Prevalence of isolated microorganisms and antimicrobial susceptibility from half milk in dairy goats
7
0
0
전체 글
(2) 152. J&ÆÁ;~ÁfçVÁ;'CÁf«Á;^ÁjÏ. ö Ú *Òº Ö·F~ ®îö & [1]f Ö·F Ê~ Bf Candida kefir ~ <Ö W [3], Ò Ö·F casein~ z' Wîö & [4] > ®j ö 5 <²öB¾" Úê' «' º jç Úææ p ® . öBº USDA~ Animal Improvement Program LaboratoryöB 1993j Wierschemö ~ Fî ï&~ V.¢ ;ã~ <"²ö & î÷ 5 Fîö & ^¦Ò, Ú^ ¦Ò, FæO¦Ò, F ¦Ò, F W¦Ò >¯> ® [33, 37, 38]. ¦Ò ¢ >¯~º &Ë Fº FO" FÖf <"²ö B Ú^>~ Ã&f z®Ú Fï6²f Fî &~ ¿³&ö ãB' ¶ j * öò jî¢ ® n*Wj *7~ " ç j" 7º î÷j ¢bʺ F º²V r^ . *^êöB Ö>º Î öF 7 Ö·F& Næ~ º jNf æ 2%ö ®"~æò [20], <"²öB F O"j ¢bʺ ö 5 Bö & [10, 11, 13, 18, 21-23, 25, 29, 31, 34]º ô >¯> ® . öBº <"²~ FFçö «~ Fï6 ²f Fî &~ j ¢bB ãB' ¶ j " ® n*Wj *7~º ÷ö b~ ªf 6"·çj 2 k~V *~ F¿öB ^j ªÒ.ÿ;~& . Ú B FO"~ .O 5 ~òö & &k" ® n*W j * V.¶ò¢ ᶠªÒ.ÿ;B ^ö &~ B 6>W þj ~& .. Òò 5 O». Òò~ j 2003j 1ú¦V 8úö ö *Îæ~ 2B <"² ÒG³&öB ÒG>º <"²(Toggenburg 5 Saanen) 216îÒ(425ªO)¢ &çb OF F¿j j~&. . Fv¢ r ²ë r ¾r 2~3 *Vº ª Ö ê Òòj ÏVö 30 ml/ ªO O Aj j Ê ;Êö IÚ þ Ú>~ þö ÒÏ~& . b' ¦Ò öFö & b' ¦Òº j Òò¢ ¾ v >Î r B /b 5% ·. Î&B .  Væö êö~ 37 C V·VöB 24* V· ê ;WB ÷£~ ;ö V¢ îÚ Væö ê& V·~& . B>V·B ÷£f ÷£~ Wç 5 Ï.W ~ FZ¢ V~ ² "ï" catalase 5 oxidase. þj Û~ ²·W *, ²·W , ²rW * 5 ²rW b 1N ª~ Ê coagulase, o. MacConkey agar growth, motility, salicin, trehalose, VogesProskauer , Oxidation-Fermentation , (BBL CrystalTM, USA) . brain heart infusion(BHI) .. þ þ ª ¢ Ï~ '' þ 5 ÿ;V ÿ;~& ÿ;B ^f V ·ö à ê B 6>W þö ÒÏ~&. B 6>W þ 425ªO F¿ 7 b ªÒB 166ªOö & B 6>W þf Kirby-Bauer :Ê {Ö» [9]ö & ~ ~& . ªÒj BHI V·ö 7«~ 37 C öB 18* à ê /ö 'z Mueller-Hinton ÂVæö êö r :Ê '~V¢ Ï~ B¢ 'ÏÊ, 24* V· r ÛB&~ V ¢ 6ë~& . þö ÒÏB Bº BBL Ò~ o. amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicilin, cephalothin, enrofloxacin, gentamicin, kanamycin, neomycin, norfloxacin, penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline, trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole 12 , 3 .. Ò «î Ö"º :Ê B· Ò~ 6; V&ö V¢ 6>W 7ê 5 ÚW~ ê ª~&. Ö ". 216îÒ~ <"² ªO F¿ö & ^ 6" ·ç j Table 1ö ¾æî . 425ªO 7 259ªO(60.9%) j6" ªOb ¾æÒb 6" ªOf 166ªO (39.1%)î . 6"ªO 7 ¢ ^6" ªO(74.7%) &¦ªî, 31ªOöBº v «~ ^, Ò 11ªOöBº ^ « ç~ ^ ªÒ>î . <"² F¿öB ªÒB bj Table 2ö ¾æî . C 18« 220"¢ ªÒ~& . 7 Staphylococcus spp. & 182"(82.6%) &¦ªj Næ®, Streptococcus spp. & 6"(2.7%), Ò Corynebacterium spp., Enterococcus spp., Pasteurella spp.& '' 4"(1.8%), Acinetobacter lwoffi & 3"(1.3%), Bacillus spp., Escherichia coli, Gemella morbillorum, Micrococcus spp., Sphingomonas paucimobilis & '' 2"(0.9%), Ò ¾^æ 7«f '' 1"(0.5%) Table 1. Prevalence of microorganisms in the milk samples of 425 halves of dairy goats No. of bacterial species None Single Double >triple Total. No. of halves (%) 259 124 31 11 425. (60.9) (29.2) (7.3) (2.6) (100.0).
(3) <"² ªO F¿öB ªÒ ^ 5 B 6>W Ò Table 2. Bacterial isolates from 425 half milk samples of 216 dairy goats Microrganisms. No. of isolates (%). Staphylococcus spp. Streptococcus spp. Corynebacterium spp. Enterococcus spp. Pasteurella spp. Acinetobacter lwoffi Bacillus spp. Escherichia coli Gemella morbillorum Micrococcus spp. Sphingomonas paucimobilis Aerococcus urinae Brevundimonas vesicularis Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis Pseudomonas stutzeri Rhodococcus equi Sewatia marcescens Shigella spp.. 182 6 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. Total. 220 (100.0). ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (. 82.6) 2.7) 1.8) 1.8) 1.8) 1.3) 0.9) 0.9) 0.9) 0.9) 0.9) 0.5) 0.5) 0.5) 0.5) 0.5) 0.5) 0.5). Table 3. Staphylococci identified from 182 isolates of half milk samples in dairy goats Microorganisms Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus Staphylococcus. epidermidis chromogens haemolyticus aureus* capitis lentus hyicus* simulans caprae hominis warneri. Total. No. of isolates (%) 52 27 23 22 15 15 8 8 5 5 2. ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (. 28.6) 14.8) 12.6) 12.1) 8.2) 8.2) 4.4) 4.4) 2.8) 2.8) 1.1). 182 (100.0). *coagulase-positive staphylococci.. O ªÒ>î . <"² F¿öB ªÒB Staphylococcus spp.ö & ÿ; Ö"¢ Table 3ö ¾æî . 182 ªÒ" 7 &Ë ô ÿ;B «f S. epidermidis 52"(28.6%)&b, S. chromogens& 27"(14.8%), S. haemolyticus& 23" (12.6%), S. aureus& 22"(12.1%), S. capitis 5 S. lentus & '' 15"(8.2%), S. hyicus 5 S. simulans& '' 8 "(4.4%), S. caprae 5 S. hominis& '' 5"(2.8%), . 153. Ò S. warneri& 2"(1.1%) &Ë Ôf ÿ;j & . Ò coagulase-positive staphylococci S. aureus f S. hyicus¢ B coagulase-negative staphylococci& 83.5% &¦ªj Næ~& . <"² F¿öB ªÒB b C 220"¢ &çb 12«~ B 6>W þÖ"¢ Table 4ö º£® . &¦ª~ Bö ¸f 6>W(96.4~80.9%) ;>îb¾ penicillinöº ÚWj ¾æî .. V. FO"f ¿³ëöB ¢ î÷7 ãB' ¶ & Ë î÷ 7ö ~¾ . ¾B FÖ~ FO"ö & º Oö ö ô >¯>Ú zæò, <"²ö & º ; [10]. ÖÒ¾¢öBê < "²ö & ; . ;j J~ öBº <"²~ FFçö «~ FO"j ¢bÚb Fï6²f Fî &~ j ¢ bB ãB' ¶ j " ®n*Wj *7~º ÷ö b~ ª·çj 2k~ ªÒB ^ö &~ B 6>W þj ~ FO"~ .O 5 ~ò ö & &k" ®n*Wö & V.¶ò¢ á¶. ~& . <"²öBº FO~ "Ãç Ò ªOF¿ Ú^ & 1Ü10 /ml ç Ã&B ãÖ FO"¢ [34]. FO"f ² ~ ª > ®º ªç;" &ªç ; . *¶º Gn'b 6º /êj ÛB î÷j ê > ®º ç, 궺 " Ú^ ¦Ò 6 º b ªÒ j Û ê > ®º ç [7]. <"²º ê." OFê, ÖN ~ Ò' Ò b' ºö ~Bê Ú^ö ôf æz& B~ [14, 15, 17, 18, 26-28, 30, 35-39], b' º ö ~ FO" B 5 Ú^ æzº Fîö 'Ëj "B 7ç ^B& B . ~ ãÖ Haenlein [21]f <"² F¿öB FO" j ¢bʺ bj ªÒ~&º Staphylococcus spp. 59%, Bacillus spp. 30%, coliforms 4%, Micrococcus spp. 3%, Streptococcus spp. 2%, Corynebacterium spp. 5 Pseudomonas spp.& '' 1%¢ ~& . Sung [33]f coagulase-negative staphylococci 34%, coliforms 28%, S. aureus 14%, streptococci 9%, Ò Væ b 14% & ~& . jÏ.W Staphylococcus spp.º Fv~ b¦, Fv& *V 6º öF j÷¶~ ¶j Û ~ *2>, <"²öBº 7º~² /~æº p æò z® FO"j ¢V [34]. ¾ jÏ.W Staphylococcus spp.& òW; FO"b ê¯F > ® 6.
(4) J&ÆÁ;~ÁfçVÁ;'CÁf«Á;^ÁjÏ. 154. Table 4. Susceptibility of microorganisms isolated from dairy goat milk samples to 12 different antibiotics Microorganisms. No. of isolates AM AMC. Staphylococcus epidermidis. 52. S. chromogens. 27. S. haemolyticus. 23. S. aureus. 22. S. capitis. 15. S. lentus. 15. S. hyicus. 8. S. simulans. 8. S. caprae. 5. S. hominis. 5. S. warneri. 2. Streptococcus spp.. 6. Corynebacterium spp.. 4. Enterococcus spp.. 4. Pasteurella spp.. 4. Acinetobacter lwoffi. 3. Bacillus spp.. 2. Escherichia coli. 2. Gemella morbillorum. 2. Micrococcus spp.. 2. Sphingomonas paucimobilis. 2. Othersa. 7. Total. 220. No. of susceptible isolates (%) CF. 52 52 48 (92.3) (100.0) (100.0) 26 27 23 (85.2) (100.0) (96.3) 23 23 20 (87.0) (100.0) (100.0) 20 20 19 (86.4) (90.9) (90.9) 14 15 12 (80.0) (100.0) (93.3) 13 14 6 (40.0) (93.3) (86.7) 8 8 8 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 8 8 8 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 5 5 5 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 5 5 5 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 2 2 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 5 5 5 (83.3) (83.3) (83.3) 3 4 4 (100.0) (100.0) (75.0) 2 4 3 (75.0) (100.0) (50.0) 3 4 1 (25.0) (100.0) (75.0) 2 3 3 (100.0) (100.0) (66.6) 0 0 0 (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) 0 2 0 (0.0) (100.0) (0.0) 2 2 1 (50.0) (100.0) (100.0) 1 1 1 (50.0) (50.0) (50.0) 2 2 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 5 6 4 (57.1) (85.7) (71.4). ENO. GM. 51 (98.1) 27 (100.0) 22 (95.7) 21 (95.5) 15 (100.0) 12 (80.0) 8 (100.0) 8 (100.0) 5 (100.0) 5 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 5 (83.3) 4 (100.0) 3 (75.0) 4 (100.0) 3 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 5 (71.4). 50 (96.2) 27 (100.0) 23 (100.0) 22 (100.0) 14 (93.3) 13 (86.7) 8 (100.0) 8 (100.0) 5 (100.0) 5 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 5 (83.3) 4 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (100.0) 3 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 1 (50.0) 6 (85.7). K. N. NOR. P. S. SXT. TE. 52 52 50 13 51 51 51 (98.1) (98.1) (98.1) (25.0) (96.2) (100.0) (100.0) 21 27 25 11 25 27 25 (92.6) (100.0) (92.6) (40.7) (92.6) (50.0) (77.8) 17 22 20 6 22 23 23 (100.0) (100.0) (95.7) (26.1) (87.0) (95.7) (74.0) 18 22 18 3 20 22 22 (100.0) (100.0) (90.9) (13.6) (81.8) (100.0) (81.8) 15 14 13 6 14 15 14 (93.3) (100.0) (93.3) (40.0) (86.7) (93.3) (100.0) 10 14 8 6 12 14 12 (80.0) (93.3) (80.0) (40.0) (53.3) (93.3) (66.7) 4 4 5 8 8 8 8 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (62.5) (50.0) (50.0) 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (75.0) 4 5 5 3 5 5 4 (80.0) (100.0) (100.0) (60.0) (100.0) (100.0) (80.0) 5 5 5 1 5 5 5 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (20.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (0.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 3 5 5 4 5 5 5 (83.3) (83.3) (83.3) (66.7) (83.3) (83.3) (50.0) 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 (100.0) (100.0) (75.0) (75.0) (75.0) (75.0) (75.0) 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 (0.0) (0.0) (75.0) (0.0) (0.0) (75.0) (75.0) 3 3 2 3 4 3 4 (75.0) (100.0) (75.0) (50.0) (75.0) (75.0) (100.0) 3 1 2 3 3 3 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (66.6) (33.3) (100.0) (66.6) 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (0.0) (100.0) (50.0) (100.0) 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (0.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 (50.0) (100.0) (100.0) (50.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 (50.0) (100.0) (100.0) (50.0) (0.0) (0.0) (100.0) 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 (0.0) (0.0) (100.0) (100.0) (0.0) (100.0) (50.0) 4 3 3 5 6 3 4 (42.9) (85.7) (71.4) (42.9) (42.9) (57.1) (57.1). 201 178 83 204 210 198 208 210 201 212 180 180 (81.8) (96.4) (91.4) (95.5) (94.5) (90.0) (95.5) (92.7) (37.7) (80.9) (91.4) (81.8). AM, ampicilin; AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; CF, cephalothin; ENO, enrofloxacin; GM, gentamicin; K, kanamycin; N, neomycin; NOR, norfloxacin; P, penicillin; S, streptomycin; SXT, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; Te, tetracycline. a Aerococcus urinae, Brevundimonas vesicularis, Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis, Pseudomonas stutzeri, Rhodococcus equi, Shigella spp., Sewatia marcescens.. FOö ÛÃj ¢bÊ Ú^>¢ Ã&Ê ö F Öïj 6²Ò > ® [18, 29]. Contreras . [13]f FO" B 34% 7 &Ë ô ¦ÂB ÷ ö bf staphylococci 96% &b 7 S..
(5) <"² ªO F¿öB ªÒ ^ 5 B 6>W Ò. & 67%¢ ~& . öBê &Ë ¸f ªÒnê¢ ¾æÞ Staphylococcus spp.& 82.6% Haenlein [21]~ 59% º ¸, Contreras [13]~ 96% º Ô~b¾ <"²~ FO" ö¶ ® F¶ ÷öö & æ³' 6f ;& kö & & Oö ö :¶ >¯>Ú¢ ~Æ . Coagulase-negative staphylococci(CNS) S. epidermidis º <"²~ FFö R~º ÆÒ' ÷öb & ªç; FO"j ¢bÊ [16], Ú^>¢ Ã&Ê òW FO"j ¢V [10, 13]. CNS 7 ~¾ S. chromogenesº v ® ô ªÒB b Ú^ >~ Ã& 5 Fï6²¢ ¢V [18]. <~ CNS º <"²öB 7º FO" öf jîæò &ª ç; FO" 5 Ú^>~ Ã&¢ ¢bÊ rº ª ç; FO"j ¢bÎ [10, 16, 30]. CNSº ~ãö ª ~º V²^b OFV~ ^¿ 5 OFê Fv æ¢ ~ CNSö ~ 6" Bf *¢ > ® ~& [12]. ~ Ö"öBê CNS& 83.5% ¸f ¦Âj ^ö & &k îN /j "î . Coagulase-positive staphylococci S. aureusº <"² ~ FFö &Ë ' ÷öWj ¢V~º ^b 6 "> &ªç;, òW;, /W; FO"j ¢bÊ ~² ê¯> Z&W FO"ræ ¢bÎ [34]. Ò <"² Fö S. aureus& J"> ë²¢ Ö~æ 7ëj ¢V > ® [24]. Streptococciö ~ FO"f ÷Ò'bº Ö 7 º~æò streptococciö ~ <"²öB~ FO" B º 5~10%ö æ¾æ pº [12]. öBê Streptococcus spp.& 6"(2.7%) ªÒ>î . Streptococci 7 Str. agalactiae& <"²öBº FO"j ¢bʺ z ^ [34]¾ ~ãW ÷ö non-agalactiae streptococci ê FO~ *», ãz, ³;W ~ ª ç Ãçj ¾æâ > ® [24]. Gram-positive bacilli(GPB)ö ~ <"²~ FO"f z~æº p . ¾ Corynebacteriaº ²öBf îR &æ "º FO" öf jîæò <"²~ F OöBê ?f ÷öWj &æ ® Ú^>~ &â Ú Ã&¢ º &ªç; FO"j ¢bÎ [10, 11].. GPB 7~ ~¾ Bacillus spp.ê <"²öB FO "j ¢bʺ z ^f jîæò S. aureusf ?f Z&W FO"j ¢bÒ > ® [12]. öBº Corynebacterium spp. 5 Bacillus spp.& '' 1.8%, 0.9% ªÒ>Ú Haenlein [21]~ f ² N& &º º ÒG~ã, OFË 5 OF¶~ *çö V¢. epidermidis. 155. ¢ > ® . öB <"²~ gram-negative bacilli(GNB) ö ~ FO" Bf z~æ p ~&º [11, 19, 22, 25, 29, 31, 32], rº S. aureusf ?f / W Z&W FO"j ¢bÎ [12]. E. colif Pseudomonas spp.& GNB 7 &Ë ô ªÒ>º [10, 19], öBº E. coli& 2"(0.9%), Pseudomonas spp.& 1"(0.5%) ªÒ>î . E. colif Pseudomonas spp. º OFV 7 öVö *Ï® Ã&~º º OFË 5 ³Ë~ ®ï *ç r^ö ¾æ¾º *ç. [8]. E. coli & 6">îj rº *W î÷j ¢V~ j;ç F& ªjB [34]. E. coliº ~ãW ÷ö æ ~ãj ÓÖ® Fæ~, OF¢j ²ë 5 F V ~ò Ò Fv~ ¶çj Oæ~ 6"j Ô Â > ® . <"² F¿öB ªÒB ÷ö Ö·F¢º ®j Û~ Ò²ö 6"j ¢bÒ öò jî¢ ÿböB ÿ b, ÿböB Ò²b 6º ®b *2>Ú 7 5 ®~ n*Wö ' *7j "º * º ² ·Ï > ®bæ FÖöB¾" ÷ö~ *2 ÛB 5 ;j * <"²¢ ÒG~º ³&ö &B º ÒG~ã 5 OFJ~ * &Ò 5 OF ê Fv æ ²ëj Æ&® ~ê vGʺ Þ, ÒG³& öB¦V ²j¶ræ *º² 76&ÒBê(Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point)~ Bvj /® ê«~ ¯¢ ©b ÒòB . <"²~ FO" öö & B 6>W þ Ö"º Ú¢ ï~ ê ;ÚB jv& Ú[æò, ¾¢öBº FO"j ÛB~V * F FOÚ '. B~ ¾~¢ ²Ë~ ®. [30]. Ö" penicillinj B Bö &~ *Ú ªÒ 96.4~80.9% ræ jv' ¸f 6>Wj & . Ö"º [2] B FÖ~ B 6 >W þW'ö j ôf N¢ FO" ö ö & ~òO» <"²f <²º ¢¢ º © j ~ ~ <"²~ FO" ööº penicillinö Ú W ;W>Ú ®bæ 'Ïö "~¢ º . jÞ B 6>W þ Ö"¢ V. '. B¢ F~¢ <²öBf ?f ÚW "~ Ã&¢ N > ® ~òÎ"¢ &zÒ > ®Ú ®*º ²¦V <"² F¢ *'b æÒ > ®bÒ¢ 'B .. Ö . *Îæ~ 2B <"² ³ËöB ÒG>º <"².
(6) 156. J&ÆÁ;~ÁfçVÁ;'CÁf«Á;^ÁjÏ. (Toggenburg 5 Saanen) 216îÒ~ 425ªO F¿j & çb ^~ ªÒ.ÿ; 5 £B6>W þj ~ r" ?f Öj áî . 425ªO 7 60.9% 259ªO j6" ªOb ¾ æÒb, 6" ªOf 166ªOb 39.1%~ ^ ª ÒNj & . C 18« 220"¢ ªÒ~&º 7 Staphylococcus spp.& 182"(82.6%) &Ë ô ªÒ> î, Streptococcus spp. 6"(2.7%), Corynebacterium spp., Enterococcus spp., Pasturella spp.& '' 4"(1.8%)O ª Ò>î . 182 Staphylococcus spp.º 11B~ «b ÿ ;>îº, S. epidermidis& 52"(28.6%) &Ë ô ÿ;>î, ¾^æº S. chromogens 27"(14.8%), S. haemolyticus 23"(12.6%), S. aureus 22"(12.1%), S. capitis 5 S. lentusº '' 15"(8.2%), S. hyicus 5 S. simulansº '' 8"(4.4%), S. caprae 5 S. hominisº 5 "(2.8%) Bîb, S. warneriº 2"(1.1%) &Ë Ô f ÿ;j & . C 220"ö & 12«~ B 6>W þöBº &¦ª Bö ¸f 6>W(96.4~80.9%) ;>î b¾ penicillinöº ÚWj ¾æî .. 10.. 11.. 12.. 13.. 14.. ^^ò. fê, ¾7, f«Ö. Ö·F~ ®îö & . »Ö²æ. 1970, 12, 214-220. 2. ;~, jÏ, fçV, ;^, B*. Holstein F Ö~ F¿öB ªÒ FO" ö~ B 6> W. ªç>~²æ. 2003, 20, 166-171. 3. &ç, '", ;C", fÿÚ, f²B, fÏ , n ', f*×. Ö·F Ê~ Bf Candida kefir ~ <Ö W. F&VF"²æ. 2000, 18, 151-163. 4. ªÿ*, *Ö", ã, f÷Æ, 7, f^*. DEAE-Celluloseö ~ Ö·F casein~ ªê 5 z' Wîö & . F&VF"²æ. 2000, 18, 1-8. 5. ;^. Ö·F~ *þö & . &> ~²æ. 1964, 4, 19-22. 6. ÛêÓ. http://www.nso.go.kr:7001/kosis/winkosis.htm. 1.. 7. Ahmad, M., Al-Majali and Jawabreh, S. Period prevalence and etiology of subclinical mastitis in Awassi sheep in southern Jordan. Small Ruminant Res. 2003, 47, 243-248. 8. Albenzio, M., Taibi, L., Muscio, A. and Sevi, A. Prevalence and etiology of subclinical mastitis in intensively managed flocks and related changes in the yield and quality of ewe milk. Small Ruminant Res. 2002, 43, 219-226. 9. Bauer, A. W., Kirby, W. M., Sherris, T. C. and. 15.. 16.. 17.. 18.. 19.. 20. 21.. 22.. Turck, M. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method. Am. J. Clin. pathol. 1966, 45, 493-496. Contreras, A., Corrales, J. C., Sanchez, A. and Sierra, D. Persistence of subclinical intramammary pathogens in goats throughout lactation. J. Dairy Sci. 1997, 80, 2815-2819. Contreras, A., Corrales, J. C., Sierra, D. and Marco, J. Prevalence and aetiology of non-clinical intramammary infection in Murciano - Granadina goats. Small Ruminant Res. 1995, 17, 71-78. Contreras, A., Luengo, C., Sanchez, A. and Corrales, J. C. The role of intramammary pathogens in dairy goats. Livestock Prod. Sci. 2003, 79, 273-283. Contreras, A., Paape, M. J. and Miller, R. H. Prevalence of subclinical intramammary infection caused by Staphylococcus epidermidis in a commercial dairy goat herd. Small Ruminant Res. 1999, 31, 203208. Contreras, A., Sierra, D., Corrales, J. C., Sanchez, A. and Marco, J. Physiological threshold of somatic cell count and California mastitis test for diagnosis of caprine subclinical mastitis. Small Ruminant Res. 1996, 21, 259-264. Das, M. and Singh, M. Variation in blood leucocytes, somatic cell count, yield and composition of milk of crossbred goats. Small Ruminant Res. 2000, 35, 169174. Deinhoger, M. and Pernthaner, A. Staphylococcus spp. as mastitis-related pathogens in goat milk. Vet. Microbiol. 1995, 43, 161-166. Droke, E. A., Paape, M. J. and Di Carlo, A. L. Prevalence of high somatic cell counts in bulk tank goat milk. J. Dairy Sci. 1993, 76, 1035-1039. Dulin, A. M., Paape, M. J., Schultz, W. D. and Weinland, B. T. Effect of parity, stage of lactation, and intramammary infection on concentration of somatic cells and cytoplasmic particles in goat milk. J. Dairy Sci. 1983, 66, 2426-2433. East, N. E., Birnie, E. F. and Farver, T. B. Risk factors associated with mastitis in dairy goats. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1987, 48, 776-779. FAOSTAT. http://apps.fao.org/cgi-bin/nph-db.pl Haenlein, G. F. W. Relationship of somatic cell counts in goat milk to mastitis and productivity. Small Ruminant Res. 2002, 45, 163-178. Hunter, A. C. Microflora and somatic cell content of.
(7) <"² ªO F¿öB ªÒ ^ 5 B 6>W Ò goat milk. Vet. Rec. 1984, 114, 318-320. 23. Kirk, J. H., Glenn, J. S. and Maas, J. P. Mastitis in a flock of milking sheep. Small Ruminant Res. 1996, 22, 187-191. 24. Lewter, M. M., Mullowney, P. C., Baldwin, E. W. and Walker, R. D. Mastitis in goats. Compend. Contin. Educ. Pract. Vet. 1984, 6, 417-425. 25. Manser, P. A. Prevalence, causes, and laboratory diagnosis of subclinical mastitis in the goat. Vet. Rec. 1986, 118, 552-554. 26. McDougall, S., Murdough, P., Pankey, W., Delaney, C., Barlow, J. and Scruton, D. Relationships among somatic cell count, California mastitis test, impedance and bacteriological status of milk in goats and sheep in early lactation. Small Ruminant Res. 2001, 40, 245254. 27. McDougall, S., Pankey, W., Delaney, C., Barlow, J., Murdough, P. A. and Scruton, D. Prevalence and incidence of subclinical mastitis in goats and dairy ewes in Bermont, USA. Small Ruminant Res. 2002, 46, 115121. 28. Perrin. G. G., Mallereau, M. P., Lenfant, D. and Baudry, C. Relationships between California mastitis test (CMT) and somatic cell counts in dairy goats. Small Ruminant Res. 1997, 26, 167-170. 29. Poutrel, B. and Lerondelle, C. Cell content of goat milk: California mastitis test, Coulter counter, and Fossomatic for predicting half infection. J. Dairy Sci. 1983, 66, 2575-2579. 30. Poutrel, B., de Cremoux, R., Ducelliez, M. and Verneau, D. Control of intramammary infections in goats: Impact on somatic cell counts. J. Anim. Sci. 1997, 75, 566-570. 31. Ryan, D. P. and Greenwood, P. L. Prevalence of udder. 32.. 33.. 34.. 35.. 36.. 37.. 38.. 39.. 157. bacteria in milk samples from four dairy goat herds. Aust. Vet. J. 1990, 67, 362-363. Smith, M. C. and Roguinsky, M. Mastitis and other diseases of the goat’s udder. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1977, 171, 1241-1248. Sung, Y. Y., Wu, T. I. and Wang, P. H. Evaluation of milk quality of Alpine, Nubian, Saanen and Toggenburg breeds in Taiwan. Small Ruminant Res. 1999, 33, 17-23. White, E. C. and Hinckley, L. S. Prevalence of mastitis pathogens in goat milk. Small Ruminant Res. 1999, 33, 117-121. Wilson, D. J., Stewart, K. N. and Sears, P. M. Effects of stage of lactation, production, parity and season on somatic cell counts in infected and uninfected dairy goats. Small Ruminant Res. 1995, 16, 165-169. Zeng, S. S. Comparison of goat milk standards with cow milk standards for analyses of somatic cell count, fat and protein in goat milk. Small Ruminant Res. 1996, 21, 221-225. Zeng, S. S. and Escobar, E. N. Effect of parity and milk production on somatic cell count, standard plate count and composition of goat milk. Small Ruminant Res. 1995, 17, 269-274. Zeng, S. S., Escobar, E. N. and Popham, T. Daily variations in somatic cell count, composition, and production of Alpine goat milk. Small Ruminant Res. 1997, 26, 253-260. Zeng, S. S., Escobar, E. N., Hart, S. P. Hinckley, L., Baulthaus, M., Robinson, G. T. and Jahnke, G. Comparative study of the effects of testing laboratory, computing method, storage and shipment on somatic cell counts in goat milk. Small Ruminant Res. 1999, 31, 103-107..
(8)
관련 문서
11:20 Preliminary Study on Conceptual Design Analysis of PCCS for SMART Hae Seong Lee, Soon Joon Hong, Yeon Joon Choo, and Jeong Hee Ha(FNC Tech.) Chun Tae Park, Young In Kim,
최 지 애.. The distribution of specimens from which 100 clinical isolates of A.. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern of 100 clinical isolates of A. Relative
Sang-Keun Woo, Yong Jin Lee, WonHo Lee, Min Hwan Kim, Ji Ae Park, In Ok Ko, Jin Su Kim, Jong Guk Kim, Young Hoon Ji, Joo Hyun Kang, Gi Jeong Cheon, Chang Woon Choi, Sang Moo
Min Seok Ko, Bo An Lee, Sung Yong Lee, Yeong Jun Jang, Yoon Jeong Hong, and Sin Kim(JNU) TR-PIV Performance Test for a Flow Field Measurement in a Single Rod Test Section Ju
P01C16 Estimation of Siphon Break in a Research Reactor using CFD Analysis Hong Beom Park, Kyoungwoo Seo, Seong Hoon Kim, and Dae Young Chi(KAERI).. P01C17 Development of
Trends in age-standardized smoking prevalence difference (PD), prevalence ratio (PR), slope index of inequality (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) by
Probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from mukeunji, a long-term ripened kimchi. Journal of Food
Purpose: We investigated recent aspects of causative organism and antimicrobial susceptibility of urinary tract infections(UTI).. Materials and Methods:
