Susceptibility to Mastitis : a Review of Factors Related to the Cow B

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Susceptibility to Mastitis : a Review of Factors Related to the Cow B SUSCEPTIBILITY TO MASTITIS : A REVIEW OF FACTORS RELATED TO THE COW B. Poutrel To cite this version: B. Poutrel. SUSCEPTIBILITY TO MASTITIS : A REVIEW OF FACTORS RELATED TO THE COW. Annales de Recherches Vétérinaires, INRA Editions, 1982, 13 (1), pp.85-99. hal-00901361 HAL Id: hal-00901361 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00901361 Submitted on 1 Jan 1982 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. SUSCEPTIBILITY TO MASTITIS : A REVIEW OF FACTORS RELATED TO THE COW B. POUTREL Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Station de Pathologie de la Reproduction, 37380 Nouzilly, France LA SENSIBILITÉ AUX MAMMITES : REVUE DES FACTEURS LIÉS A LA VACHE Facteurs de sensibilité ou de résistance Factors of susceptibility or resistance aux infections mammaires to mammary infections 1. Sensibilité aux infections liée à des caractéristiques 1. Physiological factors of the cow influencing suscepti- physiologiques de la vache bility to infection 1.1. Nombre et stade de lactation 1.1. Age and stage of lactation 1.2. Production, facilité et vitesse de traite 1.2. Milk yield, ease and milking rate 2. Sensibilité aux infections liée à des caractéristiques morphologiques de la mamelle et du trayon 2. Morphological characteristics of the udder and teat influencing susceptibility to infections 3. Mécanismes de résistance aux infections au niveau du trayon 3. Teat resistance mechanisms 3.1. Sensibilité aux mammites liée à la et longueur 3.1. Influence of length and diameter of teat canal in au diamètre du canal du trayon to mastitis 3.2. Activité bactéricide de la kératine susceptibility 3.2. Bactericidal activity of keratin 4. Mécanismes de résistance aux infections au niveau de la mamelle 4. Infection resistance mechanisms in the udder 4.1. Protéines et enzymes du lait ayant une activité 4.1. Proteins and enzymes in milk having a non- bactérienne non spécifique specific antimicrobial activity 4.1.1. Le système lactoperoxydase/thiocya- 4.1.1. Lactoperoxidase/thiocyanate/hydrogen nate/peroxyde d’hydrogène peroxide system 4.1.2. Le lysozyme 4.1.2. Lysozyme 4.1.3. La lactoferrine 4.1.3. Lactoferrin 4.1.4. Le complément 4.1.4. Complement 4.2. Les immunoglobulines 4.2. Immunoglobulins 4.3. Les leucocytes 4.3. Leucocytes Induction et stimulation de la résistance Induction and stimulation of resistance aux infections mammaires to mammary infections 1. Résistance spécifique : la vaccination 1. Specific resistance : vaccination 2. Résistance non spécifique 2. Non-specific resistance 2.1. La sélection génétique 2.1. Genetic selection 2.1.1. Héritabilité de la sensibilité aux mammi- 2.1.1. Heritability of susceptibility to mastitis tes 2.1.2. Genetic selection markers 2.1.2. Marqueurs de sélection génétique 2.2. Inducing a cell-barrier to prevent the establish- 2.2. Induction d’une barrière cellulaire ment of intrammary infections Conclusions générales General conclusions Broadly, speaking, three interdependent ele- teat in an appropriate solution immediately after ments are involved in mammary infections of the milking, systematic treatment of quarters at dairy cow: microorganisms, environment and drying-off with an effective long acting antibio- the cow itself. tic, culling of animals which do not respond to Microorganisms are directly responsible for treatment. the disease. Streptococci and staphylococci are Mastitis control, however, has both concep- the cause of about 90 % of infections. Other tual and material limitations and the more long- species of bacteria such as Escherichia coli, term aim of research is to prevent mammary Pseudomonas and Corynebacterium pyogenes infections by reducing the susceptibility of the are sometimes isolated. Most infections are cow. latent or sub-clinical and are consequently not There exists a group of anatomical and apparent to the dairy farmer who has difficulty in physiological natural defence mechanisms, for appreciating their importance. the most part non-specific, which are involved at Environmental factors, nutrition, climate, hou- three successive stages of the infection pro- sing, bedding, milking machine, etc., influence cess : penetration, establishment, then multipli- the living conditions of bacteria the opportunity cation of bacteria. These defence mechanisms they are given to penetrate the quarters and, to have their effect at two levels, the teat and the a certain extent, the susceptibility of the animal. udder itself. The differences in susceptibility to The dairy farmer may have a beneficial or infections observed between cows, as well as unbeneficial influence, modifying the environ- the existence of different types of infection - ment according to his conception of herd latent, sub-clinical, chronic, or clinical-indicate management, the attention he gives to the that a difference also exists in the ability of the maintenance and use of his milking equipment host to respond to agression, according to the and to level of hygiene. efficiency of its defence mechanisms. The cow is often seen as a passive a element» This review proposes to examine the different although a certain number of studies have factors, located at teat and udder level, which reported differences between animals where could be involved in resistance to infections, as susceptibility to infections is concerned. well as the possible means of stimulating and/or The complex nature of this pathology makes inducing this resistance. progress in the fight against the disease slow and limited ; all in !all, the situation today seems little different to that of 30 years ago. It is nevertheless possible to obtain and maintain a low level of infection a by applying Factors of susceptibility or resistance mastitis control with the aim of system reducing to mammary infections the duration .of infections and incidence of new infection. This the system, perfected by English 1. Physiological factors of the cow researchers at the National Institute for Research influencing susceptibility to infection in Dairying at Reading in the 1960’s, is based on and of lactation the application of the following measures : good 1.1. Age stage general husbandry and milking practice, including Both quarter infections and clinical mastitis regular testing and maintenance of the milking occur increasingly with the age of lactation of machine, teat-disinfection by dipping the whole the animal (Oliver et al., 1956; Wilton et al., 1972 ; Rainard and Poutrel, soumis pour publica- correlation between milking rate and incidence of tion). According to Oliver et al. (1956) the infection during lactation and at the start of increase in the number of cases of clinical drying-off, Staphylococcus aureus being the mastitis in previously healthy animals is closely bacterial species most often isolated. Using this connected with age of lactation, up to the fifth species implanted 3 mm inside the teat canal, lactation. This does not necessarily imply a Prasad and Newbould (1968) confirmed the greater susceptibility to infection, but rather to preceeding results. They, in fact, established inflammation. A greater predisposition to infec- correlations between intramammary rate of tion could be the consequence of a number of infection and length of teat canal, milk yield and characteristics associated with age of lactation, milking rate. As Dodd and Neave (1951) point in particular lengthening of teat, of more preci- out, over-milking, more frequent with fast- sely of distance between udder and floor, lesions milking cows, cannot be offered as a valid present on the teat (Hebel et al., 1979) and loss of explanation for these results, as in such a case sphincter patency (Little, 1937). front quarters would be expected to have a The results of Oliver et al. (1956) indicate that higher incidence of infection, whereas the oppo- - on the whole occurrence of new infections and site is in fact observed hind quarters are more mastitis decrease according to stage of lactation frequently infected. They thus admit that a larger and that this decrease is greatest between the and slacker sphincter, characteristics associated first and second month of lactation. In an with fast milking facilitate the penetration of experiment conducted on three herds, we obser- bacteria. ved (Rainard and Poutrel, 1982) from bacteriolo- Other authors have found no significant gical analyses carried out every three weeks on correlation between yield and incidence of all quarters that 50 % of infections are establis- infection and mastitis (Legates and Grinnells, hed in the first three months of lactation. On the 1952 ; Schmidt and Van Vleck, 1965 ; Smith and other hand, the infection status remains practi- Schultze, 1970 ; Wilton et al., 1972 ; Geer et al., cally unchanged in the last two months of 1979). On the other hand, Grootenhuis et al. lactation. Reasons for a greater susceptibility of (1979) report a higher resistance to infection in animals at the start of lactation remain unknown. fast-milking animals with a high yield. It has been suggested that the important Relationships between milking characteristics hormonal physiological changes, particularly and incidence of mammary infections remain, which take ones, place « post partum» may therefore much debated. These conflicting re- reduce udder resistance (Astrbm, 1972 ; Guidry sults may be explained by the different methods et al., 1975). used, notably criteria taken into account for the It is worth noting that in the particular case of diagnosis of mastitis, which are, according to experimental staphyloccal infections carried out each particular case, results of bacteriological in the udder cistern, the most favourable period examinations, cell counts or California Mastitis for the establishment of persistant infections Test, or clinical symptoms.
Recommended publications
  • National Program Assessment, Animal Health: 2000-2004
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska 10-5-2004 National Program Assessment, Animal Health: 2000-2004 Cyril G. Gay United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Program Staff, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub Part of the Agriculture Commons, Animal Sciences Commons, and the Animal Studies Commons Gay, Cyril G., "National Program Assessment, Animal Health: 2000-2004" (2004). Publications from USDA- ARS / UNL Faculty. 1529. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1529 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. U.S. government work. Not subject to copyright. National Program Assessment Animal Health 2000-2004 National Program Assessments are conducted every five-years through the organization of one or more workshop. Workshops allow the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to periodically update the vision and rationale of each National Program and assess the relevancy, effectiveness, and responsiveness of ARS research. The National Program Staff (NPS) at ARS organizes National Program Workshops to facilitate the review and simultaneously provide an opportunity for customers, stakeholders, and partners to assess the progress made through the National Program and provide input for future modifications to the National Program or the National Program’s research agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • Help Protect Your Herd with the Total Package. Demonstrated Safety and Efficacy
    ENVIRACORTM J-5 | MASTITIS PREVENTION HELP PROTECT YOUR HERD WITH THE TOTAL PACKAGE. DEMONSTRATED SAFETY AND EFFICACY. ENVIRACORTM J-5 | MASTITIS PREVENTION Coliform mastitis. Frightening in its severity and frequent fatality. Well-managed herds that have effectively controlled contagious mastitis are especially at risk for coliform mastitis. It carries the greatest potential for losing a quarter or even the cow, in part 60 to 70 because of bacterial endotoxins. percent70 to 80 Escherichia coli can be found throughout a cow’s environment. Coliformpercent mastitis infections • Up to 53 percent of all coliform mastitis cases are caused by that become clinical1 environmental bacteria.4 • E. coli is the primary bacterium responsible.5 • Milk should be cultured to learn which bacteria are involved so a vaccination program can be targeted. Vaccination should be part of every E. coli mastitis management 50 percent program. E. coli mastitis infections While complete prevention of E. coli mastitis is impossible, established during the dry period that remain dormant vaccination with an E. coli vaccine will help lessen the severity of until shortly after freshening2 cases and help provide an opportunity for successful treatment. $378.13 Average cost of each case of clinical E. coli mastitis3 When coliform mastitis occurs, it can cause: • Fever • Abnormal milk • Lack of appetite • Excessive udder edema • Diarrhea • Dehydration • Dramatic drop in milk production • Death A total package of safety and demonstrated efficacy. ENVIRACORTM J-5 is the safe and effective way to help control clinical signs associated with E. coli mastitis. Efficacy = 2 ½ days shorter duration of E. coli mastitis.6 The three-dose regimen helps stimulate the immune system for optimum response to help fight clinicalE.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRAM and PROCEEDINGS Dr. Fredric W. Scott
    PROGRAM and PROCEEDINGS of the 94th Annual Meeting December 8, 9 and 10, 2013 Marriott, Downtown Magnificent Mile Chicago, Illinois Robert P. Ellis, Executive Editor http://www.cvmbs.colostate.edu/mip/crwad/ The 94th Annual Meeting of the CRWAD is dedicated to Dr. Fredric W. Scott Proceedings Distributed by CRWAD CRWAD 94th ANNUAL MEETING-2013 December 8 – 10, 2013 All attendees and presenters are required to wear their name badges at all times. Registration - 5th Floor Registration Booth Sunday 10 AM - 5:30 PM Monday 7:00 AM - Noon, 2 - 5 PM Tuesday 8 - 11 AM Researchers Reception - Welcome all attendees. Casual Wear Sunday, December 8, 6-8 PM – Grand Ballroom Salon III - 7th Floor Introduction of CRWAD Officers and Dedicatee, Poster Session I Student Reception – Students and invited guests - 5:00 PM – 5:45PM, Salon II Room, 7th Floor Business Meeting - Chicago Ballroom A/B/C/D 5th Floor 11:45 AM - 12:30 PM Tuesday, December 10 Dedication of the meeting, Introduction of New Members, Grad Student Awards New member applicants and students entered in competition are invited and encouraged to attend. Speaker Ready Room is: Streeterville Room (2nd floor) - Sunday, Dec. 8 - Monday, Dec. 9 Marriott Hotel Monday AM Monday PM Tuesday AM 8:00 - 11:30 1:30 - 4:30 8:00 - 11:30 Section Room Room Room Abstract Nos. Abstracts Nos. Abstracts Nos. Bacterial Avenue Ballroom Avenue Ballroom Pathogenesis 001 – 008 009 – 019 Biosafety and Denver/Houston Biosecurity 020 – 026 Companion Animal Epidemiology Michigan/Michigan Michigan/Michigan State State 027
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding for Disease Resistance in Farm Animals, 3Rd Edition
    BREEDING FOR DISEASE RESISTANCE IN FARM ANIMALS, 3RD EDITION Bishop_FM.indd i 10/12/2010 3:05:45 PM Bishop_FM.indd ii 10/12/2010 3:05:45 PM BREEDING FOR DISEASE RESISTANCE IN FARM ANIMALS, 3RD EDITION Edited by Stephen C. Bishop The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies University of Edinburgh Midlothian, UK Roger F.E. Axford Formerly School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences University of Wales, Bangor UK Frank W. Nicholas Department of Animal Science University of Sydney Sydney, Australia and John B. Owen Formerly School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences University of Wales, Bangor UK Bishop_FM.indd iii 10/12/2010 3:05:45 PM CABI is a trading name of CAB International CABI Head Offi ce CABI North American Offi ce Nosworthy Way 875 Massachusetts Avenue Wallingford 7th Floor Oxfordshire OX10 8DE Cambridge, MA 02139 UK USA Tel: +44 (0)1491 832111 Tel: +1 617 395 4056 Fax: +44 (0)1491 833508 Fax: +1 617 354 6875 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.cabi.org ©CAB International 2010. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronically, mechanically, by photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owners. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library, London, UK. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Breeding for disease resistance in farm animals/edited by Stephen C. Bishop [et al.]. -- 3rd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index.
    [Show full text]
  • Mastitis Therapy and Pharmacology of Drugs in the Bovine Mammary Gland
    Mastitis Therapy and Pharmacology of Drugs in the Bovine Mammary Gland (Q) n 0 K. L. Anderson, D. V.M., Ph.D. '"'O '-< Department of Food Animal and Equine Medicine ......'"i and Surgery (JQg School of Veterinary Medicine > North Carolina State University 8 (D 4700 Hillsborough Street ......'"i (") Raleigh, NC 27606 § >00 Introduction 00 0 (")...... control field Mastitis remains a major concern of the dairy industry, TABLE 1. Elimination of infections during mastitis a...... despite frequent use of therapy and application of mastitis experiments. (Natzke and Everett, 1975). 0 ~ control programs. Prevention and control are the most Infections eliminated via o/o 0 productive approaches to mastitis. However, therapy is 1-i; 18 to important for clinical mastitis and is a component of Spontaneous recovery 0 Lactational therapy 27 < mastitis control. Approximately 20-80% of cows are affect­ 5· Dry period therapy 34 (D ed by clinical mastitis annually (Dohoo, 1987, Wilesmith et Culling 14 ~ al., 1986). The annual US market for intramammary infu­ Not eliminated 7 ~ (") sion products is approximately $30 million (Gingerich, ,-+-...... 100 ,-+-...... 1987). Mastitis therapy should be efficacious, cost-effective, 0 ~ and antibiotic residues in meat and milk should be avoided. The application of mastitis control has influenced mastitis (D '"i The purpose of this paper is to discuss mastitis therapy and prevalence and etiology. Mastitis due to Str. agalactiae has 00 0 the pharmacology of drugs in the bovine mammary gland. been markedly reduced, with less dramatic reductions for '"'O (D Specific areas considered include: St. aureus. The most significant change has been the relative ~ 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 National Veterinary Scholars Symposium 18Th Annual August 4
    2017 National Veterinary Scholars Symposium 18th Annual August – 4 5, 2017 Natcher Conference Center, Building 45 National Institutes of Health Bethesda, Maryland Center for Cancer Research National Cancer Institute with The Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges https://www.cancer.gov/ Table of Contents 2017 National Veterinary Scholars Symposium Program Booklet Welcome .............................................................................................................................. 1 NIH Bethesda Campus Visitor Information and Maps .........................................................2 History of the National Institutes of Health ......................................................................... 4 Sponsors ............................................................................................................................... 5 Symposium Agenda .......................................................................................................6 Bios of Speakers ................................................................................................................. 12 Bios of Award Presenters and Recipients ........................................................................... 27 Training Opportunities at the NIH ...................................................................................... 34 Abstracts Listed Alphabetically .......................................................................................... 41 Symposium Participants by College of Veterinary Medicine
    [Show full text]
  • Dairy Cattle Mastitis in and Around Sebeta, Ethiopia
    Dairy Cattle Mastitis In and Around Sebeta, Ethiopia Hunderra Sori, DVM, MS1 Ademe Zerihun, DVM, MS, PhD2 Sintayehu Abdicho, DVM, MS3 1National Veterinary Institute Debrezeit, Ethiopia 2Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Debrezeit, Ethiopia 3National Animal Disease Research Center Sebeta, Ethiopia KEY WORDS: cattle, dairy, mastitis, ing number of functional quarters). The Sebeta, Ethiopia infection rate showed statistically significant difference between the lactating quarters ABSTRACT and non-lactating quarters (P < 0.01). The A total of 180 local and crossbred dairy infection rate also varied significantly (P < cows were examined to determine the over- 0.05) between crossbred (56.29%) and local all prevalence of mastitis in and around zebu (34.48%). The prevalence of mastitis Sebeta using Californian Mastitis Test also significantly differed between animals (CMT), which revealed the overall mastitis with teat lesion, teat end shape, and status of prevalence in the area as 52.78% (16.11% ventilation (P < 0.01), udder conformation clinical and 36.67% sub-clinical cases). Of (P < 0.05), type of management (P < 0.01), 134 bacterial isolates identified from CMT- and frequency of barn cleaning (P < 0.01). positive samples sent to a laboratory for In 53.13% of animals sampled and 31.68% microbiological examination, the majority of CMT-positive quarters, mixed infection of isolates were Staphylococcus aureus per animal and per quarter was observed. (44.03%) followed by Staphylococcus epi- d e r m i d i s (14.93%) and M i c r o c o c c u s s p e c i e s INTRODUCTION (6.72%), and lowest isolation rate was for Mastitis has been known to cause a great Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aerugi- deal of loss or reduction of productivity, to nosa (0.75% each).
    [Show full text]
  • Mycoplasma Mastitis in Dairy Cows
    Mycoplasma Mastitis Can you Control it on Your Farm? Pamela Ruegg, DVM, MPVM Introduction Mastitis is a well-recognized and costly disease of dairy cattle. Most farmers are well acquainted with traditional causes of mastitis such as Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactia. The widespread adoption of standard mastitis control practices such as teat dipping, dry cow therapy, appropriate treatment, judicious culling and good milking preparation has allowed many dairy farmers to control contagious forms of mastitis. In a recent study, Staph aureus and Strep ag accounted for only 8% of clinical mastitis cases in Ontario dairy herds.4 While these traditional forms of mastitis are now controllable, mastitis continues to require management attention Other organisms have emerged to fill the niche created by the control of contagious Fig 2: Mycoplasma Diagnosis in Wisconsin Fig 3: Mycoplasma Diagnosis in New York 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 Number of Herds Number of Herds 10 10 0 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 organisms. An organism that is increasingly isolated from clinical mastitis in Wisconsin is Mycoplasma bovis (Fig 2). Prior to 1992, there were only 2 confirmed herd outbreaks within Wisconsin, between 1992 and 1998 at least 140 herd outbreaks of that organism were reported.5 A similar trend has been reported from dairies in New York (Fig 3).2 Mycoplasma mastitis was once considered to be a disease of large western dairy herds. In recent years it has become recognized in Midwest and Northeastern dairy regions. This presentation will review basic facts about mastitis caused by mycoplasma and discuss control strategies to minimize the risk of an outbreak.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Associated with Intramammary Infection in Dairy Cows Caused By
    J. Dairy Sci. 100:493–503 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11465 © 2017, THE AUTHORS. Published by FASS and Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Dairy Science Association®. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Factors associated with intramammary infection in dairy cows caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus uberis, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, Corynebacterium bovis, or Escherichia coli S. Taponen,*1 E. Liski,† A.-M. Heikkilä,† and S. Pyörälä* *Department of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Paroninkula 20, FI-04920 Saarentaus, Finland †Natural Resources Institute Finland, Viikinkaari 4, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland ABSTRACT barns with parlor milking had an increased probability of contracting an IMI compared with cows in tiestall The aim of this study was to determine risk factors barns or in new freestall barns with automatic milking. for bovine intramammary infection (IMI) associated This was the case for all IMI, except those caused by with the most common bacterial species in Finland. CNS, the prevalence of which was not associated with Large databases of the Finnish milk-recording system the milking system, and IMI caused by Staph. aureus, and results of microbiological analyses of mastitic which was most common in cows housed in tiestall milk samples from Valio Ltd. (Helsinki, Finland) were barns. A better breeding index for milk somatic cell analyzed. The study group comprised 29,969 cows with count was associated with decreased occurrence of IMI, IMI from 4,173 dairy herds.
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancing Drug Efficacy Against Mastitis Pathogens—An in Vitro
    animals Article Enhancing Drug Efficacy against Mastitis Pathogens—An In Vitro Pilot Study in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis Karthic Rajamanickam 1 , Jian Yang 1, Saravana Babu Chidambaram 2 and Meena Kishore Sakharkar 1,* 1 College of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, 107 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E5, Canada; [email protected] (K.R.); [email protected] (J.Y.) 2 Department of Pharmacology, JSS College of Pharmacy, JSS Academy of Higher Education & Research (JSS AHER), Mysuru-570015, Karnataka, India; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 5 October 2020; Accepted: 9 November 2020; Published: 15 November 2020 Simple Summary: The success rate of antibiotic treatment of mastitis is highly variable. Concurrently, the efficacy of available antibiotics is compromised by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant bacteria. Recently, it was reported that there has been a reduction in the presence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in food-producing animals where interventions provide for restrictions in antibiotic use. In addition, societal concerns regarding the use of antimicrobials in food animal production are putting increasing pressure on all aspects of livestock production. Here, we have conducted a systematic procedure for the identification of conserved and unique drug targets. We propose that combination therapy with drugs that work synergistically against conserved and unique targets can help increase efficacy and lower the usage of antibiotics for treating bacterial infections. An in vitro pilot validation of our findings in vitro for the two most common mastitis-causing bacteria in North America—Staphylococcus aureus and the coagulase-negative Staphylococcus epidermidis—is presented.
    [Show full text]
  • WELFARE ISSUES RELATED to MASTITIS in DAIRY COWS E
    Nº 10 / SEPTEMBER 2014 www.fawec.org THE farm ANIMAL welfare fact SHEET WELFARE ISSUES RELATED TO MASTITIS IN DAIRY COWS E. MAINAU, D. TEMPLE, X. MANTECA Mastitis is one of the major animal welfare and economic problems in dairy cattle production. Although in recent years there has been a general decline in the incidence of mastitis, high incidences such as 25-45% are still being currently reported. Mastitis is a multifactorial disease in which the environment, the pathogens and the host (cow) interact with each other. MASTITIS CAUSES PRODUCTION AND ECONOMIC LOSSES is a well-organised adaptive response of the animal to enhance di- sease resistance and recovery from disease. Pain caused by masti- Mastitis is one of the most costly diseases affecting dairy cattle. Di- tis may modify the expression of sickness behaviour. In particu- rect economic costs associated with mastitis include reduced milk lar, although lying time is usually increased during illness and it is yield and quality, increased veterinary costs, discarded milk (during thought to help the animal to save energy, cows with mastitis show the course of treatment) and somatic cell count (SCC) penalties. a reduction in lying time due to udder pain and this has important The main indirect costs, which are usually underestimated by far- negative effects on their welfare and production. It must not be mers, are the increased risk of culling and reduced fertility. On ave- underestimated that resting is a very important behaviour for dairy rage, each case of clinical mastitis causes an estimated loss of around cattle; healthy cows typically spend approximately 12-13 hours per 200 Euros.
    [Show full text]
  • An Update on Environmental Mastitis: Challenging Perceptions
    Received: 13 April 2017 DOI: 10.1111/tbed.12704 DISCONTOOLS SUPPLEMENT An update on environmental mastitis: Challenging perceptions I. C. Klaas1 | R. N. Zadoks2,3 1Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Summary Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Environmental mastitis is the most common and costly form of mastitis in modern Frederiksberg C, Denmark dairy herds where contagious transmission of intramammary pathogens is controlled 2Moredun Research Institute, Penicuik,UK 3Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and through implementation of standard mastitis prevention programmes. Environmental Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, mastitis can be caused by a wide range of bacterial species, and binary classification Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK of species as contagious or environmental is misleading, particularly for Staphylococ- cus aureus, Streptococcus uberis and other streptococcal species, including Streptococ- Correspondence R. N. Zadoks, Institute of Biodiversity Animal cus agalactiae. Bovine faeces, the indoor environment and used pasture are major Health and Comparative Medicine, sources of mastitis pathogens, including Escherichia coli and S. uberis. A faeco-oral University of Glasgow, UK. Email: [email protected] transmission cycle may perpetuate and amplify the presence of such pathogens, including Klebsiella pneumoniae and S. agalactiae. Because of societal pressure to reduce reliance on antimicrobials as tools for mastitis control, management of envi- ronmental mastitis will increasingly need to be based on prevention. This requires a reduction in environmental exposure through bedding, pasture and pre-milking man- agement and enhancement of the host response to bacterial challenge. Efficacious vaccines are available to reduce the impact of coliform mastitis, but vaccine devel- opment for gram-positive mastitis has not progressed beyond the “promising” stage for decades.
    [Show full text]