Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28808353›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Milk microbiome and bacterial load following dry cow therapy without antibiotics in dairy cows with healthy mammary gland.

Erika C R Bonsaglia, Marilia S Gomes, Igor F Canisso, Ziyao Zhou, Svetlana F Lima, Vera L M Rall, Georgios Oikonomou, Rodrigo C Bicalho, Fabio S Lima

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The occurrence ofmSystems · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Staphylococcal mastitis in dairy cows.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Erika C R BonsagliaDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Marilia S GomesDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Igor F CanissoDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Ziyao ZhouDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Svetlana F LimaDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Vera L M RallDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Biosciences, São Paulo State University, Botucatu, Brazil, USA.
Georgios OikonomouDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Leahurst, Neston, UK.
Rodrigo C BicalhoDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Fabio S LimaDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA. flima@illinois.edu.
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · USCornell University · USUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preventive infusion of antibiotics in the mammary gland of cows consumes 11 tons/year of medically relevant antimicrobials, yet, this practice might not be critical to prevent new infections in the healthy mammary gland of cows. Here, we used next-generation sequencing and quantitative real-time PCR to determine the impact of dry cow therapy without antibiotics on milk microbiome and bacterial load, respectively. Cows diagnosed as negative for mastitis at dry off were randomly allocated to receive antibiotic (intramammary ceftiofur hydrochloride) and teat sealant or just teat sealant. Firmicutes was the most abundant phylum, and Corynebacterium, Acinetobacter, and Staphylococcus, often involved in mastitis cases, were the most abundant genera across treatments and time. However, there were no effects of antimicrobial on milk microbiome and bacterial load. Bacterial load was greater at seven days postpartum than at dry off. Dry cow therapy based on teat sealant without antibiotics can be used with no detrimental impacts on milk microbiome and bacterial load in cows with a healthy mammary gland.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial LoadCattleCephalosporinsFemaleLactationMammary Glands, AnimalMastitis, BovineMicrobiotaMilkPostpartum PeriodAnti-Bacterial AgentsceftiofurCephalosporins

Identifiers

PMID28808353
PMCPMC5556035
OpenAlexW2743597303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.