EVALUATION OF SOME DISINFECTANTS ON TOTAL MICROBIAL LOAD IN TEATS CUPS AND MILK
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Investigation was carried out at the farm of Animal Production Department, College of Agriculture and Forestry, Mosul University on 20 Dairy Friesian Cows. The Cows were milked twice daily in their stands with an Alfa Laval pipeline milking machine .Teats Cups were treated by disinfectants as follows:1-Untreated Teat Cups 2- Wet towel washing water (55-60C0) followed by paper towel drying. 3- Wet towel washing (55-60C0) then by 0.1:1000, 5:100, 1:100 Iodophor respectively, followed by paper towel drying. 4-- Wet towel washing (55-60C0) then by Hibitane at a concentration of 1%, 0. 5%, 0.25%, respectively followed by paper towel drying. 5- Wet towel washing (55-60C0) then by half strength Lukewarm potassium at a concentration 0.5:10000 , 1:10000 respectively followed by paper towel drying, All these treatments were applied onto teats cups for 30-60 seconds. The aims of this study is to evaluate the effects of these disinfectants on Colony forming units (CFUs) of teats cups swab samples and Colony forming units (CFUs) of milk samples. The lowest percentage in the reduction of Log2 /swab of teats cups surface was noticed when wet towel washing (55-60C0), followed by paper towel drying being 36.05%. By using Iodophor there was an increase of about 20% in the reduction of TBC/swab(Total Bactrial Count) with each increase in Iodophor concentration, and were 58.5%,79.3% and 95.7% with concentrations of 1:100, 0.5:100 and 0.1:100). The highest concentration of Hibitane gave a reduction in TBC/swab similar to that of the highest Iodophor concentration, being 94.5%.A decline in the percentage of TBC/swab was proportional with the decrease in Hibitane concentration, being 62.6% and 42.1%, when Hibitane was used at concentrations of 0.5% and 0.25% respectively. Potassium permanganate treatments show a slightly better than wet towel treatments, being 44.9% and 46.9% in concentrations 0.5:10000 and 1:10000 respectively. The reduction percentage of Log2 TBC/ ml of milk in different treatments was noticed when wet towel washing (55-60C0), followed by paper towel drying being 30.0%. By using Iodophor there was an increase of about 20% in the reduction of TBC/swab with each increase in Iodophor concentration, and were 56.2.5%,79.0% and 95.5% with concentrations of 1:100, 0.5:100 and 0.1:100). Hibitane concentrations gave a reduction in TBC/swab lower than that given by Iodophor, being 75.4%.A decline in the percentage of TBC/swab was proportional with the decrease in Hibitane concentration, being 47.3% and 39.5%, when Hibitane was used at concentrations of 0.5% and 0.25% respectively. Potassium permanganate treatments show a slightly better than wet towel treatments, being 40.5% and 49.7% in concentrations of 05.10000 and 1:10000 respectively.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».