Accuracy of Field Methods in Detection of Bovine Subclinical Mastitis
Keywords:
Subclinical mastitis, mastitis screening, precise detection, Draminski, sustainable productionAbstract
Mastitis is a major challenge for the dairy industry. The current study aimed to evaluate the performance of Draminski® mastitis detector (DMD) and ultrasonography as cow-side tools for detecting bovine subclinical mastitis. To achieve this purpose, a total of 103 raw milk samples, including 48 samples from buffaloes and 55 from cows were tested using DMD, the California Mastitis Test (CMT), ultrasonography, and bacterial culture. Based on the results of CMT and bacterial culture, the study defined the quarter health status (QHS) as healthy, latent, or inflamed. The study evaluated the performance of the DMD and ultrasonography via Spearman’s rank correlation and calculated the cut-point value for DMD, in addition to identifying the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for ultrasonography against QHS. Results showed that percentages of quarters defined as healthy or inflamed using QHS categorization were higher in buffaloes than cows, unlike the latent ones. The study found a significant inverse correlation between DMD and QHS (– 0.695 in buffalo and – 0.526 in cow samples). Using inflamed/non-inflamed QHS classification, the cut-point values for the DMD were 515 for buffaloes and 465 for cows. The diagnostic performance analysis of ultrasonography against inflamed/non-inflamed QHS revealed a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 22%. The negative predictive and positive predictive values for ultrasonography against inflamed/non-inflamed QHS were 78% and 29%, respectively, and the overall accuracy was 39% as a screening method for subclinical infection. The study concluded that DMD is suitable for early detection of bovine subclinical mastitis. The cut-point value assigned by the DMD manufacturer is potentially low. Therefore, the study suggests a cut-point value of 515 for buffaloes and 465 for cows. Finally, ultrasonography is more appropriate for identifying structural intramammary changes rather than for screening subclinical infections.
Received: xx November 2025
Revised: xx November 2025
Accepted: xx February 2026
Published Online First: xx June 2026
References
1. Chen Y, Ma Y, Ji Q. Intracellular Staphylococcus aureus Infection Decreases Milk Protein Synthesis by Preventing Amino Acid Uptake in Bovine Mammary Epithelial Cells. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8:756375. 10.3389/fvets.2021.756375
2. Wei Z, Wang J, Wang Y, Wang C, Liu X, Han Z, et al. Effects of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps on Bovine Mammary Epithelial Cells in vitro. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1003 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01003
3. Wellnitz O, Zbinden C, Huang X, Bruckmaier RM. Short communication: Differential loss of bovine mammary epithelial barrier integrity in response to lipopolysaccharide and lipoteichoic acid. J Dairy Sci. 2016;99(6):4851-4856. 10.3168/jds.2016-10927
4. Zhao X, Lacasse P. Mammary tissue damage during bovine mastitis: Causes and control1. J Animal Sci. 2008;86(suppl_13):57-65. 10.2527/jas.2007-0302
5. Stanek P, Żółkiewski P, Januś E. A review on mastitis in dairy cows research: Current status and future perspectives. Agriculture. 2024;14(8):1292. 10.3390/agriculture14081292
6. Constable PD, Blood DC, Radostits OM. Veterinary medicine: a textbook of the diseases of cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, and goats. 11th edition. ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; 2017.
7. Gussmann M, Steeneveld W, Kirkeby C, Hogeveen H, Farre M, Halasa T. Economic and epidemiological impact of different intervention strategies for subclinical and clinical mastitis. Prev Vet Med. 2019;166:78-85. 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.03.001
8. Roberts J. CPD article: The California mastitis test: what is the value? Livestock. 2024;29(5):184-193. 10.12968/live.2024.0011
9. Ashraf A, Imran M. Diagnosis of bovine mastitis: from laboratory to farm. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2018;50(6):1193-1202. 10.1007/s11250-018-1629-0
10. Themistokleous KS, Papadopoulos I, Panousis N, Zdragas A, Arsenos G, Kiossis E. Udder ultrasonography of dairy cows: Investigating the relationship between echotexture, blood flow, somatic cell count and milk yield during dry period and lactation. Animals. 2023;13(11):1779. 10.3390/ani13111779
11. Adkins PRF, Middleton JR. Methods for Diagnosing Mastitis. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2018;34(3):479-491. 10.1016/j.cvfa.2018.07.003
12. Algharib SA, Dawood AS, Huang L, Guo A, Zhao G, Zhou K, et al. Basic concepts, recent advances, and future perspectives in the diagnosis of bovine mastitis. J Vet Sci. 2024;25(1):e18. 10.4142/jvs.23147
13. Ali HW, Dahl MO. Comparison of California mastitis test and Draminski mastitis detector as on-farm methods for monitoring udder health in lactating buffalo. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2022;36(Supplement I):55-60. 10.33899/ijvs.2022.135362.2469
14. Fitts JE, Laird D, Marshall RT. Direct Microscopic Methods for Bacteria or Somatic Cells. In: Marshall RT, ed. Standard Methods for the Examination of Dairy Products: American Public Health Association; 2004. 10.2105/9780875530024ch10
15. Franz S, Floek M, Hofmann-Parisot M. Ultrasonography of the bovine udder and teat. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2009;25(3):669-685. 10.1016/j.cvfa.2009.07.007
16. Kelley SG, Post FJ. Basic microbiology techniques. 4th ed. Belmont, CA.: Star Pub.; 2002. p. 31-43.
17. Sanders ER. Aseptic Laboratory Techniques: Plating Methods. JoVE. 2012(63):e3064. doi:10.3791/3064
18. Tamburini A, Bava L, Piccinini R, Zecconi A, Zucali M, Sandrucci A. Milk emission and udder health status in primiparous dairy cows during lactation. J Dairy Res. 2010;77(1):13-19. 10.1017/s0022029909990240
19. Unal I. Defining an Optimal Cut-Point Value in ROC Analysis: An Alternative Approach. Comput Math Methods Med. 2017;1:3762651. 10.1155/2017/3762651
20. Galfi AL, Radinović MŽ, Davidov IN, Erdeljan MM, Kovačević ZR. Detection of subclinical mastitis in dairy cows using California and Draminski mastitis test. Biotechnol Anim Husb. 2017;33(4):465-473. 10.2298/BAH1704465G
21. Pisestyani H, Permana I, Basri C, Lukman DW, Sudarwanto M. An Evaluation of Draminski Detector as an Early Detection Tool for Subclinical Mastitis in Dairy Cattle in Pondok Ranggon Farm. J Med Vet. 2023;6(1):6-14. 10.20473/jmv.vol6.iss1.2023.6-14
22. Szencziová I, Strapák P. Ultrasonography of the Udder and teat in cattle: perspective measUring technique. Slovak J Anim Sci. 2012;45:96-104. https://office.sjas-journal.org/index.php/sjas/article/view/280
23. Bianchi RM, Schwertz CI, de Cecco BS, et al. Pathological and microbiological characterization of mastitis in dairy cows. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2019;51(7):2057-2066. 10.1007/s11250-019-01907-0
24. Ali T, Kamran, Raziq A, Wazir I, Ullah R, Shah P, et al. Prevalence of mastitis pathogens and antimicrobial susceptibility of isolates from cattle and buffaloes in Northwest of Pakistan. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8:746755. 10.3389/fvets.2021.746755
25. Ciliberti MG, Santillo A, Caroprese M, Albenzio M. Buffalo Immune Competence Under Infectious and Non-Infectious Stressors. Animals. 2025;15(2):163. 10.3390/ani15020163
26. Dahl MO, Hamdoon OK, Abdulmonem ON. Epidemiological Analysis for medical records of Veterinary Teaching Hospital, University of Mosul during 2017 to 2019. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2021;35(3):541-548. 10.33899/ijvs.2020.127141.1468
27. Ali HW, Dahl MO. Epidemiological investigation of mastitis in lactating buffalo cows in Nineveh governorate, Iraq. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2022;36(Supplement I):217-222. 10.33899/ijvs.2022.135930.2545
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 The Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
