Journal of Dairy Science
Volume 93, Issue 1 , Pages 45-52 , January 2010

Pressure distribution at the teat–liner and teat–calf interfaces

  • P.P.J. van der Tol

      Affiliations

    • Lely Industries N.V., Weverskade 110, NL-3147 PA Maassluis, the Netherlands
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
    • ,
  • W. Schrader

      Affiliations

    • Lely Industries N.V., Weverskade 110, NL-3147 PA Maassluis, the Netherlands
    • ,
  • B. Aernouts

      Affiliations

    • Lely Industries N.V., Weverskade 110, NL-3147 PA Maassluis, the Netherlands
    • Biosciences and Technology Department, K. H. Kempen, Kleinhoefstraat 4, B-2440 Geel, Belgium

Received 4 November 2008 ,Accepted 21 September 2009.

References 

  1. Bade R, Reinemann DJ, Mein GA. Sources of variability in compressive load applied to bovine teats. In: Proc. 46th Annual Mtg. Natl. Mastitis Counc. San Antonio, Texas. National Mastitis Council, Madison, WI. 2007;
  2. Blowey R, Edmondson P. Mastitis Control in Dairy Herds. Tonbridge, UK: Farming Press Books; 1995;
  3. Boast D, Hale M, Turner D, Hillerton JE. Variation in rubber chemistry and dynamic mechanical properties of the milking liner barrel with age. J. Dairy Sci. 2008;91:2247–2256
  4. Davis, M. A., D. J. Reinemann, and G. A. Mein. 2001. Development and testing of a device to measure compressive teat load applied to a bovine teat by the closed teatcup liner. Paper no. 013007 presented at The 2001 ASAE Annual Mtg., Sacramento, CA. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
  5. Fischer, A. 2007. Untersuchungen zur Vermeidung des gegenseitigen Besaugens unter Kälbern durch den Einsatz eines Saugnuckels mit erhöhtem Saugwiderstand. PhD thesis, Fakultät für Agrarwissenschaften der Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany.
  6. Gates RS, Scott NR. Measurements of effective teat load during machine milking. Trans. ASAE. 1986;29:1124–1130
  7. Hamann J. Effect of machine milking on teat-end condition. Bull. Int. Dairy Fed. 1987;215:46
  8. Hamann J, Burvenich C, Mayntz M, Osteras O, Halder W. Machine-induced changes in the status of the bovine teat tissue with respect to new infection risk. Bull. Int. Dairy Fed. 1994;297:13–22
  9. Hamann J, Stanitzke U. Studies on pathogenesis of bovine mastitis by comparison of milking conditions as calf suckling, hand milking and machine milking: Reactions of the teat tissue. Milchwissenschaft. 1990;45:632–637
  10. Happel F. Untersuchung der pneumatischen und mechanischen Belastungen der Zitze beim natürlichen Milchentzug durch das Kalb als Grundlage zur Beurteilung des Maschinemelkens. Tierarztl. Umsch. 1963;18:493–500
  11. Mein GA. Action of the cluster during milking. In:  Bramley AJ,  Dodd FH,  Mein GA,  Bramley JA editor. Machine Milking and Lactation. Burlington, VT: Insight Books; 1992;p. 121–122
  12. Mein GA, Williams DM, Reinemann DJ. Effects of milking on teat-end hyperkeratosis: 1. Mechanical forces applied by the teatcup liner and responses of the teat. In: Proc. 42nd Annual Mtg. Natl. Mastitis Counc. Fort Worth, TX. National Mastitis Council, Madison, WI. 2003;p. 114–123
  13. Michel G, Seffner W, Schulz J. Hyperkeratosis of teat duct epithelium in cattle. Monatsh. Veterinärm. 1974;29:570–574
  14. Muthukumarappan, K., D. J. Reinemann, and G. A. Mein. 1994. Compressive load applied to the bovine teat by the teatcup liner. Presented at the December 1994 ASAE International Winter Mtg., ASAE Paper no. 933538. Chicago, IL. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
  15. 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
  16. Neijenhuis F, Klungel GH, Hogeveen H. Recovery of cow teats after milking as determined by ultrasonographic scanning. J. Dairy Sci. 2001;84:2599–2606
  17. Nickerson SC. Bovine mammary gland-structure and function-relationship to milk production and immunity to mastitis. Agric. Pract. 1994;15:8–18
  18. O'Shea J, Meaney WJ. New intramammary infections and teat-orifice infections in suckled cows and in teat-dipped and non-teat-dipped machine-milked cows. Irish J. Agric. Res. 1979;18:37–43
  19. Rasmussen MD. Influence of switch level of automatic cluster removers on milking performance and udder health. J. Dairy Res. 1993;60:287–297
  20. Rasmussen MD, Mayntz M. Pressure in the teat cistern and the mouth of the calf during suckling. J. Dairy Res. 1998;65:685–692
  21. Reinemann, D. J., K. Muthukumarappan, and G. A. Mein. 1994a. Forces applied to the bovine teat by the teatcup liner during machine milking. Report no. 94-D-052 presented at XII CIGR World Congress, Milan, Italy.
  22. Reinemann DJ, Muthukumarappan K, Mein GA. Measurements of the Pressures Applied to the Bovine Teat by the Teatcup Liner. In: Proc. at the XII CIGR World Congress. Italy: Milan; 1994;
  23. Schoeley W. Milchsynthese und Milchgewinnung. In:  Schwark HJ editors. Rinderzucht. Berlin, Germany: Dt. Landwirtschaftsverlag; 1989;p. 186–190
  24. Schukken Y, Petersson L, Bradley R. Liners and Teat End Health. In: Proc. Natl. Mastitis Counc. Annual Mtg., Tampa, FL. National Mastitis Council, Madison, WI. 2006;p. 183–196
  25. Tolle A, Hamann J. Operational characteristics of non-conventional systems using constant vacuum. In: Proc. Int. Symp. Machine Milking: 17th Annual Mtg. Natl. Mastitis Counc. Louisville, KY. National Mastitis Council, Madison, WI. 1978;p. 150–161
  26. Vennmann W. Das Maschinemelken im Vergleich zum Handmelken und Kälbersaugen. Tierzüchter. 1953;5:563–565
  27. Williams DM, Mein GA. Effects of pulsation failure on the bovine teat canal. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Milking Machines and Mastitis, Fermoy, Ireland. IDF, Brussels, Belgium. 1980;p. 73–81

PII: S0022-0302(10)70264-2

doi: 10.3168/jds.2008-1864

Journal of Dairy Science
Volume 93, Issue 1 , Pages 45-52 , January 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution