Browsing Other Teagasc Research by Subject "Teat disinfection"
Now showing items 1-3 of 3
Are some teat disinfectant formulations more effective against specific bacteria isolated on teat skin than others?The use of pre- and post-milking teat disinfectants can reduce teat bacterial load and aid in the collection of high-quality milk. The objective of this study was to compare the reduction in bacteria populations on teat skin after the application of different commercial teat disinfectant products. Ten teat disinfectant products were applied to the teats of 10 Holstein–Friesian cows. One cow received one teat disinfectant product at each sampling point before cluster application for milking. A composite swab sample was taken of the 4 teats of each cow before and after teat disinfectant application. Swab samples were placed on three different selective agars to enumerate bacterial counts of staphylococcal, streptococcal and coliforms isolates on teat skin. Staphylococcal isolates were the most prominent bacterial group recovered on teat swabs (49%), followed by streptococcal (36%) and coliform (15%) isolates before the application of disinfectant. The average bacterial reductions on teat skin were shown to be 76%, 73% and 60% for staphylococcal, streptococcal and coliform isolates, respectively. All of the teat disinfectant products tested reduced teat bacterial load for all three bacterial groups. Product 4 containing 0.6% w/w diamine was the most effective against bacterial populations of staphylococcal and streptococcal isolates on teat skin with a reduction of 90% and 94%, respectively. Whereas product 10, which contained 0.5% w/w iodine, resulted in the highest reduction in coliforms on teat skin with a reduction of 91%. Results from this study suggest that specific bacterial population loads on teats can be reduced using different teat disinfectant formulations.
The effect of disinfectant ingredients on teat skin bacteria associated with mastitis in Irish dairy herdsBackground Teat disinfection is an important step in the control of mastitis within a dairy herd. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 96 commercially available teat disinfectant products in Ireland against bacterial isolates on teat skin. Teat disinfection products were applied to the teats of seventeen Holstein–Friesian cows. A split-udder model was used where one cow received two different teat disinfection products on each day. A composite swab sample was taken of the left teats and the right teats before and after teat disinfectant application. Swab samples were plated onto 3 different selective agars to enumerate bacterial counts of streptococcal, staphylococcal and coliform isolates. Results Streptococcal isolates were the most prominent bacterial group recovered on teat swabs taken before the application of a teat disinfection product (55.0%), followed by staphylococcal isolates (41.3%) and coliform isolates (3.7%). Products were reclassified by active ingredients (n = 9) for analysis. These ingredient groups included; chlorhexidine, chlorine dioxide, diamine, iodine, iodine and lactic acid, lactic acid, lactic acid and chlorhexidine, lactic acid and hydrogen peroxide, and lactic acid and salicylic acid. The ingredient group, chlorine dioxide, resulted in comparable reductions to the iodine group for streptococcal isolates. The ingredient group, iodine combined with lactic acid, resulted in the greatest reduction of staphylococcal isolates. When observing products individually, a product containing 1.6% w/w lactic acid combined with hydrogen peroxide was the most effective at reducing streptococcal isolates on the teat skin, whereas a product containing lactic acid combined with 0.6% w/w chlorhexidine was the most effective against staphylococcal isolates. Minor differences were observed regarding the relationship between effectiveness and active ingredient concentration between products. Conclusions This study suggests that some teat disinfectant products achieve a higher reduction in bacterial levels against different specific bacterial groups on teat skin than other products. Therefore, when choosing a teat disinfectant product, the bacteria in the dairy herds’ environment should be considered. Further studies are necessary to evaluate products efficacy against new IMIs and any possible effects on teat skin condition.
Effect of pre-milking teat disinfection on new mastitis infection rates of dairy cowsBackground The practise of teat disinfection prior to cluster attachment for milking is being adopted by farmers in Ireland, particularly where there are herd issues with new infection rates. Pre-milking teat disinfection has been shown to reduce bacterial numbers on teat skin and to be most effective against environmental bacteria such as Escherichia coli and Streptococcus uberis. A split udder design experiment was undertaken on two research herds (A = 96 cows: B = 168 cows) to test the benefit of pre-milking teat disinfection on new mastitis infection levels. The disinfectant was applied to the left front and right hind teats of all cows in each herd and the right front and left hind teats received no disinfectant treatment prior to milking over a complete lactation. Individual quarter foremilk samples were taken on 5 occasions during the lactation and all clinical cases were recorded. The presence and number of staphylococcus and streptococcus bacteria on teat skin of a random sample of experimental cows (n = 20) was measured on 3 occasions during lactation (April, June, and October). Results Pre-milking teat disinfection had no significant impact on quarter SCC and new infection rates (P > 0.05). The median SCC was 169 (95% CI = 144–198) × 103 cells/mL and 170 (95% CI = 145–199) × 103 cells/mL for disinfected teats and non-disinfected teats, respectively. There were no differences in SCC observed between herds (A = 161 (95% CI = 127–205) × 103 cells/mL; B = 169 (95% CI = 144–198) × 103 cells/mL) over the complete lactation. Bacterial levels on teat skin were reduced significantly with pre-milking teat disinfection compared to teats receiving no disinfectant (P < 0.001). Total infections (clinical and sub-clinical) were similar for disinfected teats (n = 36) and not disinfected teats (n = 40), respectively. Staphylococcus aureus (n = 47) and Strep. uberis (n = 9) were identified as the predominant bacteria in quarter foremilk samples with both clinical and sub-clinical infections. Conclusion SCC and new infection rates were similar in non-disinfected teats and disinfected (pre-milking) teats. The routine application of pre-milking teat disinfectant in pasture-grazed herds is unlikely to be of benefit where herd SCC is below 200 × 103 cells/mL.