Predicting intramammary infection status at drying off using indirect testing of milk samples

References

• *Anonymous. New Zealand Dairy Statistics 2015–16. https://www.dairynz.co.nz/media/5416078/nz-dairy-statistics-2015-16.pdf (accessed 13 October 2017). DairyNZ, Hamilton, NZ, 2016
   Google Scholar
• Barnum DA, Newbould FH. The use of the California Mastitis Test for the detection of bovine mastitis. The Canadian Veterinary Journal 2, 83–90, 1961
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berning LM, Paape MJ, Miller RH, LeDane RA. Variation in N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase activity and somatic cell count among various milk fractions. Journal of Dairy Science 70, 1054–60, 1987 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(87)80111-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhutto AL, Murray RD, Woldehiwet Z. California mastitis test scores as indicators of subclinical intra-mammary infections at the end of lactation in dairy cows. Research in Veterinary Science 92, 13–7, 2012 doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2010.10.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating charachteristic receiver curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44, 837–845, 1988 doi: 10.2307/2531595
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodd FH, Westgarth DR, Neave FK, Kingwill RG. Mastitis—the strategy of control. Journal of Dairy Science 52, 689–95, 1969 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(69)86631-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Dohoo I, Martin W, Stryhn H. Veterinary Epidemiologic Research. VER Inc., Charlottetown, PEI, Canada, 2009
   Google Scholar
• Dohoo IR, Smith J, Andersen S, Kelton DF, Godden S, Mastitis Research Workers’ Conference. Diagnosing intramammary infections: evaluation of definitions based on a single milk sample. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 250–61, 2011 doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3559
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernando RS, Spahr SL, Jaster EH. Comparison of electrical conductivity of milk with other indirect methods for detection of subclinical mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 68, 449–56, 1985 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(85)80844-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greiner M, Pfeiffer D, Smith RD. Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 45, 23–41, 2000 doi: 10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00115-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hogan JS, Gonzalez RN, Harmon RJ, Nickerson SC, Oliver SP, Pankey JW, Smith KL. Laboratory Handbook on Bovine Mastitis. National Mastitis Council Inc., Madison, WI, USA, 1999
   Google Scholar
• Huxley JN, Green MJ, Green LE, Bradley AJ. Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry period. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 551–61, 2002 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74108-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159–74, 1977 doi: 10.2307/2529310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leach KA, Green MJ, Breen JE, Huxley JN, Macaulay R, Newton HT, Bradley AJ. Use of domestic detergents in the California mastitis test for high somatic cell counts in milk. Veterinary Record 163, 566–70, 2008 doi: 10.1136/vr.163.19.566
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansell PD, Seguya A. The use of a hand-held conductivity meter for the diagnosis of subclinical mastitis in dairy cows during late lactation. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 51, 21–5, 2003 doi: 10.1080/00480169.2003.36325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *McDougall S, Compton C. Internal teat sealants. Proceedings of the 2014 New Zealand Milk Quality Conference Pp 35–46. New Zealand Veterinary Association, Wellington, NZ, 2014
   Google Scholar
• Middleton JR, Hardin D, Steevens B, Randle R, Tyler JW. Use of somatic cell counts and California mastitis test results from individual quarter milk samples to detect subclinical intramammary infection in dairy cattle from a herd with a high bulk tank somatic cell count. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 224, 419–23, 2004 doi: 10.2460/javma.2004.224.419
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norberg E, Hogeveen H, Korsgaard IR, Friggens NC, Sloth KHMN, Løvendahl P. Electrical conductivity of milk: ability to predict mastitis status. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 1099–107, 2004a doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73256-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norberg E, Rogers GW, Goodling RC, Cooper JB, Madsen P. Genetic parameters for test-day electrical conductivity of milk for first-lactation cows from random regression models. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 1917–24, 2004b doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73350-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poutrel B, Rainard P. California mastitis test guide of selective dry cow therapy. Journal of Dairy Science 64, 241–8, 1981 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(81)82560-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabiee AR, Lean IJ. The effect of internal teat sealant products (Teatseal and Orbeseal) on intramammary infection, clinical mastitis, and somatic cell counts in lactating dairy cows: a meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 6915–31, 2013 doi: 10.3168/jds.2013-6544
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanford CJ, Keefe GP, Sanchez J, Dingwell RT, Barkema HW, Leslie KE, Dohoo IR. Test characteristics from latent-class models of the California Mastitis Test. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 77, 96–108, 2006 doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2006.06.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant JM, Leslie KE, Shirley JE, Pulkrabek BJ, Lim GH. Sensitivity and specificity of somatic cell count and California Mastitis Test for identifying intramammary infection in early lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 2018–24, 2001 doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74645-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolford MW, Williamson JH, Henderson HV. Changes in electrical conductivity and somatic cell count between milk fractions from quarters subclinically infected with particular mastitis pathogens. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 65, 187–98, 1998
   Google Scholar
• *Non-peer-reviewed
   Google Scholar