Development of a Teat Bio-sealant and Evaluation of its Technological and Functional Properties

Abstract

A teat bio-sealant was developed using Weissella cibaria, and the bio-sealant's technological and functional properties were assessed. The development included four experimental phases that were analyzed using independent experimental designs. Initially, sterilized or pasteurized Aloe vera gels were used, and the effect of heat treatment was investigated. In the second phase, the effects of time, storage temperature, and addition of cryopreservatives on the viability of the probiotic were observed. The third phase consisted of evaluating the synergistic effects of the cryopreservatives. The fourth phase involved selecting a material that would provide viscosity to the teat sealant. Technological and functional properties were measured in terms of viability of W. cibaria, and antimicrobial activity against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactiae was also analyzed. A mixture of milk powder and glycerol preserved this antimicrobial activity. Pullulan provided greater viscosity and maintained the technological and functional properties of the bio-sealant for 29 days. This teat bio-sealant can be used as an alternative for the prevention of bovine mastitis.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Teat-Sealant and Antibiotic Dry-Cow Treatments for Mastitis Prevention Shows Similar Effect on the Healthy Milk Microbiome

“…Bismuth subnitrate products not only act as a physical barrier, but also show inhibitory effect on bacterial growth ( 16 ): this can partially explain the efficacy of bismuth-based formulations in the prevention of intramammary infections over the dry period. Other products have been tested as teat sealants for their physical-barrier action, like wax plugs or intramammary polystyrene devices, but were unsuccessful in the long-term protection of cows against IMI and mastitis ( 52 – 54 ).…”

Effect of bismuth subnitrate on in vitro growth of major mastitis pathogens

“…Other studies testing different physical barriers, such as wax plugs or intramammary polystyrene devices, were unsuccessful in the long-term protection of cows against IMI and mastitis. Even though intramammary devices elicited some immune response and a seemingly initial protective effect (Poutrel et al, 1983;Paape et al, 1988;Nickerson et al, 1990;Serna-Cock and Pabón-Rodríguez, 2016), in the long term these devices resulted in an increase in IMI. We hypothesize, therefore, that creating a physical barrier against bacteria traversing the teat canal is not the sole mode of action providing the efficacy observed for bismuth-based formulations.…”