Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T09:11:53.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of season, milking routine and cow cleanliness on bacterial and somatic cell counts of bulk tank milk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2011

Maddalena Zucali ,
Luciana Bava ,
Alberto Tamburini ,
Milena Brasca ,
Laura Vanoni  and
Anna Sandrucci
Maddalena Zucali*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Animali, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Luciana Bava
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Animali, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Alberto Tamburini
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Animali, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
Milena Brasca
Affiliation:
Istituto di Scienze delle Produzioni Alimentari, CNR, via Celoria 2, 20133, Milano, Italy
Laura Vanoni
Affiliation:
Istituto di Scienze delle Produzioni Alimentari, CNR, via Celoria 2, 20133, Milano, Italy
Anna Sandrucci
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Animali, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy
*
*For correspondence; maddalena.zucali@unimi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of season, cow cleanliness and milking routine on bacterial and somatic cell counts of bulk tank milk. A total of 22 dairy farms in Lombardy (Italy) were visited three times in a year in different seasons. During each visit, samples of bulk tank milk were taken for bacterial and somatic cell counts; swabs from the teat surface of a group of cows were collected after teat cleaning and before milking. Cow cleanliness was assessed by scoring udder, flanks and legs of all milking cows using a 4-point scale system. Season affected cow cleanliness with a significantly higher percentage of non-clean (NC) cows during Cold compared with Mild season. Standard plate count (SPC), laboratory pasteurization count (LPC), coliform count (CC) and somatic cell count, expressed as linear score (LS), in milk significantly increased in Hot compared with Cold season. Coagulase-positive staphylococci on teat swabs showed higher counts in Cold season in comparison with the other ones. The effect of cow cleanliness was significant for SPC, psychrotrophic bacterial count (PBC), CC and Escherichia coli in bulk tank milk. Somatic cell count showed a relationship with udder hygiene score. Milking operation routine strongly affected bacterial counts and LS of bulk tank milk: farms that accomplished a comprehensive milking scheme including two or more operations among forestripping, pre-dipping and post-dipping had lower teat contamination and lower milk SPC, PBC, LPC, CC and LS than farms that did not carry out any operation.

Keywords

Milkbacteria countsomatic cell counthygiene scoremilking routine
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 78 , Issue 4 , November 2011 , pp. 436 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2011

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

ARPA (Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell'Ambiente in Lombardia) 2009 http://ita.arpalombardia.it/meteo/meteo.aspGoogle Scholar
Bade, RD, Reinemann, DJ & Thompson, PD 2008 Method for assessing teat and udder hygiene. Paper Number 083796. ASABE Annual International Meeting Rhode Island Convention Center Providence, Rhode Island 29 June–2 July 2008Google Scholar
Barkema, HW, Schukken, YH, Lam, TJGM, Beiboer, ML, Benedictus, G & Brand, A 1998 Management practices associated with low, medium, and high somatic cell count in bulk milk. Journal of Dairy Science 81 1917–1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, PC, Miller, GY, Lance, SE & Heider, LE 1992 Managerial determinants of intramammary coliform and environmental streptococci infections in Ohio dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 75 1241–1252CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bava, L, Zucali, M, Zanini, L, Brasca, M & Todesco, R 2008 [Relationship between cow hygiene and somatic cell and bacterial counts in bulk tank milk.]. Scienza e Tecnica Lattiero-Casearia 59 339–343Google Scholar
Bava, L, Zucali, M, Sandrucci, A, Brasca, M, Vanoni, L, Zanini, L & Tamburini, A 2011 Effect of cleaning procedure and hygienic condition of milking equipment on bacterial count of bulk tank milk. Journal of Dairy Research 78 211–219Google Scholar
Costerton, JW, Stewart, PS & Greenberg, EP 1999 Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science 284 1318–1322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, KA, Innocent, GT, Mihm, M, Cripps, P, McLean, WG, Howard, CV & Grove-White, D 2007 Dairy cow cleanliness and milk quality on organic and conventional farms in the UK. Journal of Dairy Research 74 302–310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elmoslemany, AM, Keefe, GP, Dohoo, IR & Jayarao, BM 2009 Risk factors for bacteriological quality of bulk tank milk in Prince Edward Island dairy herds. Part 1: Overall risk factors. Journal of Dairy Science 92 2634–2643Google Scholar
Elmoslemany, AM, Keefe, GP, Dohoo, IR, Wichtela, JJ, Stryhna, H & Dingwell, RT 2010 The association between bulk tank milk analysis for raw milk quality and on-farm management practices. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 95 32–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, LK, Zadoks, RN & Gaskins, CT 2005 Biofilm production by Staphylococcus aureus associated with intramammary infection. Veterinary Microbiology 107 295–299Google Scholar
Galton, DM, Petersson, LG & Merrill, WG 1986 Effects of premilking udder preparation practices on bacterial counts in milk on teats. Journal of Dairy Science 69 260–266Google Scholar
Gibson, H, Sinclair, LA, Brizuela, CM, Worton, HL & Protheroe, RG 2008 Effectiveness of selected premilking teat-cleaning regimes in reducing teat microbial load on commercial dairy farms. Letters in Applied Microbiology 46 295–300CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IZSLER (Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna) 2010 http://www.izsler.it/pls/izs_bs/v3_s2ew_consultazione.mostra_pagina?id_pagina=405 Accessed 15 February 2011Google Scholar
Jayarao, BM, Pillai, SR, Sawant, AA, Wolfgang, DR & Hegde, NV 2004 Guidelines for monitoring bulk tank milk somatic cell and bacterial counts. Journal of Dairy Science 87 3561–3573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köster, G, Tenhagen, BA, Scheibe, N & Heuwieser, W 2006 Factors associated with high milk test day somatic cell counts in large dairy herds in Brandenburg. II. Milking practices. Journal of Veterinary Medicine A 53 209–214CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makovec, JA & Ruegg, PL 2003 Results of milk samples submitted for microbiological examination in Wisconsin from 1994 to 2001. Journal of Dairy Science 86 3466–3472Google Scholar
Murphy, SC & Boor, KJ 2000 Source and causes of high bacteria counts in raw milk an abbreviated review. http://www.riboprinter.cornell.edu/cals/foodsci/extension/upload/BactRawRev.doc Accessed 15 June 15 2011Google Scholar
Olde Riekerink, RGM, Barkema, HW & Stryhn, H 2007 The effects of season on somatic cell count and the incidence of clinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 90 1704–1715Google Scholar
Reinemann, DJ, Wolters, GMVH, Billon, P, Lind, O & Rasmussen, MD 2000 Review of practices for cleaning and sanitation of milking machines. http://www.uwex.edu/uwmril/pdf/MilkMachine/Cleaning/00_Nagano_CIP.pdf. Accessed 15 February 2011Google Scholar
Reinemann, DJ, Bade, RD & Thompson, PD 2008 Method for assessing teat and udder hygiene. Paper No. 083796, ASABE Annual International Meeting Rhode Island Convention Center Providence, Rhode Island 29 June–2 July 2008Google Scholar
Rodrigues, AOC, Caraviello, DZ & Ruegg, PL 2005 Management of Wisconsin dairy herds enrolled in milk quality teams. Journal of Dairy Science 88 2660–2671CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruegg, PL 2003 Practical food safety interventions for dairy production. Journal of Dairy Science 86 E. SupplE1–E9Google Scholar
SAS 9·1, 2001 SAS Inst. Inc., Cary NC, USAGoogle 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 1159–1167Google Scholar
Schreiner, DA & Ruegg, PL 2003 Relationship between udder and leg hygiene scores and subclinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 86 3460–3465Google Scholar
Villar, A, Garcia, JA, Iglesias, L, Garcia, ML & Oterob, A 1996 Application of principal component analysis to the study of microbial populations in refrigerated raw milk from farms. International Dairy Journal 6 937–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, WR, Hughes, JW, Faull, WB, Cripps, PJ, Sutherland, JP & Sutherst, JE 2002 Observational study of temperature, moisture, pH and bacteria in straw bedding, and faecal consistency, cleanliness and mastitis in cows in four dairy herds. Veterinary Record 151 199–206CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, AM & Ruegg, PL 2002 The effect of manual forestripping on milking performance of Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 85 804–809Google Scholar
Wiggans, GR & Shook, GE 1987 A lactation measure of somatic cell count. Journal of Dairy Science 70 2666–2672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed