mastitis Council Inc.Google Scholar
O'Shea, J 1987 Machine milking factors affecting mastitis—A literature review. Bulletin International of Dairy Federation 215 5–32Google Scholar
Østerås, O & Lund, A 1988 Epidemiological analyses of the associations between bovine udder health and milking machine and milking management. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 6 91–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeilsticker, HU, Bruckmaier, RM & Blum, JW 1996 Cisternal milk in the dairy cow during lactation and after preceding teat stimulation. Journal of Dairy Research 63 509–515CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piccinini, R, Binda, E, Belotti, M, Daprà, V & Zecconi, A 2007 Evaluation of milk components during whole lactation in healthy quarters. Journal of Dairy Research 74 226–232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pyörälä, S 2003 Indicators of inflammation in the diagnosis of mastitis. Veterinary Research 34 565–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen, MD 1993 Influence of switch level of automatic cluster removers on milking performance and udder health. Journal of Dairy Research 60 287–297CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasmussen, MD 2004 Overmilking and teat condition. NMC Annual Meeting Proceedings 2004 169–175Google Scholar
Rasmussen, MD, Baines, J, Neijenhuis, F & Hillerton, E 2004 Teat condition and mastitis. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation 388 43–48Google Scholar
Rasmussen, MD, Frimer, ES, Galton, DM & Petersson, LG 1992 The influence of premilking teat preparation and attachment delay, on milk yield and milking performance. Journal of Dairy Science 75 2131–2141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rupp, R, Beaudeau, F & Boichard, D 2000 Relationship between milk somatic-cell counts in the first lactation and clinical mastitis occurrence in the second lactation of French Holstein cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 46 99–111CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rupp, R & Boichard, D 2000 Relationship of early first lactation somatic cell count with risk of subsequent first clinical mastitis. Livestock Production Science 62 169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandrucci, A, Tamburini, A, Bava, L & Zucali, M 2007 Factors affecting milk flow traits in dairy cows: results of a field study. Journal of Dairy Science 90 1159–1167CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS 9.1, 2001 SAS Inst. Inc., Cary NC, USAGoogle Scholar
Shearn, MFH & Hillerton, JE 1996 Hyperkeratosis of the teat duct orifice in the dairy cow. Journal of Dairy Research 63 525–532CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tančin, V, Ipema, AH & Hogewerf, P 2007 Interaction of somatic cell count and quarter milk flow patterns. Journal of Dairy Science 90 2223–2228CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tančin, V, Ipema, B, Hogewerf, P & Mačuhová, J 2006 Sources of variation in milk flow characteristics at udder and quarter levels. Journal of Dairy Science 89 978–988CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, D, Weinfurtner, M & Bruckmaier, RM 2004 Teat anatomy and its relationship with quarter and udder milk flow characteristics in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87 3280–3289CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, D & Bruckmaier, RM 2005 Optimization of individual prestimulation in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 88 137–147CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zecconi, A & Smith, KL 2003 Ruminant mammary gland immunity. Bruxelles: FIL-Bulletin International of Dairy FederationGoogle Scholar
Zecconi, A, Casirani, G, Binda, E, Migliorati, L & Piccinini, R 2006 Field study on automatic milking system effects on teat tissues conditions and intramammary infection risk. Journal of Veterinary Medicine B 24 4393–4402Google Scholar
Zecconi, A & Hamann, J 2006 Interpretation of machine effects on the defense mechanisms of bovine teat tissue. Milchwissenschaft 614 356–359Google Scholar
Zucali, M, Bava, L, Sandrucci, A, Tamburini, A, Piccinini, R, Daprà, V, Tonni, M & Zecconi, A 2009 Milk flow pattern, somatic cell count and teat apex score in primiparous dairy cows at the beginning of lactation. Italian Journal of Animal Science 8 103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar