Milking management practices and IMI in Jersey crossbred cows in changing scenario

CHAMPAK BHAKAT; A CHATTERJEE; D K MANDAL; M KARUNAKARAN; A MANDAL; S GARAI; T K DUTTA

doi:10.56093/ijans.v87i4.69613

Authors

CHAMPAK BHAKAT ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
A CHATTERJEE ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
D K MANDAL ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
M KARUNAKARAN ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
A MANDAL ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
S GARAI ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India
T K DUTTA ICAR-NDRI, ERS, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v87i4.69613

Keywords:

Cleanliness, Farmer, Hygiene, Hand and machine milking, Milk characteristics

Abstract

Experiment was conducted on Jersey crossbred cows (12) to compare 2 management practices viz. hand and machine milking. Field investigations were also carried out on other milking management practices, IMI, hygiene status and cleanliness in 3 stages. A total of 459 milk samples were analysed. Farm experimentation revealed that SCC and MCMT were significantly higher in hand milking as compared to machine milking management. But milk yield and milk extraction rate were significantly lower in hand milking as compared to machine milking
management. The time required for milking/animal was significantly higher in hand milking as compared to machine milking management. The morning and evening milk samples of both hand and machine milking showed higher values of SCC, MCMT, pH during evening as compared to morning session but milk yield and milk extraction rate were lower during evening as compared to morning session whereas time required for milking/animal was higher in morning as compared to evening time. Almost similar trend of fat and SNF (%) were estimated in both milking session. Field investigation indicated that SCC, MCMT, pH were higher in IMI animal as compared to no-IMI animal whereas fat and SNF were lower in IMI animal as compared to no IMI animal. Teat dipping and screening of udders for mastitis were never followed by any farmer. Most of farmer having single cow, maintained good hygiene status and cleanliness but most of the farmer having >3 cows, maintained poor hygiene status. Farm experimentation concluded that the IMI can be reduced in machine milking practices in comparison to hand milking practices with higher milk quantity without affecting milk composition in Jersey crossbred cows. Field investigation concluded that there is a significant association between animal keeping pattern and hygiene status/cleanliness at study area. So efforts should be made to increase cleanliness and hygiene status in milking cows itself, housing of animal and milkers of farmerâ€™s house to reduce incidence of IMI in changing scenario.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bailey K and Heald C W. 2000. Milk Components and Quality: New Methods for Paying Pennsylvania Dairy Farmers. Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Research and Cooperative Extension. http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/FreePubs/pdfs/ua342.pdf.

Ballou L U, Pasquini M, Bremel R D, Everson T and Dean S R D. 1995. Factors affecting herd milk composition and milk plasmin at four levels of somatic cell counts. Journal of Dairy Science 78: 2186–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(95)76846-1

Bharti P, Bhakat C, Ghosh M K, Dutta T K and Das R. 2015. Relationship among intramammary infection and raw milk parameters in Jersey crossbred cows under hot-humid climate. Journal of Animal Research 5(2): 317 – 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-940X.2015.00054.6

Bhaskaran K and Praveena C. 1982. Adoption of improved dry land agricultural technology in an integrated dry land agricultural development project in AP. Indian Journal of Extension Education 18: 32–39.

Bhakat C, Wathore S B, Chatterjee A, Garai S, Karunakaran M, Mandal D K, Rai S, Mandal A and Dutta T K. 2016a. Studies on milking hygiene management and udder health status of dairy cows at Nadia district of WB. Compendium of 44th Dairy Industry Conference at ICAR-NDRI, Feb 18–20,2016, pp 134– 135.

Bhakat C, Mandal D K, Chatterjee A, Karunakaran M, Asif M, Rai S and Mandal A. 2016b. Influence of clean milk production on incidence of sub-clinical mastitis in cows at lower gangetic regions. Journal of Agriculture Engineering and Food Technology 3(3): 248–52.

Dang A K and Anand S K. 2007. Effect of milking systems on the milk somatic cell counts and composition. Livestock Research for Rural Development 19(6): 1–9.

Dang A K, Anand S K and Singh M. 2004. Mastitis and strategies for its control. Indian Dairyman 56(1): 27–32.

Dang A K and Singh M. 2006. Udder the most important asset of Dairy industry, its care and management. Indian Dairyman 58(8): 57–63.

Devi B K, Shukla P C and Bagherwal R K. 1997. Incidence of sub-clinical mastitis in cows. Indian Journal of Dairy Science 50(6): 477–78.

Dohoo I R and Meek A H. 1982. Somatic cell counts in bovine milk. Canadian Veterinary Journal 23: 119–25.

Eberhart R J, Hutchinson L J and Spencer S B. 1982. Relationship of bulk milk tank somatic cell counts to prevelance of intramammary infection and to indices of herd production. Journal of Food Protection 45: 1125–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-45.12.1125

Hamann J. 2002. Relationships between somatic cell counts and milk composition. Bulletin of the IDF 372: 56–59.

Hanan M, El-Hewairy, Sahar A, Galal, Hamouda R H and Dohreig R M A. 2015. Immunological and bacteriological findings associated with subclinical mastitis in dairy farm. Life Science Journal 12: 139–46.

Harmon R J. 1994. Physiology of mastitis and factors affecting somatic cell count. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 2103–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)77153-8

Kumaresan G. 2013. Somatic cell pattern and composition of milk of Holstein Friesian crossbred cattle. International Journal of Enironmental Science Technology 2(6): 1421 – 25.

Malek dos Reis C B, Barreiro J R, Mestieri L, Porcionato M A and dos Santos M V. 2013. Effect of somatic cell count and mastitis pathogens on milk composition in Gyr cows. BMC Veterinary Research 9: 67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-6148-9-67

Neijenhuis F, Barkema H W, Hogeveen H and Noordhuizen J P T M. 2001. Relationship between teat end callosity and occurrence of clinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 84: 2664–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74720-0

Neijenhuis F. 2003. International collaboration of teat end condition. Bulletin of the IDF 381/2003 pg-21.

Patil M P, Nagvekar A S, Ingole S D, Bharucha S V and Palve V T. 2015. Somatic cell count and alkaline phosphatase activity in milk for evaluation of mastitis in buffalo. Veterinary World 8(3): 363–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2015.363-366

Schukken Y H, Wilson D J, Welcome F, Garrison-Tinofsky L and Gonzales R N. 2003. Monitoring udder health and milk quality using somatic cell counts. Veterinary Research 34: 579–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2003028

Singh M and Dang A K. 2002. Somatic cell counts of milk. National Dairy Research Institute, Publication No: 1/2002.

Sharma N. 2007. Alternative approach to control intramammary infection in dairy cows- A Review. Asian Journal of Animal Veterinary Advances 2(2): 50–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2007.50.62

Snedecor G W and Cochran W G. 1994. Statistical methods. Affiliated East-West press and Iowa State University press, 8th edition.

Srivastava A K and Khetra Y. 2016. World wide scenario of milk processing and emerging trends. Souvenir of 44th Dairy Industry Conference at ICAR-NDRI, Feb 18-20,2016, pp 1–6. Tancin V. 2013.

Somatic cell counts in milk of dairy cows under practical conditions. Slovak Journal of Animal Science 46(1):31–34.