Research Article

 

Diagnostic Study of She Camel Subclinical Mastitis in Al-Hyadia District – Al-Najaf Province

 

Hayder M. Al-Rammahi*, Abdulameer Abed Hatem, Asaad Chasib Al-Atabi

College of Veterinary Medicine/ University of Kufa, Kufa /Iraq.

 

Editor | Kuldeep Dhama, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Received | May 12, 2018; Accepted | June 27, 2018; Published | July 25, 2018

*Correspondence | Hayder M. Al-Rammahi, College of Veterinary Medicine/ University of Kufa, Kufa /Iraq; Email: hayderm.alrammahi@uokufa.edu.iq

Citation | Al-Rammahi HM, Hatem AA, Al-Atabi AC (2018). Diagnostic study of she camel subclinical mastitis in al-hyadia district – al-najaf province. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 6(7): 278-280.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2018/6.7.278.280

ISSN (Online) | 2307-8316; ISSN (Print) | 2309-3331

Copyright © 2018 Al-Rammahi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Introduction

 

There are a great demand for the milk and dairy products in the past decades, however the needs has been increased because the huge demand due to growing of populations worldwide (Tiwari et al., 2013). Camel breeding plays an important role in the life of the desert inhabitants. Camel milk is an important source of protein and energy and some vitamins such as vitamin C, which is difficult for the Bedouin to get them from other sources (Saleh and Faye, 2011). Mastitis is the main problem facing milk production in dairy animals. Moreover it has zoonotic and economic importance (Tibary and Anouassi, 2000).The cornerstone in the prevention of mastitis in milk animals is the early treatment of sub-clinical mastitis, which depends mainly on the diagnosis of this disease as soon as possible through early detection methods (Abdulrahman,1995). Many methods have been advised for rapid diagnosis of subclinical mastitis in dairy animals which based mainly on inflammation products such as California mastitis test (CMT), somatic cell count (SCC), pH estimation and electrical conductivity (Salah and Faye, 2011; Viguier et al., 2009; Younan et al., 2001). The present study conducted to assess subclinical mastitis in Arabian camels in Al-Najaf province.

 

Materials and Methods

 

Study Area and Animals

The study was carried out at Al- Hyadia arid district which was located 38 km western to Al-Najaf were 82 she camels (at variousl actation stages). Clinical examination was done for all animals with particular attention to udders.

 

Milk Sampling

After stimulation of milking by camel calf, each udder quarter was washed and disinfected with 70% ethanol. The first few drops were discarded and 10 ml of milk placed in aseptic plain tube. All samples were kept in icebox (4Co) and transported immediately to laboratory for examination.

 

Bacteriological Examination

Bacteriological examinations were carried out following standard methods according to methods described by Quinn et al. (1994). Briefly, a loop-full of milk was streaked on 5% sheep blood agar, and incubated aerobically at 37 0C for 24-48 hours. Identification of bacterial isolates was based on colonies morphology, Gram’s stain reaction, and haemolytic characteristics on blood agar and catalase test. Staphylococci and Micrococci were identified by growth on manitol salt agar, coagulase production, catalase and oxidase tests. Gram’s stain negative isolates were sub-cultured on MacConcky agar and further tested using triple sugar Iron TSI agar, Indol, methyl red,Voges-Proskauer, citrate utilization test, urea and oxidase reaction.

 

California Mastitis Test (CMT)

CMT was carried out according to method mentioned by Jilo et al. (2017), briefly by adding equal parts (5 ML) of milk and CMT reagent in each paddle wells according to arrangement of quarters with slight rotation movement of paddle. The reactions were interpreted according to gel formation as score 0:no gel formation; score 1 slight (slim) gel formation,which disappeared with movement;score 2 distinctive slim formation; score 3 gel formation as mass to bottom of paddle.

 

Somatic Cell Count (SCC)

The direct microscopic somatic cell counting method was carried out by spreading of 1 μL of thoroughly mixed milk from each samples over 1 cm2 area on a glass slides, air drying and were stained by Newman-Lampert stain as described by Ali et al. (2016).

 

Electric Conductivity and PH

Each milk samples was examined by milk electrical conductivity meter (Dramaniski) after calibration of device with standard buffer solutions. Milk Ph was measured by pH-meter.

 

Results

 

According to bacterial isolation, the subclinical mastitis was detected in 24 out of 82 She camels in percentage rate 19.68%. The Coagulase –ve Staphylococci revealed the highest percentage 17.68% of isolates followed by Streptococcus spp. (12.92%), while the percentage rate of Staphylococcus aureus, E. coli and Micrococcus were 10.2%, 8.16% and 4.08% respectively (Table 1).

 

Subclinical mastitis was diagnosed based to bacterial isolation from the milk samples accompanied with California mastitis test and the relation was made between the isolated bacteria and CMT score. score 3 CMT score 3 was seen with Coagulase –ve staphylococci, E. coli and Staphylococcus aureus with PH ranged 7.5-6.73 and electric conductivity 8.1-7.9 ms/cm. While CMT score 2 was observed with Streptococcus spp. and Micrococcus isolates with PH ranged 6.89-6.44 and electric conductivity 7.81-7.68 ms/cm (Table 2).

 

Table 1: Reveals percentages of the isolates

Isolate	No. isolates	%
Coagulase –ve Staphyloocci	26	17.68
Streptococcus spp.	19	12.92
Staphylococcus aureus	15	10.2
E. coli	12	8.16
Micrococcusspp.	6	4.08

 

Table 2: Reveals the relationship between isolates, SCC, CMT, pH and electric conductivity

Isolates	SCC 103	CMT	PH	Electric conductivity ms/cm
Coagulase –ve Staphyloocci	300	3	7.5	8.1
E. coli	260	3	7.43	7.93
Staphylococcus aureus	180	3	6.73	7.9
Streptococcus spp.	120	2	6.89	7.81
Micrococcus	110	2	6.44	7.68
No isolate	36	0	6.31	6.13

 

Discussion

 

The results of bacteriological isolations revealed that Coagulase –ve staphylococci and Streptococcus spp were the main causative agents with percentages of 17.68% and 12.92 %, respectively. These results are in agreements with previous reported studies (Al Salihi et al., 2017; Al-Juboori et al., 2013). Other researchers also recorded that these organisms are major mastitis causative agents in she-camels (Yagoob and Sanaa, 2005). The entrance of infection is the teat canal, through teat the infection reaches the mammary gland. There are two sources of infective agent- the udder- where many bacteria like Streptococcus agalactia and Staphylococcus aureus may be present as normal inhabitant and the environment- where causative agents like E.coli persist as recorded by Seifu and Tafesse, (2010).

 

The skin surface of the camel has many microorganisms as inhabitant population and from where the organisms may have the chance to invade through contamination by the handlers. Spread of infection is possible through bedding ground by discharges of affected gland; these results are agreement with Abdurahman, (1995). In conclusion, this study found that bacteriological isolation were accurate method to determine the causative agents of mastitis. In addition, the measurement of EC is an inexpensive, simple and rapid method when compared to SCC. Moreover, this study found that the electrical conductivity (EC) test can be done on site and California mastitis test (CMT) was fast, cost effective but with low sensitivity.

 

Acknowledgements

 

The authors would like to thank the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Kufa for support and help in doing this research.

 

COnlict of interest

 

There is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this manuscript for any other authorities

 

Authors COntribution

 

All authors contributed equally.

 

References

 

• Abdurahman OSH, Agab H, Abbas B, Astroem G (1995). Relations between udder infection and somatic cells in camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk. Acta Vet. Scand. 36: 423-431.

• Abdurahmann OAS (1995). N-acetyl-B-Dglucosaminidase and serum albumin as indicators of subclinical mastitis in the Camel. J. Vet. Med. A. 42 :643-647. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0442.1995.tb00418.x

• Ahmad S, Yaqoob M, Bilal MQ, Muhammad G. Yang LG (2012). Risk factors associated with prevalence and major bacterial causes of mastitis in dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) under different production systems. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 44:107-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-011-9895-0

• Ali F, Hussain R, Qayyum A, Gul ST, Iqbal Z, Hassan MF (2016). Milk somatic cell counts and some hemato-biochemical changes in sub-clinical mastitic dromedary she-camels (Camelus dromedarius). Pak. Vet. J. 36(4): 405-408.

