Short communication: scoring system based on five teat morphology traits relates to udder health

References

• Bezman D, Lemberskiy-Kuzin L, Katz G, Merin U, Leitner G. 2015. Influence of intramammary infection of a single gland in dairy cows on the cow’s milk quality. J Dairy Res. 82(3):304-311. doi:10.1017/S002202991500031X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celik, H.A., Aydin, I., Colak, M., Sendag, S. and Dinc, D.A. 2008. Ultrasonographic evaluation of age related influence on the teat canal and the effect of this influence on milk yield in brown Swiss cows. Bull Veterinary Inst Pulawy. 52:245-249.
   Google Scholar
• Divers TJ, Peek SF. Rebhun’s diseases of dairy cattle. 2007. 2nd ed. Amsterdam (NL): Elsevier Health Sciences. Chapter 8, Deseases of the teats and udder; p. 327-394.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2020. Farm to fork strategy – publication. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Ferronatto JA, Ferronatto TC, Schneider M, Pessoa LF, Blagitz MG, Heinemann MB, Libera AMMPD, Souza FN. 2018 Diagnosing mastitis in early lactation: use of Somaticell®, California mastitis test and somatic cell count. Ital J Anim Sci. 17(3):723-729. doi:10.1080/1828051X.2018.1426394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gašparík M, Stádník L, Ducháček J, Tančin V. 2019. Differences between jersey and Holstein cows in milking-induced teat prolongation throughout the lactation. Czech J Anim Sci. 64(10):431-438. doi:10.17221/145/2019-CJAS
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guarín JF, Ruegg PL. 2016. Pre-and postmilking anatomical characteristics of teats and their associations with risk of clinical mastitis in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 99(10):8323-8329. doi:10.3168/jds.2015-10093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamann J, Mein GA. 1996. Teat thickness changes may provide biological test for effective pulsation. J Dairy Res. 63(2):309-313. doi:10.1017/S002202990003168X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanuš O, Stádník L, Klimešová M, Tomáška M, Hasoňová L, Falta D, Kučera J, Kopecký J, Jedelská R. 2016. The evaluation of real time milk analyse result reliability in the Czech republic. Acta Univ Agric Silvic Mendelianae Brun. 64(4):1155-1166. doi:10.11118/actaun201664041155
   Google Scholar
• Klein D, Flock M, Khol JL, Franz S, Stuger HP, Baumgartner W. 2005. Ultrasonographic measurements of the bovine teat: breed differences and the significance of the measurements for udder health. J Dairy Res. 72(3):296-302. doi:10.1017/S0022029905000920
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacy-Hulbert SJ, Hillerton JE. 1995. Physical characteristics of the bovine teat canal and their influence on susceptibility to streptococcal infection. J Dairy Res. 62(3):395–404. doi:10.1017/S0022029900031101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin LM, Stöcker C, Sauerwein H, Büscher W, Müller U. 2018. Evaluation of inner teat morphology by using high-resolution ultrasound: changes due to milking and establishment of measurement traits of the distal teat canal. J Dairy Sci. 101(9):8417-8428. doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mein GA. 2012. The role of the milking machine in mastitis control. Vet Clin Food Anim Pract. 28(2):307-320. doi:10.1016/j.cvfa.2012.03.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles AM, McArt JAA, Yepes FAL, Stambuk CR, Virkler PD, Huson HJ. 2019. Udder and teat conformational risk factors for elevated somatic cell count and clinical mastitis in New York Holsteins. Prev Vet Med. 163:7-13. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.12.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neijenhuis F, Barkema HW, Hogeveen H, Noordhuizen JPTM. 2001. Relationship between teat-end callosity and occurrence of clinical mastitis. J Dairy Sci. 84(12):2664-2672. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74720-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAS Institute Inc. 2011. SAS/STAT® 9.3 user’s guide. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Seykora AJ, McDaniel BT. 1985. Udder and teat morphology to mastitis resistence. J Dairy Sci. 68(8):2087-2093. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(85)81072-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seykora AJ, McDaniel BT. 1986. Genetics statistics and relationships of teat and udder traits, somatic cell counts, and milk production. J Dairy Sci. 69(9):2395-2407. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(86)80679-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slettbakk T, Jorstad A, Farver TB, Holmes JC. 1995. Impact of milking characteristics and morphology of udder and teats on clinical mastitis in first-lactation and 2nd-lactation Norwegian cattle. Prev Vet Med. 24(4):235–244. doi:10.1016/0167-5877(95)00490-N
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stádník L, Louda F, Bezdíček J, Ježková A, Rákos M. 2010. Changes in teat parameters caused by milking and their recovery to their initial size. Arch Anim Breed. 53(6):650-662. doi:10.5194/aab-53-650-2010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zecconi A, Hamann J, Bronzo V, Ruffo G. 1992. Machine-induced teat tissue reactions and infection risk in a dairy herd free of contagious mastitis pathogens. J Dairy Res. 59:265-271. doi:10.1017/S0022029900030545
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwertvaegher I, De Vliegher S, Verbist B, Van Nuffel A, Baert J, Van Weyenberg S. 2013. Short communication: associations between teat dimensions and milking-induced changes in teat dimensions and quarter milk somatic cell counts in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 96(2):1075–1080. doi:10.3168/jds.2012-5636
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar