A32>Lancaster Farming, Saturday, May 22, 1993 Table 2. YEARLY PRODUCTION AND MASTITIS SUMMARY TteK \ ROLLING YEARLY SOMATIC CELL COUNT SUMMARY _ °£ s M 8 '\\ HEROAVERAGE . %COWSSCCSCORE AVERAGE OF TEST hero ON ~~A \ 1 1 -ALU 1 5 s—iii- SCC \ TEST PERIOD TEST DAY D AYSJ*\ \ PAT PHOT BELOW 142.000* 284.000* $44000 OVEA SCORE _ __ _ __ _ MILK \ \ 142000 20.000 50.000 1.1300001 I2OOOC ■ (1L TV\[\f f C! MONTH DROPPED I 3ipnrgrr ~rs6\\ 17631622 I 66 Ilfrnrl' 4 I a13.~3i UL ' L ' n ” J —B=n=BV~7V 1 129 — I2W\ \TB3T"BZC“TSTTT ~3""“5 "STS’ 9-17-89 34 127 129 \\77o 626 72 17 7 3 I 2.S lO-13-89 26 131 127 \\777 632 79 13 2 3 3 2.3 % ■ l/J 11-12-89 30 133 137 X\B3 637 75 10 9 3 3 2,4 I 12-10-89 28 128 ISO A 198 641 85 10 3 2 2.1 1- 33 127 163 73 \4 647 83 9 3 3 2 2.2 2- 30 1,23 175 68V 648 82 10 3 5 2.2 R V 8 3-19-90 36 /123 194 6?A \ 647 73 IS 9 2 I 2.4 V_.. , H 4-13-90 205 61.1 \649 78 12 7 3 2.1 ■■■PF Glenn A. Shirk H 5-19-90 36 * 124 204 62.3v>«50 70 20 10 2.4 «/\" B 6—14—90 26 if' l:22 192 57.8 k\46 82 IS 2 1 2.1 OkX \\ LancasterExtens.cn 8 7 * 17 - 90 33 * 122 180 58 « 6 \\ 9 76 11 8 1 4 2.5 BBn \r\V Dairy Agent | AVERAGES 30 ; 125 155 66.8 6V, \ 78 12 6 3 1 2.3 Many producers know what their herd average SCC levels have been because it is reported to them by their milk plant and they read it on their monthly DHIA reports. It affects their eligibility for milk quality premium payments, it is an indication of the herd's general udder health status, it indicates 4. Unsanitary maternity area, how much production they may have lost as a result of damage done to udder 5. Weakened immune system caused by inadequate nutrition, calving- tissue. Better indicators of the herd's udder health status, infection patterns and 6. Ineffective dry treatment, or no dry treatment. the effectiveness of mastitis prevention and control measures are the herds SCC trend* - lactation trends and seasonal trends. These can be found on Penna. DHIA's SCC Management Report and Herd Summary Report 11, and on Raleigh's indicate that: DHIA Herd Summary Report. They are also illustrated in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1. Lactation Trends STAGE OF LACTATION (DAYS) STAGE OF r MO 41-100 101-199 200-305 306* „„ IST LACT 2 4 4 4 3 NUMBER -m -m a -r 2ND t LATER * * % OF IST LACT A | £ fl 6 MILKING a « "i 'ft if I HERD 2ND I LATER _ av. daily ist LACT. 54 5 5 56 47 40 PRODUCTION 2NO» LATER * ist lact, 3#2 2m 1 2mS I*2 2*9 Table 1 shows SCC trends by stage of lactation and by lactation number. In this example, Ist lactation heifers, as well as the older cows, have scores in excess of 3.0 within 40 days of calving. These averages, apply only to the 2 heifers and to the 4 older cows that were less than 41 days m milk as of the last test day. Similarly, the 41-100 day average applies only to the 4 heifers and 7 older cows that were in that stage of lactation as of the last test day. Why might the heifers and cows in this herd have elevated cell counts within 40 days of calving? A number of things could be responsible, some of which are: Top 50 Protein 50 protein producing as follows: The top are listed NAME BOB+KAREN GOCHENAUR STEPHEN L HERSHEY JOHN E COLEMAN JR ROBERT KAUFFMAN JR SPRING BELLE FARM HENRY D ZIMMERMAN ABRAHAM SHELLY JR WALNUT RUN FARM VERNON R UMBLE + SON SHELMAR ACRES JOHN H HOWARD JEFFREY L AUNGST WARREN Z GOOD ROBERT L & LINDA SENSENIG NATE+TRISH STOLTZFUS DAVID R STOLTZFUS NEVIN S HORNING ROBERT L SHELLY AMOS E STOLTZFUS MELVIN ZOOK EARL ANNA MAE REIFF WEAVER HOMSTEAD FARM (Table 1) herds for April in Lancaster DHIA S MILK. IT DOES ABODY GOOD; MIDDLE ATLANTIC MILK MARKETING ASSOCIATION, INC. 1. Heifers being sucked. 2. Heifers becoming infected during their rearing period, peihaps because of unsanitary conditions, flies feeding on their teat ends, etc. 3. The producers could have purchased infected replacements. ■elated stresses, other infections, etc. The cell counts of other heifers later in lactation are lower. This could 1. Measures taken to control or reduce early lactation infections were successful 2. Problem heifers were quickly culled. 3. Heifers later in lactation were not exposed to the same high-risk situations as those which calved more recently. 4. The low counts in heifers throughout the latter stages of lactation indicate that good milking procedures must have been followed to prevent spread of infections from older cows to the newer replacements. S. In our example, some heifers could have gotten infected late in lactation. As cows approach the end of their normal lactation and as they extend over into a longer lactation cell counts normally increase, not necessarily due to infection but due to normal iluffing off of cells in the udder. In late lactation there it less milk to dilute the cells, so the counts in milk are generally higher Older cows generally have higher counts than younger heifers. Don't accept this at being normal. It isn'tl Strive to maintain low counts in older cows as well. The reason older cows have higher counts is they have been exposed to more opportunities for infection, and we haven't been completely successful in preventing and controlling their infections In our example herd, the older cows also came fresh with elevated counts and the counts remained rather high throughout lactation. Why? 1. Did the cows get infected m their previous lactation, soon after being dned off. or at calving time? 2. Were the cows dry-treated 9 Was it successful? Herds, Lancaster DHIA For . April RHA FAT RHA BRD MILK 25255 24873 23543 22729 23469 23318 22161 24127 23051 22741 22744 23516 22540 22521 22405 22953 23662 21802 22122 22283 22515 22948 RHA NO. PRO COWS 802 54 769 63 767 61 758 95 748 47 742 53 741 33 740 237 733 87 730 89 728 46 725 50 723 47 717 74 717 48 715 35 715 47 714 51 714 64 712 78 711 40 711 87 CURTIS E AKERS KENNETH E ZURIN 1332 COLEBROOK RD EMANUEL S ESH KEN + LISA WIKER THOMAS C LAPP WEA-LAND FARM DARYL + SAM MARTIN NELSON + JANE STONER MARVIN R STOLTZFUS CLAIR R LANDIS J RAY RANCK LENEWOOD FARM DENNIS E TICE DONALD B TRIMBLE ELMER M HIGH WARREN E BURKHOLDER JOHN S ZIMMERMAN RICK + MIM BRENNEMAN HARRY L TROOP STAR POINT DAIRY CALVIN L ZIMMERMAN PARKE H RANCK JR KARL W HERR SAMUEL E BEILER SIX CORNER FARM PAUL M FAHNESTOCK CLAY FARM 3. Was there any attempt to cure infecliona during lactation? 4. Are there a few older, chronically-infected cows that are keeping the count elevated month after month? Table 2 looks at seasonal SCC trends. In addition to herd average, look at the infection pattern from month to month. What percent of the henl is not infected (codes J-3), "lightly” infected (code 4), and severely infected (codes 5-9)? Looking at Table 2, we observe that the average count did not change much from month to month, but we can spot some months when more than 10* of the herd fell in the code 5-9 range. The months were July 1989 (the month dropped), September, November. March, April, May and July. What happens in these high months, and in the days preceding that preceded them, to cause an increaae in the number of cows severely infected? Was it due to I. Hot, mucky days and sloppy conditions? 2. Cows having access to stagnant water and swampy areas? 3. Illnesses or conditions that jeopardized the cows' immune systems? 4. Changes in milking techniques or milkers (people or machines)? 5. Failure to maintain the milking system, change inflations, clean the regulator filters, repair faulty pulsalors, etc.? 6. Malfunctioning milking equipment? 7. The purchase of some infected replacements? We've just raised some questions about the high months. Now let's focus on the low months, and ask what caused a drop in severe infections in these months? 1. Did you reduce the severity of infections with effective treatments? 2. Did you identify and correct the cause of the problem? Or, did you just beat the symptom? 3. Did you cull the problem cows (symptoms)? And, if there was no attempt to correct the cause of the problem, do other cows continue to get severely infected within a few months? As I have illustrated, these trends can reveal a lot about infection patterns and herd management practices. But, we have to take the time to see the patterns and trends that make up the herd’s average SCC, and we have to darc to ask ourselves some probing questions as to why these patterns and (rends exist. Penn State Cooperative Extension is an affirmative action, equal opponumty educational institution
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers