Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Cow, farm, and management factors during the dry period that determine the rate of clinical mastitis after calving

By M. J. Green, Andrew J. Bradley, Graham Medley and W. J. Browne

Abstract

The purpose of the research was to investigate cow characteristics, farm facilities, and herd management strategies during the dry period to examine their joint influence on the rate of clinical mastitis after calving. Data were collected over a 2-yr period from 52 commercial dairy farms throughout England and Wales. Cows were separated for analysis into those housed for the dry period (8,710 cow-dry periods) and those at pasture (9,964 cow-dry periods). Multilevel models were used within a Bayesian framework with 2 response variables, the occurrence of a first case of clinical mastitis within the first 30 d of lactation and time to the first case of clinical mastitis during lactation. A variety of cow and herd management factors were identified as being associated with an increased rate of clinical mastitis and these were found to occur throughout the dry period. Significant cow factors were increased parity and at least one somatic cell count 200,000 cells/mL in the 90 d before drying off. A number of management factors related to hygiene were significantly associated with an increased rate of clinical mastitis. These included measures linked to the administration of dry-cow treatments and management of the early and late dry-period accommodation and calving areas. Other farm factors associated with a reduced rate of clinical mastitis were vaccination with a leptospirosis vaccine, selection of dry-cow treatments for individual cows within a herd rather than for the herd as a whole, routine body condition scoring of cows at drying off, and a pasture rotation policy of grazing dry cows for a maximum of 2 wk before allowing the pasture to remain nongrazed for a period of 4 wk. Models demonstrated a good ability to predict the farm incidence rate of clinical mastitis in a given year, with model predictions explaining over 85% of the variability in the observed data. The research indicates that specific dry-period management strategies have an important influence on the rate of clinical mastitis during the next lactation. \u

Topics: SF
Publisher: American Dairy Science Association
Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:667

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. 1985.Environmental pathogens and intramammary infection during the dry period. doi
  2. (2006). A comparison of Bayesian and likelihood-based methods for fitting multilevel models. Bayesian Anal. doi
  3. (2007). A national intervention study of mastitis control on dairy herds in England and Wales. doi
  4. (2002). A rational approach to dry cow therapy. I. Background and current perspectives. doi
  5. (2002). A rational approach to dry cow therapy. II. Making logical treatment decisions. doi
  6. (2000). A study of the incidence and significanceofintramammary enterobacterialinfectionsacquired during the dry period.
  7. (2007). A survey of the incidence rate and aetiology of mastitis on dairy farms in England and Wales. doi
  8. (2006). Aging of the immune system: How much can the adaptive immune system adapt? Immunity 24:491–494. doi
  9. (2001). An investigation of the impact of intramammary antibiotic dry cow therapy on clinical coliform mastitis. doi
  10. (2007). Association between milk yield at dry-off and probability of intramammary infections at calving. doi
  11. (2004). Association of cow and quarter-level factors at drying-off with new intramammary infections during the dry period. doi
  12. (2005). Bacterial isolates in the dry bovine mammary gland: Prevalence and associations. doi
  13. (1985). Bovine leptospirosis: Some clinical features of serovar Hardjo infection. doi
  14. (2006). Clinical mastitis in Norwegian herds after a combined selective dry-cow therapy and teat-dipping doi
  15. (2003). Coliform mastitis. doi
  16. (2002). Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry period. doi
  17. (2006). Frailty of older age: The role of the endocrine–immune interaction. doi
  18. (1991). Gram-negative bacterial infections of the mammary gland in cows.
  19. (2000). Hyperketonemia and the impairment of udder defense: A review. doi
  20. (2006). Incidence of intramammary infections during the dry period without or with antibiotic treatment in dairy cows—A quantitative analysis of published data. doi
  21. (2002). Influence of dry period bacterial intramammaryGREEN ET AL. 3776 infection on clinical mastitis in dairy cows. doi
  22. (1996). Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice. doi
  23. (1994). Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research. doi
  24. (2003). Modelling survival data in MLwiN 1.20.CentreforMultilevelModelling,InstituteofEducation,University of London,
  25. (1995). Multilevel Statistical Models. doi
  26. (1996). Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies.
  27. (2001). Serological study of the frequency of leptospiral infections among dairy cows in farms with suboptimal reproductive efficiency in Galicia, doi
  28. (1982). Somatic cell counts in bovine milk.
  29. (2007). Stochastic modeling to determine the economic effects of blanket, selective, and no dry cow therapy. doi
  30. (1983). Susceptibility of the bovine mammary gland to infections during the dry period. doi
  31. (2002). The effect of an intramammary teat seal on new intramammary infections. doi
  32. (2004). The importance of the nonlactating period in the epidemiology of intramammary infection and strategies for prevention. Vet. Clin. North Am. Food Anim. doi
  33. (2004). The use of Markov chain Monte Carlo for analysis of correlated binary data: Patterns of somatic cells in milk and the risk of clinical mastitis in dairy cows. doi
  34. (1950). Udder infections in the dry period. doi
  35. (2003). Veterinary Epidemiologic Research.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.