1975
DOI: 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(75)84740-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microbial Populations of Teat Ends of Dairy Cows, and Bedding Materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
63
0
7

Year Published

1979
1979
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 97 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
2
63
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Results of this study indicate that cows housed in the CBP are exposed to a contaminated surface, which might increase the pressure of intramammary infection if there is a transfer of pathogens to the teat skin (Rendos, Eberhart, & Kesler, 1975;Hogan et al, 1989). Bedding characteristics such as moisture and particle size, which could influence bedding adhesion to cows, need to be studied to assess the risk of mastitis in the CBP.…”
Section: Factors Associated With Bedding Bacterial Concentrationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results of this study indicate that cows housed in the CBP are exposed to a contaminated surface, which might increase the pressure of intramammary infection if there is a transfer of pathogens to the teat skin (Rendos, Eberhart, & Kesler, 1975;Hogan et al, 1989). Bedding characteristics such as moisture and particle size, which could influence bedding adhesion to cows, need to be studied to assess the risk of mastitis in the CBP.…”
Section: Factors Associated With Bedding Bacterial Concentrationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Enlarged water holding capacity as a result of increased surface area may favour bacterial growth (Rendos et al 1975). On the other hand, as all woody plants, Miscanthus contains fewer free nutrients, such as simple sugars, pentoses and amino acids and more cellulose and lignin than straw, all of which might impede bacterial growth (Rendos et al 1975).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The interpretation of consecutive milk samples is classically recommended (Brown et al, 1969). This interpretation limits false-negative quarters because of the intermittent shedding of some pathogens (Sears et al, 1990) and also false-positive quarters only infected in their teat canal end (Rendos et al, 1975). Potentially, duplicate sampling generates an increase in sensitivity of the microbiological procedure of about 7% (Buelow et al, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%