Journals / Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 4

Awareness and adoption level of subclinical mastitis diagnosis among dairy farmers of Punjab, India

Pages
845–852
Publication Date
2022-11-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

A significant difference (P < 0.01) was seen on overall CM incidence at farms level (38.33%), among which 10.00% was on technology adopter farms.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:: Subclinical mastitis (SCM) is a major and silent problem of public health concern.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A crosssectional study was carried out during 2018–19 in six districts from different agroclimatic zones of Punjab, India to describe awareness about various technologies and its adoption to diagnose SCM.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:A significant difference (P < 0.01) was seen on overall CM incidence at farms level (38.33%), among which 10.00% was on technology adopter farms.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

: Subclinical mastitis (SCM) is a major and silent problem of public health concern. It causes higher economic losses with no initial visible changes in the appearance of milk or udder. Subclinically affected animals always remain a continuous source of infection. Most of the clinical mastitis (CM) cases start as subclinical; hence controlling SCM is the best way to reduce the incidence of diseases. A crosssectional study was carried out during 2018–19 in six districts from different agroclimatic zones of Punjab, India to describe awareness about various technologies and its adoption to diagnose SCM. The multistage random technique was used to select dairy farmers (n = 600). A personal interview technique with the pretested schedule was used to collect information after obtaining participation consent. Around 13% of respondents were aware of SCM diagnosis technologies and very few (6.67%) were implementing the same at their farms. Family size (Odds Ratio – OR 2.44), dairy income (OR 13.67), landholding (OR 2.13), herd size (OR 6.45) and extension contacts are likely to affect the probability of SCM diagnosis adoption. A significant difference (P < 0.01) was seen on overall CM incidence at farms level (38.33%), among which 10.00% was on technology adopter farms. Five percent of adopter farms had no incidence of disease. From 600 dairy farms, 3179 dairy animals were exposed and 378 were suffered from CM (12.05%). A significant difference (P < 0.01) was found for incidence rate, number of animals affected and exposed to CM among three categories of farms such as 1) technology adopters with no incidence (n = 17), 2) technology adopters with incidence (n = 23), and 3) technology nonadopters with incidence (n = 207). The study confirmed the potential and direct role of SCM diagnosis on reducing CM incidence, however poor awareness coupled with financial status may be the reason limiting adoption, which can be accelerated through comprehensive extension approach for producing clean milk to society

🔖

Cite This Article

NIMBALKAR, V., VERMA, H. K., SINGH, J., KANSAL, S. K. (2022). Awareness and adoption level of subclinical mastitis diagnosis among dairy farmers of Punjab, India. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 4, 845–852. https://ajindex.com/articles/614693

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Quddus MA. Adoption of dairy farming technologies by small farm holders: practices and constraints. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science 2012; 41 (2): 124-135
  2. Siddiky MNA. Dairying in South Asian region: opportunities, challenges and way forward. SAARC Journal of Agriculture 2017; 15 (1): 173-187
  3. Government of India, 19th Livestock Census – All India Report. New Delhi, India: Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying; 2012
  4. Chander M, Dutt T, Ravikumar R, Subrahmanyeswari B. Livestock technology transfer service in India: a review. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 2010; 80: 1115-1125
  5. Swami SV, Patil RA, Gadekar SD. Studies on the prevalence of sub-clinical mastitis in dairy animals. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2017; 5 (4): 1297-1300
  6. Ratafia M. Worldwide opportunities in genetically engineered vaccines. Biotechnology 1987; 5: 1154
  7. Sharma N, Gurdeep S, Zul-I-Huma, Sharma S, Misri J et al. Mastitis occurrence pattern in dairy cows and importance of related risk factors in the occurrence of mastitis. Journal of Animal Research 2018; 8 (2): 315-326
  8. Dhanda MR, Sethi MS. Investigation of mastitis in India. Series no
  9. New Delhi, India: Indian Council of Agricultural Research; 1962
  10. Dua K. Incidence, etiology and estimated economic losses due to mastitis in Punjab and in India- an update. Indian Dairyman 2000; 53: 41-48
  11. Bardhan D. Estimates of economic losses due to clinical mastitis in organized dairy farms. Indian Journal of Dairy Science 2013; 66 (2): 168-172
  12. Chanda A, Roy CR, Bannerjee P, Guha C. Studies on incidence of bovine mastitis, its diagnosis, etiology and in-vitro sensitivity of the isolated pathogens. Indian Veterinary Journal 1989; 66: 277-282
  13. Awale MM, Dudhatra GB, Avinash K, Chauhan BN, Kamani D et al. Bovine mastitis: a threat to economy. Open Access Scientific Reports 2012; 1 (5): 295
  14. Tripti K, Champak B, Rajeev KC. A Review on subclinical mastitis in dairy cattle. International Journal of Pure & Applied Biosciences 2018; 6 (2): 1291-1299
  15. Jones GM, Bailey TL. Understanding the basics of mastitis. Virginia Cooperative Extension 2009; 404 (233): 1-5
  16. Kalorey DR. Future prospects for mastitis control. In: Proceedings of VIII Annual conference of Indian Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Research; Ludhiana, India; 2001. pp. 81-85
  17. Wattiaux MA. Mastitis: The disease and its transmission. Dairy Essentials, Babcock Institute for