Download PDF
Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere 2010; 38(04): 225-232
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1623978
Übersichtsartikel
Schattauer GmbH

Melktechnische Einflüsse auf die Zitzenkondition von Milchkühen

Eine LiteraturübersichtMilking technique and the bovine teat conditionA literature overview
M. Hubal
Abteilung Mikrobiologie der Fakultät II – Maschinenbau und Bioverfahrenstechnik der Fachhochschule Hannover
,
V. Krömker
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Eingegangen: 26 February 2010

Akzeptiert nach Revision: 27 April 2010

Publication Date:
08 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Neben der Melkarbeit und den Haltungsbedingungen nehmen melktechnische Variablen Einfluss auf die Zitzenkondition von Milchkühen. Da eine unzureichende Zitzenkondition mit Störungen der Eutergesundheit in Verbindung gebracht wird, sollten die technischen Einstellungen so gewählt werden, dass möglichst geringe melkabhängige Störungen der Zitzenkondition auftreten. Durch die komplexe Interaktion der melktechnischen Parameter ist eine Verbesserung der Zitzenkondition durch eine optimierte Einstellung nicht einfach zu erreichen. Die vorliegende Arbeit versucht, mittels einer Literaturübersicht den aktuellen Kenntnisstand darzustellen.

Summary

The bovine teat condition is not only affected by milking and housing conditions, but also by technical parameters of both the milking machine and the milking process. Because of the association between insufficient teat condition and deterioration of the udder health, the technical parameters should be adjusted in such a way as to minimize milking-related deterioration of the teat condition. It is difficult to improve the teat condition by an optimised adjustment of technical milking parameters due to complex interactions among the variables. The present paper shows the current status of knowledge by means of a literature overview.

Schlüsselwörter:

Maschineller Milchentzug - Hyperkeratose - Mastitis - Einstellungen

Key words:

Machine milking - hyperkeratosis - mastitis - settings
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Billon P, Gaudin V. Influence of the duration of a and c phase of pulsation on the milking characteristics and on udder health of dairy cows. Proceedings, ICAR Technical Series No 7, Physiological and Technical Aspects of Machine Milking. Nitra, Slovak Republic: 2001: 141-147.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Boast D, Bennett M, Hale M, Turner DM, Allcock J, Hillerton JE. Details of some forces applied to the cow’s teat during milking. Proceedings of the 4th IDF International Mastitis Conference. Maastricht, The Netherlands: 2005: 390-396.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Capuco AV, Wood DL, Quast JW. Effects of teatcup liner tension on teat canal keratin and teat condition in cows. J Dairy Res 2000; 67: 319-327.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ebendorff W, Ziesack J. Untersuchungen zum Einfluss eines verminderten Melkvakuums (45 kPa) auf Zitzenbelastung und Eutergesundheit sowie Milchertrags- und Milchentzugsparameter. Mh Vet Med 1991; 46: 827-831.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Geidel S, Graff K. Morphologie der Zitze und melktechnische Parameter. 1. Jahrestagung der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft der Milcherzeugerberater e. V. 2001: 1-8.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gleeson DE, O’Callaghan E. The effect of two milking systems on bovine teat condition. Proceedings, ICAR Technical Series No 7, Physiological and Technical Aspects of Machine Milking. Nitra, Slovak Republic: 2001: 243-246.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gleeson DE, Kilroy D, O’Callaghan E, Fitzpatrick E, Rath M. Effect of machine milking on bovine teat sinus injury and teat canal keratin. Ir Vet J 2003; 56: 46-50.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gleeson DE, O’Callaghan EJ, Rath MV. Effect of milking on bovine teat tissue as measured by ultrasonography. Ir Vet J 2002; 55: 628-632.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Graff K, Heidig K, Geidel S. Wartung und Pflege von Melkanlagen. Milchpur 2007; 48-53.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Grindal RJ. The role of the milking machine in mastitis. Br Vet J 1988; 524-533.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hamann J. Zum Einfluß des maschinellen Milchentzuges auf die Infektionsgefahr für die bovine Milchdrüse. München, Universität, Habil.-Schr. 1988
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hamann J. Zitzengewebereaktionen und maschineller Milchentzug – ein Beitrag zum Infektionsrisiko in der Zwischenmelkzeit. Milchwissenschaft 1988; 43: 8-12.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hamann J, Mein GA. Responses of the bovine teat to machine milking: measurement of changes in thickness of the teat apex. J Dairy Res 1988; 55: 331-338.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hamann J, Mein GA. Measurement of machine-induced changes in thickness of the bovine teat. J Dairy Res 1990; 57: 495-505.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hamann J, Mein GA. Teat thickness changes may provide biological test for effective pulsation. J Dairy Res 1996; 63: 179-189.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hamann J, Nipp B, Persson K. Teat tissue reactions to milking: Changes in blood flow and thickness in the bovine teat. Milchwissenschaft 1994; 49: 243-247.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hamann J, Mein GA, Wetzel S. Teat tissue reactions to milking: effects of vacuum level. J Dairy Sci 1993; 76: 1040-1046.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hillerton JE, Boast D, Davies D, Ohnstad I, Middleton N. Changes in milking liner performance with age. Proceedings of National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. Fort Worth, Texas 2003; 239-250.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hillerton JE, Ohnstad I, Baines JR, Leach KA. Changes in cow teat tissue created by two types of milking cluster. J Dairy Res 2000; 67: 309-317.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hillerton JE, Pankey JW, Pankey P. Effect of over-milking on teat condition. J Dairy Res 2002; 69: 81-84.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kirk JH. Risk factors for excessive hyperkeratosis of teat ends. http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/vetext/INF-DA/RiskFactorsPoorTeatEnd.pdf,. 2003
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kochmann AK, Laney C. The effect of liner barrel shape on teat end condition. Proceedings of National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. 2009; 230-231.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Krömker V. Melken. In: Kurzes Lehrbuch der Milchkunde und Milchhygiene. Krömker V. Hrsg. Stuttgart: MVS Medizinverlage, Parey; 2006: 23-46.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Krömker V, Hamann J. Diagnostik des Mastitisrisikos – tierindividuelle Merkmale. Prakt Tierarzt 1997; Coll. Veterinarium XXVIII: 70-75.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lacy-Hulbert SJ, Hillerton JE, Woolford MW. Influence of pulsationless milking on teat canal keratin growth and turnover. J Dairy Res 1996; 63: 517-524.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mein GA, Neijenhuis F, Morgan WF, Reinemann DJ, Hillerton JE, Baines JR, Ohnstad I, Rasmussen MD, Timms L, Britt JS, Farnsworth R, Cook N, Hemling T. Evaluation of bovine teat condition in commercial dairy herds, 1. Non-infectious factors. Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium on Mastitis and Milk Quality. Vancouver, Canada: 2001: 347-351.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Mein GA, Reinemann DJ, O’Callaghan E, Ohnstad I. Where the rubber meets the teat and what happens to milking characteristics. IDF World Dairy Summit and Centenary. Bruges, Belgium: 2003
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mein GA, Williams DMD, Reinemann DJ. Effects of milking on teat-end hyperkeratosis: 1. Mechanical forces applied by the teatcup liner and responses of the teat. Proceedings of 42nd National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. Fort Worth, Texas: 2003: 114-123.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Mein GA, Reinemann DJ, Schuring N, Ohnstad I. Milking machines and mastitis risk: A storm in a teatcup. Proceedings of 43rd National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. Charlotte, North Carolina: 2004: 176-188.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Neijenhuis F, Barkema HW, Hogeveen H, Noordhuizen JPTM. Classification and longitudinal examination of callused teat ends in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2000; 83: 2795-2804.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Neijenhuis F, Klungel GH, Hogeveen H, Noordhuizen JPTM. Machine milking risk factors for teat end callosity in dairy cows on herd level. In: Teat Condition in Dairy Cows. Neijenhuis F. ed. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Utrecht University, Diss; 2004: 107-128.
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Ohnstad I. Machine milking and the well-being of the dairy cow. Proceedings of the British Mastitis Conference. Stoneleigh, United Kingdom: 1998: 62-67.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ortega R, Pérez MA, Muñiz R, Fernández R. Milking machine tuning to improve udder health and to reduce teat end hyperkeratosis in dairy cows. In: Mastitis control. From science to practice. Lam TJGM. ed. Proceedings of International Conference on Mastitis Control. The Hague, The Netherlands: 2008: 333-340.
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Østerås O, Rønningen O, Sandvik L, Waage S. Field studies show associations between pulsator characteristics and udder health. J Dairy Res 1995; 62: 1-13.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Paulrud CO, Clausen S, Andersen PE, Rasmussen MD. Infrared thermography and ultrasonography to indirectly monitor the influence of liner type and overmilking on teat tissue recovery. Acta Vet Scand 2005; 46: 137-147.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Rasmussen MD. Influence of switch level of automatic cluster removers on milking performance and udder health. J Dairy Res 1993; 60: 287-297.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Rasmussen MD. Overmilking and teat condition. Proceedings of National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. Charlotte, North Carolina 2004: 169-175.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Rasmussen MD, Madsen NP. Effects of milkline vacuum, pulsator airline vacuum, and cluster weight on milk yield, teat condition, and udder health. J Dairy Sci 2000; 83: 77-84.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Rasmussen MD, Frimer ES, Kaartinen L, Jensen NE. Milking performance and udder health of cows milked with two different liners. J Dairy Res 1998; 65: 353-363.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Reid DA, Johnson AP. Trouble shooting herds with poor teat condition. Proceedings of National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting. Fort Worth, Texas: 2003: 124-127.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Reinemann DJ, Bade R, Zucali M, Spanu C, Ruegg PL. Understanding the influence of machine milking on teat defense mechanisms. In: Mastitis control. From science to practice. Lam TJGM. ed. Proceedings of International Conference on Mastitis Control. The Hague, The Netherlands: 2008: 323-331.
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Rønningen O, Reitan AD. Influence of static and dynamic teat characteristics and milking time on udder health in Norwegian Red Cattle. J Dairy Res 1990; 57: 171-177.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Ryšánek D, Olejník P, Babák V. Vacuum fluctuation in short milk tube during peak milk flow. Proceedings, ICAR Technical Series No 7, Physiological and Technical Aspects of Machine Milking. Nitra, Slovak Republic: 2001: 125-130.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Schukken YH, Petersson LG, Rauch BJ. Liners and teat end health. Proceeding of National Mastitis Council Annual Meeting Tampa, Florida: 2006: 183-196.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Thompson PD, Sieber RL. Milking machine effects on impacts and teat-end lesions. Proceedings of International Workshop on Machine Milking and Mastitis. Moorepark, Ireland: 1980: 61-72.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Wendt K. Veränderungen der Haut und Unterhaut. In: Euter- und Gesäugekrankheiten. Wendt K, Bostedt H, Mielke H, Fuchs H. Hrsg. Jena, Stuttgart: Fischer; 1994: 301-310.
    Google Scholar
  • 47 Wendt K. Beurteilung der Zitzenkondition und Einflüsse der Melktechnik auf die Zitze. Jahrestagung der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft der Milcherzeugerberater e.V. 2004
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Williams DM, Mein GA. The role of machine milking in the invasion of mastitis organisms and implications for maintaining low infection rates. Kieler Milchwirtschaftliche Forschungsberichte 1985; 37: 415-425.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar