ArticleBMC veterinary research2024
Assessment of Lactococcus Cremoris preparations for the pre- and post-milking teat disinfection.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bacteria-dependent modulation of immune responses in the bovine udder.Veterinary research · 2026Article
- Review
- Nisin A-producing Lactococcus cremoris formulations for pre- and post-milking teat disinfection modulate the bovine milk microbiota.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Impact of a teat disinfectant based on Lactococcus cremoris on the cow milk proteome.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Good hygienic milking practices including the disinfection of the cow teat skin before and after milking aimed at preventing the occurrence of new intramammary infections (IMI) in dairy cows. This practice is generally performed using disinfectants, and in the current context of attention to the emergence of resistances, it is of greatest interest to evaluate alternative solutions that can expand treatment options. We assessed the efficacy of a pre-dipping and a post-dipping product based on the bacteriocin-containing culture of Lactococcus cremoris strain FT27, as compared to commercial disinfectants. FT27 was selected for the bactericidal activity in vitro against food pathogens. In the present study, it also revealed a high bactericidal activity against the main mastitis pathogens, most likely related to Nisin A production, according to genomic and proteomic analysis. The lactococcus-based preparations were applied in two commercial dairy farms in Northern Italy. Overall, 298 dairy cows were enrolled, 141 in the treated group (TR), and 157 in the control group (CTR). The cows were sampled at quarter level every two weeks for 3 months. During the trial, all cows showed a good health status. The hygiene level for udder, flanks and legs was generally good (on average < 3 score); the udder hygiene was significantly worse (P < 0.01) in the CTR group. The teat apex hyperkeratosis was overall low (on average < 2 score). We recorded no significant differences between the two experimental groups in the Somatic Cell Count (SCC) values and the bacteriological results. The overall frequency of new IMI was low, ranging 0.6 - 0.5% for S. aureus in the TR or CTR group respectively, to 2.6-4.4% for NASM. Regarding Str. spp., the new IMI accounted for 1.7% or 1.9% in the TR or CTR group, respectively. Notably, the incidence of S. aureus new IMI did not increase during the study, even though neither of the two herds segregated the positive cows. The non-inferiority test showed that the Lactococcus-based pre- and post-dipping products had an efficacy comparable to proven commercial disinfectants in maintaining udder health and preventing new IMI, thus representing a possible alternative to current teat dip products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.