Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0152030 (skin irritation)
 2,146 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Bacterial counts were compared in free-stall mattresses and teat ends exposed to 5 treatments in a factorial study design on 1 dairy farm. Mattresses in five 30-cow groups were subjected to 1 of 5 bedding treatments every other day: 0.5 kg of hydrated limestone, 120 mL of commercial acidic conditioner, 1 kg of coal fly ash, 1 kg of kiln-dried wood shavings, and control (no bedding). Counts of coliforms, Klebsiella spp., Escherichia coli, and Streptococcus spp. were lowest on mattresses bedded with lime. Mattresses bedded with the commercial acidic conditioner had the next lowest counts for coliforms, Klebsiella spp., and Streptococcus spp. Wood shavings and the no-bedding control had the highest counts for coliform and Klebsiella spp. Compared with wood shavings or control, fly ash reduced the counts of coliforms, whereas for the other 3 bacterial groups, the reduction was not always significant. Streptococcus spp. counts were greatest in the control group and did not differ among the shavings and fly ash groups. Teat swab results indicated that hydrated lime was the only bedding treatment that significantly decreased the counts of both coliforms and Klebsiella spp. There were no differences in Streptococcus spp. numbers on the teats between any of the bedding treatments. Bacterial populations grew steadily on mattresses and were generally higher at 36 to 48 h than at 12 to 24 h, whereas bacterial populations on teats grew rapidly by 12 h and then remained constant. Hydrated lime was the only treatment that significantly reduced bacterial counts on both mattresses and teat ends, but it caused some skin irritation.
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of free-stall mattress bedding treatments to reduce mastitis bacterial growth. 1842 Jun 19