Influence of the sampling device on somatic cell count variation in cow milk samples (by official recording)

  1. Fouz, Ramiro 1
  2. Vilar, María J. 2
  3. Yus, Eduardo 3
  4. Sanjuán, María-Luisa 3
  5. Diéguez, Francisco J. 4
  1. 1 Africor LUGO, Ronda de Fingoi 117, 27002 Lugo
  2. 2 University of Helsinki, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Dept. of Food Hygiene and Environmental Health. P.O. Box 66. 00014
  3. 3 Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Facultad de Veterinaria de Lugo, Unidad de Epidemiología y Sanidad Animal del Instituto de Investigación y Análisis Alimentarios. Campus Universitario s/n. 27002 Lugo
  4. 4 Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Facultad de Veterinaria de Lugo, Dept. de Anatomía y Producción Animal. Campus Universitario s/n. 27002 Lugo
Mostrar afiliacións +
Revista:
Spanish journal of agricultural research

ISSN: 1695-971X,  2171-9292

Ano de publicación: 2016

Volume: 14

Número: 1

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.5424/SJAR/2016141-7536 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Outras publicacións en: Spanish journal of agricultural research

Resumo

The objective of this study was to investigate the variability in cow´s milk somatic cell counts (SCC) depending on the type of milk meter used by dairy farms for official milk recording. The study was performed in 2011 and 2012 in the major cattle area of Spain. In total, 137,846 lactations of Holstein-Friesian cows were analysed at 1,912 farms. A generalised least squares regression model was used for data analysis. The model showed that the milk meter had a substantial effect on the SCC for individual milk samples obtained for official milk recording. The results suggested an overestimation of the SCC in milk samples from farms that had electronic devices in comparison with farms that used portable devices and underestimation when volumetric meters are used. A weak positive correlation was observed between the SCC and the percentage of fat in individual milk samples. The results underline the importance of considering this variable when using SCC data from milk recording in the dairy herd improvement program or in quality milk programs.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • AFRICOR, 2012. Memoria Africor, Lugo, 2011. Asociación provincial de criadores de frisón para el control de rendimientos. AFRICOR, Lugo, Spain. 120 pp.
  • Boland F, O’Grady L, More SJ, 2013. Investigating a dilution effect between somatic cell count and milk yield and estimating milk production losses in Irish dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 96: 1477-1484. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-6025
  • Evers JM, 2004. The milk fat globule membrane - Compositional and structural changes post secretion by the mammary secretory cell. Int Dairy J 14: 661-674. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2004.01.005
  • Fouz R, Yus E, Sanjuán ML, Diéguez FJ, 2009. Effect of sampling device on fat and protein variation in cow milk samples obtained for official milk recording. J Dairy Sci 92: 4914-4918. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2074
  • Godden S, Bey R, Farnsworth R, Reneau J, LaValle M, 2002. Field validation of a milk line sampling device for monitoring milk quality and udder health. J Dairy Sci 85: 1468-1475. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74215-X
  • Green LE, Schukken YH, Green MJ, 2006. On distinguishing cause and consequence: Do high somatic cell counts lead to lower milk yield or does high milk yield lead to lower somatic cell count? Prev Vet Med 76: 74-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2006.04.012
  • Hagnestam-Nielsen C, Emanuelson U, Berglund B, Strandberg E. 2009. Relationship between somatic cell count and milk yield in different stages of lactation J Dairy Sci 92: 3124-3133. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1719
  • ICAR, 2006. Basic functions and technical desing of LactoCorder®. International Committee for Animal Recording, Berlin, Germany.
  • ICAR, 2014. ICAR rules, standards and guidelines for recording milk and milk constituents. In: International agreement of recording practises. pp. 25-57. International Committee for Animal Recording General Assembly, ICAR, Berlin.
  • Ma Y, Barbano DM, 2000. Gravity separation of raw milk: Fat globule size distribution and fat contents of milk fraction. J Dairy Sci 83: 1719-1727. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)75041-7
  • Olson CC, Amick DD, 1986. Weighing and sampling milk for DHI Test. In: National Cooperative Dairy Herd Improvement Program Handbook; Majeskie JL (ed.). Fact sheet F7. Extension Service, USDA, Washintong DC.
  • Rajcevic M, Potocnik K, Levstek J, 2003. Correlations between somatic cells count and milk composition with regard to the season. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus 68: 221-226.
  • Riekerink RGM, Barkema HW, Veenstra W, Berg FE, Stryhn H, Zadoks RN, 2007. Somatic cell count during and between milkings. J Dairy Sci 90: 3733-3741. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0001
  • Sarikaya H, Werner-Misof C, Atzkern M, Bruckmaier RM, 2005. Distribution of leucocyte populations, and milk composition, in milk fractions of healthy quarters in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 72: 486-492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022029905001317
  • Sawa A, Piwczynski D, 2002. Somatic cell count and milk yield and composition in Black and White x Holstein-Friezian cows. Medycyna Weterynaryjna 58: 636-640.
  • Schutz MM, Hansen LB, Steuernagel GR, 1990. Variation of milk, fat, protein and somatic cells for dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 73: 484-493. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(90)78696-1
Fonte de datos: Dialnet