Thursday, May 28, 2015

Using Milk Balancer with Whole Milk Feeding

In a recent research report (Glosson, K.M. and Others, "Effect of supplementing pasteurized milk balancer products to heat-treated whole milk on the growth and health of dairy calves" Journal of Dairy Science 98:1127-1135 June 2015) milk balancers were used to supplement pasteurized whole milk in an intensive milk feeding program.

The unique feature of this work was the comparison of two balancer products. Both were formulated to provide 25% crude protein and 10% fat. One product was made with all milk ingredients. The second balancer "substituted half of the milk protein with a combination of soy protein and animal plasma. It contained identical ingredients to the all-milk version with the exceptions of added soy isolate, protein modified soy flour, and animal plasma." (p1129)

Bottom line was that calves fed both versions of the balancer product had approximately the same average daily gains (that is, 1.7 pounds per day). While additional trials will add credibility to these findings, it is encouraging to learn that at least in this small trial (three groups of 24 calves) the lower-cost balancer product supported equal growth among preweaned calves in an intensive milk feeding program. 

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Achilles Heel in Colostrum Collection

Nearly all colostrum is collected in so-called "catch buckets." 

In my experience many of these stainless steel buckets do not have their original stainless steel lids. Black plastic lids have been substituted.

Most dairies have realized that it is important to keep these clean - gaskets clean top and bottom, and brush all the surfaces.

Oops! Did I say, "Brush ALL surfaces?"

Two recent experiences suggest that actually brushing surfaces makes a difference. I checked two of these black plastic lids.

I used the Hygiena SystemSure Plus unit to do adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring. The ATP test is a process of rapidly measuring actively growing microorganisms through the detection of adenosine triphosphate. An ATP monitoring system can detect the amount of organic matter that remains after cleaning a surface (for example, calf feeding equipment). 

Thresholds used in the food processing industry are less than10 RLU for direct food contact surfaces and less than 50 RLU for environmental surfaces. I have been using a reading of 100 RLU as a realistic on-farm upper threshold for calf feeding equipment.

My testing site was inside the round baffle centered on the underside of the lid. When cleaning you need a bottle brush or something similar to reach up into this round plastic structure.

At Dairy #1 they have a bottle brush at the wash sink where nursing bottles are washed as well as the colostrum collection equipment. The RLU reading from up inside the round baffle structure was 318. It appears that a bit more careful scrubbing could easily lower the bacteria count in this area.

At Dairy #2 the lid I tested appeared clean. The RLU reading from up inside the round babble structure was 1782. Nasty place all ready to inoculate incoming colostrum with bacteria. There is a 9 inch bucket brush at the wash sink - no bottle brush. I had an extra bottle brush in the truck - all we have to do is convince everyone to actually use the brush when cleaning the lids.

The reason I called this site the "Achilles Heel" at these dairies is that nearly all the other possible inoculation sites (tube feeder bottle and tube, stainless steel catch bucket, nursing bottle and nipple) tested in the 0-20 range, 


Thursday, May 21, 2015

Protocol Lapses Happen

It is great when protocols actually work. Calf feeding equipment gets cleaned well using the prescribed steps every time.

OUCH! We slipped up. 

The dairy I was on yesterday has been doing a very consistent job cleaning the equipment used to feed colostrum. The bottles and nipples have been very clean each time we have checked them.

I used the Hygiena SystemSure Plus unit to do adenosine triphosphate (ATP) monitoring. The ATP test is a process of rapidly measuring actively growing microorganisms through the detection of adenosine triphosphate. An ATP monitoring system can detect the amount of organic matter that remains after cleaning a surface (for example, calf feeding equipment). 

Thresholds used in the food processing industry are less than10 RLU for direct food contact surfaces and less than 50 RLU for environmental surfaces. I have been using a reading of 100 RLU as a realistic upper threshold for calf feeding equipment. 

The readings yesterday were:

1. nursing bottle interior surface - April value = 1, May value = 22 -- acceptable
2. tube feeder inside upper end of tube - April value = 0, May value = 19 -- acceptable
3. tube feeder inside ball end of tube - April value = 2, May value = 894 -- NOT ACCEPTABLE

 So, what happened?

I looked around to find the brush used to clean the tube part of the esophageal tube feeder. Could not find it. I hunted up a person who should know about the cleaning - he could not find the brush either. It seems as though the brush is "missing in action."

Such a simple thing - a brush.

Fortunately I had an extra brush in my truck so we solved that problem on the spot (and, I sold him an extra brush to keep in reserve when the first one disappears).

This experience suggests the value of consistent monitoring of some kind regarding compliance with cleaning protocols. You might want to read this resource on how to monitor sanitation protocol compliance - click HERE to access this checklist. 

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Color Communicates Well

Katie Grinstead from Wisconsin has this system of using color to communicate.

They feed different volumes of milk to their calves depending on their age. Thus, some calves are fed two quarts each feeding while others receive three quarts. 

Pink pails = two quarts
Blue pails = three quarts

The link to her presentation is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9r86l_vTp4

Another dairy, this one in central New York, has three different color pails:

Blue pails = two quarts
Yellow pails = three quarts
Red pails = calves being weaned, milk only in morning.

This is the principle of keeping routines as simple as possible - no words needed - just look at the color. 

Thursday, May 7, 2015

Feeding Pasteurized Milk:
Tips for Success

This is the title of the May, 2015, issue of the calf management newsletter, Calving Ease.

The link is HERE.

The ideas covered in this issue are:
  • Start with a superior product 
  • Clean, clean and clean some more. 
  • Post-Pasteurization Contamination is a common problem. 
  • Monitoring for bacteria in “as-fed” milk is essential for quality control.
Enjoy!

Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Sampling Protocol for Bacteria Culturing When Feeding
Pasteurized Milk to Calves

When and where to collect samples when monitoring bacteria contamination of pasteurized milk fed to dairy calves?

To answer this question I like to start with the answers that I want after I have the culture results. They are:
1. Is the dairy starting with quality non-salable raw milk?
2. How well is the pasteurizer working to reduce the bacteria count in the raw milk?
3. How much post-pasteurization contamination is taking place between the pasteurizer and the calves?
4. How much bacteria growth is taking place between the time the milk is pasteurized and the last calf is fed?

I am going to need 4 samples.

Sample #1: Collect a raw milk sample. Results under 100,000cfu/ml (colony forming units per milliliter) are good, results over 1,000,000cfu/ml mean that we are loading the pasteurized milk with a lot of "trash" from the killed bacteria and setting ourselves up for significant post-pasteurization contamination.

Sample #2: Collect a sample directly as the milk comes out of the pasteurizer. We are looking for no growth at 48 hours of incubation. If the raw milk counts are less than or equal to 100,000cfu/ml the pasteurizer is not working well if we get any growth in the pasteurized product. If the raw milk counts are greater than 1,000,000cfu/ml the pasteurized milk may have a modest number of residual bacteria. 

I like to see coliform counts in the pasteurized milk less than 100cfu/ml and total plate counts less than 1,000cfu/ml. If counts are higher than this the fault is probably not with the pasteurizer but rather with excessively high raw milk bacteria counts. Remember, pasteurization is not sterilization!

Sample #3: Collect an "as-fed" sample for the first calf fed. Get the sample as the milk goes into either a bottle or bucket in order feed the first calf. Note that this says, "goes into" and not "from." Do not take the sample from the bottle or bucket. Take the sample as the milk goes into either one. 

These culture results tell me the extent of immediate post-pasteurization contamination of the product. If the milk going into nursing bottles is coming from the source where Sample #2 is obtained, then skip this step. However, if the milk is going into nursing bottles is from any other source then I want a sample as the first bottle is filled. If the milk is going into something to carry to the calves (for example, 5-gallon pail, transport tank) then I want the sample coming out of these as it goes into calf feeding buckets.

If the calves are being fed with mob feeders, then get the sample as the gang or mob feeder is being filled. In this case, skip the fourth sample. 

Sample #4: Collect an "as-fed" sample for the last calf fed. Collect the sample the same way as for the "first-calf-fed" sample.

If the bacteria counts are higher here than the "first calf fed" sample then I can estimate the extent to which bacteria have multiplied while the calves are being fed. Or, if these sample values are lower than the "first-calf-fed" it usually is revealed that systems that include hoses and pumps have a cleaning issue there.

Note that this 4-sample-set sampling process does not capture contamination from nursing bottles, nursing nipples and feeding buckets.

If you have culture results from samples like these you would like to share, please send them to me and I will "blog" about them. Send to smleadley@yahoo.com.


Friday, May 1, 2015

I Don't Have Brush For That

We are checking for a source of bacteria contamination of post-pasteurized milk from nursing bottles. Only the very youngest calves are fed with bottles with the remainder learning how to drink from buckets before they are a week old. 

The milk coming out of the pasteurizer is clean - all the samples that we culture have no growth at 48 hours - none, zip.

When we collect and culture "as-fed" samples from nursing bottles they are alive with bacteria. This dairy has a history of doing a good job of cleaning milk feeding equipment. Thus, these culture results are puzzling. 

Where is the contamination coming from? First, I thought that the contamination was coming from the sampling process - something like dirty hands, thumb on the inside of the sample bottle lid. Nope. Put on clean nitrile gloves when collecting samples.

Then we checked the inside surfaces of bottles - nope. Highest reading using the ATP luminometer was 6 RLU's. [For reference, the food industry standard for clean is <10 RLU's.] 

I asked for a nipple to check the inside surface. I swabbed up inside the nipple part, not the cap. RLU reading was 580! Oops. When I asked about brushing bottles and nipples I found out that they had a good bottle brush but nothing with which to brush up inside the nipples. 

The solution was pretty simple - I pulled a double-end brush out of my truck and the dairy was in the business of brushing the insides of the few nipples they use to feed the youngest calves.

Click HERE to see a picture of this brush.