Abstract
Seven hundred ninety six milk samples from 266 quarters of 69 lactating cows were subjected to microbiological investigations for identification of pathogens. One hundred ninety bacterial isolates were recovered from 89 infected quarters, among these monomicrobial infection was found in 50 (56.2%) quarters, whereas, mixed infection was observed in 39 (43.8%) quarters. Bacterial isolates identified were Staph. chromogenes (49.47%), Staph. hyicus (21.1%), Staph. epidermidis (11.05%), Str. agalactiae (5.8%), Staph. aureus (4.2%), Staph. intermedius (3.1%), Enterobacter sp. (1.5%), Klebsiella sp., E. coli (1.05%), Micrococcus sp. (1.05%) and Serratia marcescens (0.52%). Milk samples from every quarter of each cow were also subjected to 6 mastitis marker tests named Somatic cell count (SCC), California mastitis test (CMT), electrical conductivity (EC) by EC-meter as well as by Hand-held mastitis detector, pH detection by impregnated paper strip and also by pH meter. Efficacy of mastitis markers for diagnosis of sub-clinical mastitis was determined by comparing results of mastitis marker tests with microbiological findings. Mean value of SSC in milk from healthy quarters was significantly lower (p than that in milk from infected quarters. Significantly higher (p value of SSC was observed in milk samples having coagulase positive staphylococci as compared to that in milk from quarter with coagulase negative pathogens. The mean electrical conductivity (EC) in milk samples from infected quarters was significantly higher (P<0.05) than that from healthy quarters. Numbers and percentages of samples showing true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative results with SSC, CMT, EC by EC-meter, EC by hand-held meter, pH by impregnated strips, pH by digital pH-meter tests were evaluated and compared. The sensitivity and specificity of impregnated pH paper strip, CMT, pH-meter test, SCC, electrical conductivity by EC-meter and the same by Hand-held mastitis detector were evaluated The compatibility between the results of SCC, impregnated pH paper strip, CMT, EC-meter, pH-meter, Hand-held mastitis detector and bacteriological culture examination (reference test) was found to be 64.4, 63.4, 61.5, 59, 59 and 53 respectively.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ijasbt.v2i2.10191Int J Appl Sci Biotechnol, Vol. 2(2): 121-125
Highlights
Sub clinical mastitis (SCM) is a major cause of economic loss in dairy herds that shows no gross inflammatory changes in udder, remains unnoticed unless investigated by employing laboratory tests
There are several direct and indirect tests with varying efficacies for detection of subclinical mastitis viz. culture, isolation and identification of causal agents, somatic cell count, California mastitis test, modified white side test (WST), bromothymol blue card test, electrical conductivity of milk, Cl- estimation in milk, Modified Aulendorfer Mastitis Probe (MAMP) test, N-Acetyl-β-D-Glucosaminidase (NAGase) enzyme activity and ELISA etc., among these tests, bacterial culture from the milk has been considered as standard method for confirming subclinical udder infections in dairy cows (IDF, 1991 and Sudhan and Sharma, 2010)
Somatic cell count (SCC) is a useful predictor of subclinical udder infection it is considered as an important component for assessing the quality and milk hygiene for mastitis control protocols (Sharma et al, 2011)
Summary
CrossRef, Google Scholar, Global Impact Factor, Genamics, Index Copernicus, Directory of Open Access Journals, WorldCat, Electronic Journals Library (EZB), Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig, Hamburg University, UTS (University of Technology, Sydney): Library, International Society of Universal Research in Sciences (EyeSource), Journal Seeker, WZB, Socolar, BioRes, Indian Science, Jadoun Science, Jour-Informatics, Journal Directory, JournalTOCs, Academic Journals Database, Journal Quality Evaluation Report, PDOAJ, Science Central, Journal Impact Factor, NewJour, Open Science Directory, Directory of Research Journals Indexing, Open Access Library, International Impact Factor Services, SciSeek, Cabell’s Directories, Scientific Indexing Services, CiteFactor, UniSA Library, InfoBase Index, Infomine, Getinfo, Open Academic Journals Index, HINARI, etc
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Applied Sciences and Biotechnology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
