Survey of farm, parlour and milking management, parlour technologies, SCC control strategies and farmer demographics on Irish dairy farms

BACKGROUND

This cross-sectional study describes a survey designed to fill knowledge gaps regarding farm management practices, parlour management practices and implemented technologies, milking management practices, somatic cell count (SCC) control strategies, farmer demographics and attitudes around SCC management on a sample of Irish dairy farms.

RESULTS

We categorized 376 complete responses by herd size quartile and calving pattern. The average respondent herd was 131 cows with most (82.2%) operating a seasonal calving system. The median monthly bulk tank somatic cell count for seasonal calving systems was 137,000 cells/ml (range 20,000 - 1,269,000 cells/ml), 170,000 cells/ml for split-calving systems (range 46,000 - 644,000 cells/ml) and 186,000 cells/ml for 'other' herds (range 20,000 - 664,000 cells/ml). The most common parlour types were swing-over herringbones (59.1%) and herringbones with recording jars (22.2%). The average number of units across herringbone parlours was 15, 49 in rotary parlours and two boxes on automatic milking system (AMS) farms. The most common parlour technologies were in-parlour feeding systems (84.5%), automatic washers on the bulk tank (72.8%), automatic cluster removers (57.9%), and entrance or exit gates controlled from the parlour pit (52.2%). Veterinary professionals, farming colleagues and processor milk quality advisors were the most commonly utilised sources of advice for SCC management (by 76.9%, 50.0% and 39.2% of respondents respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we successfully utilised a national survey to quantify farm management practices, parlour management practices and technology adoption levels, milking management practices, SCC control strategies and farmer demographics on 376 dairy farms in the Republic of Ireland. Rotary and AMS parlours had the most parlour technologies of any parlour type. Technology add-ons were generally less prevalent on farms with smaller herds. Despite finding areas for improvement with regard to frequency of liner changes, glove-wearing practices and engagement with bacteriology of milk samples, we also found evidence of high levels of documentation of mastitis treatments and high use of post-milking teat disinfection. We discovered that Irish dairy farmers are relatively content in their careers but face pressures regarding changes to the legislation around prudent antimicrobial use in their herds.

Effect of automatic cluster flushing on the concentration of Staphylococcus aureus in teat cup liners

Automatic flushing of milking clusters between milking events is a control measure aimed at reducing transmission of mastitis pathogens from infectious milk to a subsequently milked cow. We evaluated the effect of flushing with cold water and flushing with water containing peracetic acid (PAA) on the concentration of Staphylococcus aureus in teat cup liners. Thirty-two clusters in a swing-over milking parlor (Dairymaster, Causeway, Ireland) were subjected to a simulated milking with S. aureus-contaminated milk. Sixteen clusters were not flushed (controls), whereas 8 clusters were flushed with cold water (966 ± 32 mL) and 8 clusters were flushed with water containing PAA (200 mL/mL). A random teat cup in each cluster was sampled by rinsing with a phosphate buffer. Teat cup samples were cultured on the day following collection on Baird-Parker plates to determine the concentration of S. aureus. In teat cup samples from control clusters, the mean concentration of S. aureus was 2.8 × 10⁵ cfu/mL. The concentration of S. aureus was zero in teat cup samples from clusters flushed with cold water. In teat cup samples from clusters flushed with water containing PAA, the concentration of S. aureus was in general reduced compared with control clusters, but S. aureus was not removed completely. However, the automatic cluster flushing did not function properly when clusters were flushed with water containing PAA; thus, results reflected the effect of inadequate function rather than the effect of adding disinfectant to the flushing water. Before the main study, we conducted a pilot study to evaluate whether teat cup sampling with swabs and sample analysis with quantitative PCR were appropriate methods for the main study. Specifically, we evaluated the effect of swab sample mass on detection of S. aureus by quantitative PCR in the laboratory, Further, we compared PCR and bacterial culture on detection of S. aureus in a suspension following disinfection of the suspension with PAA. We sampled 20 identical S. aureus suspensions for culture and PCR by swabs before and after disinfection with PAA. Swab sample mass was determined by differential weighing and contributed to 46% of the variation observed in detection of S. aureus by PCR. Following disinfection with PAA, S. aureus remained detectable by PCR, although culturability ceased. Based on these results, we sampled teat cups in the main study with a buffer rinse and quantified S. aureus in the samples by bacterial culture. We concluded that automatic cluster flushing with cold water was effective in removing S. aureus from teat cup liners and that addition of PAA was therefore not necessary.