• Al-Juboori A, Kamat N, Sindhu J (2013). Prevalence of some mastitis causes in dromedary camels in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Iraqi J. Vet. Sci. 27: 9-14.

• Al-Salihi KA, Abdullah S, Amjad L, Leitha H (2017). Epidemiological study of clinical and subclinical mastitis in she- camel in Samawah desert / Al Muthanna governorate. MRVSA. 6(2): 11-24. https://doi.org/10.22428/mrvsa. 2307-8073.2017. 00622.x

• Bruckmaier M, Ontsouka E, Blum W (2004). Fractionized milk composition in dairy cows with subclinical mastitis. Vet. Med. Czech. 49 :283–290. https://doi.org/10.17221/5706-VETMED

• Coulon JB, Gasqui P, Barnouin J, Ollier A, Pradel P, Pomiès D (2002). Effect of mastitis and related-germ on milk yield and composition during naturally-occurring udder infections in dairy cows. Anim. Res. 51:383–393. https://doi.org/10.1051/animres:2002031

• Jilo K, Galgalo W, Mata W (2017). Camel Mastitis: A Review. MOJ Eco. Environ. Sci. 2(5): 00034. https://doi.org/10.15406/mojes.2017.02.00034

• Lindmark-Månsson H, Fondén R, Pettersson HE (2003). Composition of Swedish dairy milk. Int. Dairy J. 13:409–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-6946(03)00032-3

• Nielen M, Deluyker H, Schukken YH, Brand A (1992). Electrical conductivity of milk: measurement, modifiers, and meta-analysis of mastitis detection performance. J. Dairy Sci. 75:606–614. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)77798-4

• Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey B, Carter GR (1999). Clin. Vet. Microbiol. Wolf publishing, London, England. p. 327.

• Saleh SK, Faye B (2011). Detection of subclinical mastitis in dromedary camels (Camelus dromedaries) using somatic cell counts, california mastitis test and udder pathogen. Emir. J. Food Agric. 23(1): 48-58. https://doi.org/10.9755/ejfa.v23i1.5312

• Seifu E, Tafesse B (2010). Prevalence and etiology of mastitis in traditionally managed camels (camelus dromedarius) in selected pastoral areas in eastern Ethiopia. Ehiopean. Vet. J. 14: 103-113.

• Tibary A, Anouassi A (2000). Lactation and udder disease. In: L. Skidmore and G.P. Adams (Eds.). Recent Advances in Camelid Reproduction. Int. Vet. Info. Service (www.ivis.org).

• Tiwari JG, Babra C, Tiwari HK, Williams V, Wet SD (2013).Trends in therapeutic and prevention strategies for management of bovine mastitis: An overview. J. Vacc. Vaccin. 4: 76. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7560.1000176

• Viguier C, Arora S, Gilmartin N, Welbeck K, O’Kennedy R (2009). Mastitis detection: current trends and future perspectives. Trends Biotechnol. 27(8): 486-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2009.05.004

• Woubit S, Bayleyegn M, Bonnet P, Jean-Baptiste S (2001). Camel (Camelus dromedarius) mastitis in Borena lowland pastoral Area, Southwestern Ethiopia. Revue Elev. Med. Vet. Pay Trop. 54: 207-212. https://doi.org/10.19182/remvt.9774

• Yagoob O, Sanaa (2005). Bacterial Diseases of Reproductive system of camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern Sudan J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 4(7): 642-644.

• Younan M, Aliz B, Muller W (2001). Application of the California mastitis test in intrammary Streptococcus agalactiae and Staphylococcus aureus infection of camels (camelus dromedarius) in Kenya. Prev. Vet. Med. 51(3-4): 307-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(01)00228-8