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