Udder health effects of polyurethane-based external teat sealer

  • Johanna Lücking
  • Elisabeth Maria Mansion-de Vries
  • Nicole Wente
  • Jan-Hendrik Paduch
  • Martina Hoedemaker
  • Volker Krömker
Keywords: External teat sealer, polyurethane, udder health, mastitis, dry period, split-udder design

Abstract

Intramammary infections from the prepartum period can affect udder health in the following lactation. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of a polyurethane-based external teat sealer, which
was applied on average 4.4 days before calving to primigravid animals and 2.8 days before calving to multigravid animals, on the development of udder health.
In a split udder study, the teat canal orifices of the front left and the hind right udder quarter of clinical udder-healthy cows were sealed with the external teat sealer when first signs of approaching parturition were observed. Front right and hind left teats were left untreated. Aseptic quarter foremilk samples taken in week 1 and 2 after calving were investigated bacteriologically. Clinical mastitis in the first 100 days of lactation was recorded.
In total, 130 primigravid and 93 multigravid cows were included into the study. In comparison to unsealed quarters (2.9% infected quarters), sealed quarters had twice as many intramammary infections (5.8%). The higher rate of intramammary infections in sealed quarters was mainly due to CNS (4.0% in sealed quarters, 2.5% in unsealed quarters). Based on random logistic regression models, the application of the external teat sealer was associated with increased odds of intramammary infections (P < 0.001), but not with clinical mastitis occurring in the first 100 days of lactation (P = 0.165). Further investigations are needed to characterize the dynamics of microbial populations under the external teat sealer.

References

Bradley AJ, Green MJ. The importance of the nonlactating period in the epidemiology of intramammary infection and strategies for prevention. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2004; 20: 547-568.

Smith KL, Todhunter DA, Schoenberger PS. Environmental mastitis: cause, prevalence, prevention. J Dairy Sci. 1985; 68: 1531-1553.

Green MJ, Green LE, Medley GF, Schukken YH, Bradley AJ. Influence of dry period bacterial intramammary infection on clinical mastitis in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2002; 85: 2589-2599.

Fox LK. Prevalence, incidence and risk factors of heifer mastitis. Vet Microbiol. 2009; 134: 82-88.

Piepers S, de Vliegher S, de Kruif A, Opsomer G, Barkema HW. Impact of intramammary infections in dairy heifers on future udder health, milk production, and culling. Vet Microbiol. 2009; 134: 113-120.

Halasa T, Østerås O, Hogeveen H, van Werven T, Nielen M. Meta-analysis of dry cow management for dairy cattle. Part 1. Protection against new intramammary infections. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92: 3134-3149.

Sampimon OC, de Vliegher S, Barkema HW, Sol J, Lam TJGM. Effect of prepartum dry cow antibiotic treatment in dairy heifers on udder health and milk production. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92: 4395-4403.

Leslie K. Mastitis prevention strategies for the dry period. Proc. National Mastitis Council Regional Meeting. 1999; Waterloo, Ontario, Canada: 35-47.

Huxley JN, Green MJ, Green LE, Bradley AJ. Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry period. J Dairy Sci. 2002; 85: 551-561.

Lim GH, Leslie KE, Kelton DF, Duffield TF, Timms LL, Dingwell RT. Adherence and efficacy of an external teat sealant to prevent new intramammary infections in the dry period. J Dairy Sci. 2007; 90: 1289-1300.

Lim GH, Kelton DF, Leslie KE, Timms LL, Church C, Dingwell RT. Herd management factors that affect duration and variation of adherence of an external teat sealant. J Dairy Sci. 2007; 90: 1301-1309.

Krömker V. Entwicklung eines bakterienundurchlässigen und heilungsfördernden Wund- und Zitzenkanalverschlusses für laktierende und trockenstehende Milchkühe auf der Basis eines innovativen Polyurethanwerkstoffes. Veröffentlichung der Ergebnisse

von Forschungsvorhaben im BMBF-Programm. 2012. DOI: 10.2314/GBV:767768159.

Court MH, Bellenger CR. Comparison of adhesive polyurethane membrane and polypropylene sutures for closure of skin incisions in cats. Vet Surg. 1989; 18: 211-215.

Pantoja JC, Hulland C, Ruegg PL. Dynamics of somatic cell counts and intramammary infections across the dry period. Prev Vet Med. 2009; 90: 43-54.

Krömker V, Pfannenschmidt F, Friedrich J. Neuinfektionsrate der Milchdrüsen von Milchkühen in der Trockenperiode nach Anwendung eines internen Zitzenversieglers zum Trockenstellen. Berl Münch tierärztl Wochenschr. 2010; 123: 215-220.

German Veterinary Association (GVA). Guidelines for antiseptic milk sampling and guidelines to isolate and identify mastitis pathogens. GVA. 2009; Gießen, Germany.

German Veterinary Association (GVA). Guidelines for bovine mastitis control in dairy herds. GVA. 2012; Gießen, Germany.

National Mastitis Council (NMC). Laboratory Handbook on Bovine Mastitis. Revised edition. NMC. 1999; Madison, WI, USA.

Bradley AJ, Breen JE, Payne B, Green MJ. A comparison of broad-spectrum and narrow-spectrum dry cow therapy used alone and in combination with a teat sealant. J Dairy Sci. 2011; 94: 692-704.

Barkema HW, Schukken YH, Lam TJGM, Galligan DT, Beiboer ML, Brand A. Estimation of interdependence among quarters of the bovine udder with subclinical mastitis and implications for analysis. J Dairy Sci. 1997; 80: 1592-1599.

Taponen S, Björkroth J, Pyörälä S. Coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from bovine extramammary sites and intramammary infections in a single dairy herd. J Dairy Res. 2008; 75: 422-429.

Paduch JH, Krömker V. Colonization of the teat skin and the teat canal by mastitis pathogens in dairy cattle. Tierärztl Prax. 2011; 39: (G) 71–76.

Zecconi A, Hamann J, Bronzo V, Ruffo G. Machine-induced teat tissue reactions and infection risk in a dairy herd free from contagious mastitis pathogens. J Dairy Res. 1992; 59: 265-271.

Williams DM, Mein GA. The role of machine milking in the invasion of mastitis organisms and implications for maintaining low infection rates. Kiel Milchwirtschaftl Forschungsber. 1985; 37: 415-425.

Published
2018-10-09