ArticleTropical animal health and production2014
Milk yield and reproductive performance of brucellosis-vaccinated but seropositive Holstein cows.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shedding rate of Brucella spp. in the milk of seropositive and seronegative dairy cattle.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Importance of brucellosis control programs of livestock on the improvement of one health.The veterinary quarterly · 2021Review
- Effect of co-positivity for brucellosis and tuberculosis on milk yield and fertility of Holstein cows.Tropical animal health and production · 2021Article
- Brucella species circulating in rural and periurban dairy cattle farms: a comparative study in an endemic area.Tropical animal health and production · 2021Article
- Seroprevalence and risk factors of brucellosis and the brucellosis model at the individual level of dairy cattle in the West Bandung District, Indonesia.Veterinary world · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this research was to study if seropositivity for brucellosis in vaccinated cows against this disease hampers reproductive performance and milk production in high-yielding Holstein cows. For this purpose 1,026 healthy cows and 372 cows seropositive for brucellosis were enrolled in this study. Cows positive to card test and subsequently to the rivanol test were further subjected to the radial immunodiffusion (RID) test. It was found that only 11% of the presumably infected cows by brucellosis screening tests were really infected with this disease. The reproductive performance of the group of cows with 11% Brucella-infected animals was not impaired; overall pregnancy rate did not differ between seropositive and healthy cows (30.9 vs. 29.6%). The abortion rates were similar between seropositive cows (5.3%) and seronegative animals (6.9%). Cows in the herd with 11% Brucella-infected animals produced significantly more milk than unaffected cows over a 305-day lactation (10,684 ± 1,720 vs. 10,345 ± 1,736; mean ± SD; P < 0.05). It was concluded that in dairy herds vaccinated against brucellosis with both 19 and RB51 strains, supplemental tests such as RID need to be conducted on all reactors in order to maintain diagnostic accuracy. These results also indicate that 11% animal prevalence of brucellosis did not exert a detrimental effect on 305-day milk yield and reproductive performance in high milk-yielding Holstein cows.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24254418What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.