CellCheck Newsletter June 2018 FINAL

JUNE EDITION 2018

CellCheck ANIMAL HEALTH IRELAND NEWSLETTER Contributing to a profitable and sustainable farming and agri-food sector through improved animal health

CELLCHECK PROGRAMME NEWS

P3

www.AnimalHealthIreland.ie

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR P4

CELLCHECK TIP OF THE MONTH P7

P9

RESEARCH UPDATE

NATIONAL MASTITIS CONTROL PROGRAMME

CellCheck AnimalHealthIreland.ie Animal Health Ireland, 4-5 The Archways, Carrick-on-Shannon, Co. Leitrim, N41 WN27

AHI gratefully acknowledges the financial and other contributions of our stakeholders to the CellCheck programme .

NATIONAL MASTITIS CONTROL PROGRAMME Animal Health Ireland, 4-5 The Archways, Carrick-on-Shannon, Co. Leitrim, N41WN27

CellCheck AnimalHealthIreland.ie

CELLCHECK PROGRAMME UPDATE

June News

Finola McCoy, Programme Manager

W elcome to the June edition of the CellCheck newsletter. This month’s guest contributor is Alan Johnson. Alan is a Senior ResearchOfficer in the Department of Agriculture, Food and theMarine’s (DAFM) Regional Veterinary Laboratory (RVL) in Limerick. In his article he discusses the merits of milk culture testing. Approximately 6,000 milk samples were cultured in veterinary laboratories around the country in 2017. While this is not a high figure, the number has been rising in recent years, as more and more dairy farmers pay attention to mastitis control on their farms. This month’s technical tip is a reminder about the importance of changing milking machine liners after 2,000 milkings or 6 months, whichever comes first. Aged liners can harbour bacteria and chemical residues, and can result in cows that are incompletely milked out. This month, we feature a scientific paper that examines the effect of the duration of the milking machine pulsation rest phase on teat end congestion. Finally, CellCheck Milking For Quality Awards update. Two new categories have been added this year for dairy discussion groups; Most Improved Group – the winning group will come from applicant groups who have the most improved group average bulk milk somatic cell count, based on SCC data submitted by milk processors to the ICBF database, for the September 2017-August 2018 period compared to the average of the previous two years; Best SCC Group - the winning group will come from applicant groups who have the best group average (September 2017-August 2018 period) bulk somatic cell count based on the monthly average SCC submitted by milk processors to the ICBF database. Representatives from Teagasc, AHI and ICBF will analyse the data and determine the winners. These Awards are open to all dairy discussion groups. Details and application form is available from the AHI website or any Teagasc Dairy Advisors. The deadline for the return of the application form is Monday 11 th of June. Awards will be presented at the CellCheck Milking For Quality Awards ceremony in November.

PAGE 3

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR Milk Culture as a tool for mastitis control

Alan Johnson is on the CellCheck Technical Working Group and works as a Senior Research Officer in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine’s (DAFM) Regional Veterinary Laboratory (RVL) in Limerick.

A pproximately 6,000 milk samples were cultured in diagnostic laboratories around the country in 2017. While this is not a high figure when compared to the 18,000 dairy farms and 1.4 million dairy cows in the country, the number has been rising in recent years, as more and more dairy farmers pay attention to mastitis control on their farms. The culture of milk samples for mastitis-causing pathogens is a valuable tool for use as part of a mastitis control programme. A number of veterinary

laboratories in Ireland are offering this service. Bacterial infection is responsible for virtually all cases of mastitis (clinical and subclinical), and by identifying the agent responsible, important information about the possible source of infection (contagious or environmental) and where to focus control measures can be gathered. Culturing milk samples costs money so it is important to get the maximum possible value for the effort put in. Care taken in the sampling process, refrigeration

Culturing a milk sample in a bacteriology laboratory

PAGE 4

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR

and prompt delivery (or freezing for delayed delivery) of the samples to the laboratory are very important steps to get right. The biggest problemthe laboratories have year-on-year is with contamination at the time of sampling. This can happen very easily and is usually the result of bacteria getting into the sample from the milker’s hands or from the skin on the teat or udder. It is also common when bulk tank samples are submitted as there are likely to be bacteria included from the cluster, milk line and bulk tank itself. When contamination happens, culture at the laboratory will result in the growth of a mixture of bacteria, and it is not easy for the laboratory technician to identify the ‘significant’ ones. The percentage of contaminated samples received by testing laboratories has been reducing year-on- year through the building of awareness on proper sampling technique. Many half-day farmer milk quality workshops have been organised in association with CellCheck. They have focused on a small number of areas identified as being key to achieving the most effect on improving milk quality. Identifying infected cows (using milk recording), infected quarters (using the California mastitis test (CMT)) and the preparation of the teat prior to quarter sampling for culture are three of the topics covered in the workshop. Management NoteA in theCellCheck ‘FarmGuidelines for Mastitis Control’ gives a clear list of steps to be taken when collecting milk samples for culture. Some farmers have a routine of collecting and freezing amilk sample from every cow that develops clinical mastitis. These samples can be stored and only submitted to the laboratory for culture if there is concern about a higher than expected mastitis rate within the herd. In such a situation the culture results may indicate a consistent cause and point the farmer towards the control measures that could achieve the best results.

Figure 1: Agar plate showing a growth of Staphylococcus aureus

Figure 2: Antimicrobial sensitivity plate showing sensitivity to five antimicrobials and resistance to one

PAGE 5

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR

In addition to identifying the mastitis-causing bacteria in a milk sample, veterinary laboratories usually test those bacteria for antimicrobial sensitivity or resistance. This can provide useful information for the veterinary practitioner when making a decision on an appropriate antimicrobial to prescribe. Although antimicrobial resistance is not seen currently as a huge issue in the Irish dairy industry, changes in resistance patterns are being seen. Antimicrobial resistance is a huge global issue that is having a serious impact on human health. It is important, when choosing an antimicrobial for treating cows during lactation or during the dry period, to select one appropriate to the on-farm situation. If possible, antimicrobials deemed critically important for human medicine, such as the macrolides, quinolones and 3rd, 4th and 5th-generation cephalosporins, should only be chosen when deemed necessary. Eight private laboratories volunteered to participate in a Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine- operated milk culture performance-testing (PT) programme in 2017. A set of milk samples spiked with various mastitis-causing bacteria was circulated to each laboratory on two occasions during the year. Each laboratory was scored based on the accuracy of the results obtained. Six of the eight participating laboratories passed the standard deemed necessary to be successful and were designated as ‘Cellcheck Partner Laboratories’ and listed on the Animal Health Ireland website click here . The PT programme is being continued in 2018.

Bacterial infection is responsible for virtually all cases of mastitis (clinical and subclinical), and by identifying the agent responsible, important information about the possible source of infection (contagious or environmental) and where to focus control measures can be gathered.

PAGE 6

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

CELLCHECK TIP OF THE MONTH

Don’t Risk it With Old Liners!

[Click here] for previously published tips

T he liner is the only part of the milking machine that comes in direct contact with the cow. A cow spends on average 60 hours of every lactation in contact with this liner. Do you worry that the recommendation to change your milking machine liners has been developed just to sell more liners?

Do you think that liners which are ‘a bit worn’ won’t make much of a difference?

Well rest assured that changing your liners will increase your milk yield and udder health!

As liners operate over time they lose tension, absorb fat and hold bacteria. This deterioration is sufficient to reduce the speed and completeness of milking, resulting in a loss in milk yield. This also increases teat end damage and increases the spread of mastitis bacteria. To reduce the impact of aged liners on milk yield and udder health, the industry recommendation is to change liners after 2,000 milkings or 6 months, whichever comes first.

To see when exactly you should change your liners, use the following simple calculation:

2,000 X NUMBER OF MILKING UNITS HERD SIZE X NUMBER OF MILKINGS PER DAY

NUMBER OF DAYS =

Example: A herd of 100 cows milking twice per day [number of milkings per day] in a 10 unit swing-over parlour [number of milking units] would take approx 100 days to reach 2,000 cow milkings

2,000 X 10 100 X 2

= 100 DAYS

NUMBER OF DAYS =

If the full herd was milking by 1st March, with new liners in spring, by 1st August they will have done at least 150 days milking. But they should have been changed after 100 days i.e. around June 9 th .

PAGE 7

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

CELLCHECK TIP OF THE MONTH

Many herds have increased in size, while parlour size may have stayed the same. Hence each cluster is milking more cows now than it might have a few years ago. So don’t wait any longer…..calculate exactly how often you should have new liners, and change them now if that’s what the figures tell you! Remember too, that liners should be changed at least every 6 months, as the rubber naturally deteriorates over time, and with exposure to the cleaning products used for machine disinfection.

For more information see our short video online - When Should I Change My Liners?

PAGE 8

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

RESEARCH UPDATE

J. Dairy Sci. 99:3958–3965 http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10466 © American Dairy Science Association®, 2016.

Effect of pulsation rest phase duration on teat end congestion

J. Upton,*1 J. F. Penry,† M. D. Rasmussen,‡ P. D. Thompson,§ and D. J. Reinemann§

*Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland †Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706 ‡Aarhus University, Department of Engineering, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark §Biological Systems Engineering Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of d-phase (rest phase) duration of pulsation on the teat canal cross-sectional area during the period of peak milk flow from bovine teats. A secondary objective was to test if the effect of d-phase duration on teat canal cross-sectional area was influenced by milking system vacuum level, milking phase (b-phase) duration, and liner overpressure. During the d-phase of the pulsation cycle, liner compression facilitates venous flow and removal of fluids accumulated in teat-end tissues. It was hypothesized that a short-duration dphase would result in congestion of teat-end tissue and a corresponding reduction in the cross- sectional area of the teat canal. A quarter milking device, designed and built at the Milking Research and Instruction Laboratory at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, was used to implement an experiment to test this hypothesis. Pulsator rate and ratios were adjusted to achieve 7 levels of d-phase duration: 50, 100, 150, 175, 200, 250, and 300 milli-seconds (ms). These 7 d-phase durations were applied during one milking session and were repeated for 2 vacuum levels (40 and 50 kPa), 2 milking phase durations (575 and 775 ms), and 2 levels of liner overpressure (9.8 and 18 kPa). We observed a significant reduction in the estimated cross-sectional area of the teat canal with d-phase durations of 50 and 100 ms when compared with d-phase durations of 150, 175, 225, 250, and 300 ms. No significant difference was found in the estimated cross-sectional area of the teat canal for d-phase durations from 150 to 300 ms. No significant interaction was observed between the effect of d-phase and b-phase durations, vacuum level, or liner overpressure.

Key words: milking, pulsation, teat congestion, milk flow.

PAGE 9

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

CELLCHECK REGIONAL COORDINATORS

A Resource and Point of Contact for CellCheck Activities in your Area

6

1

Tom Starr 087 6697010

Mícheal Guinan 086 3511852 micheal.guinan@aurivo.ie Mayo/Sligo Aurivo

tstarr@arrabawn.ie Tipperary/Limerick National Co-op

7

2

4

1

John Fitzpatrick 086 0426567

John Murphy 066 7163200 john.murphy@kerry.ie Kerry/Clare Kerry Agribusiness

fitzpatrickj@glanbia.ie Kilkenny/Laois/Carlow/ Kildare/Dublin Glanbia

3

7

8

6

8

6

5

Sinead Treanor streanor@carbery.com 023 8822369 West Cork Carbery Group

9

Andrew O’Neill 086 1836505 aoneill@tipperary-coop.ie Tipperary Tipperary Co-Op

2

3

4

9

5

Tom Downes 087 2564669

Denis Guiry 086 8098639 dguiry@dairygold.ie Cork/Tipperary/Limerick Dairygold

downest@lakeland.ie Longford/Monaghan Lakeland Dairies

Brendan Dillon 087 2626851 BrDillon@glanbia.ie

Cork/Waterford/ Wexford/Wicklow Glanbia

PAGE 10

CELLCHECK NEWSLETTER | JUNE EDITION 2018

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10

Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker