IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlvet/v64y2019i2id122-2018-vetmed.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of colostrum quality in the Czech Republic using radial immunodiffusion and different types of refractometers

Author

Listed:
  • Alena Pechova

    (Department of Animal Protection, Welfare and Behaviour, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Sona Slosarkova

    (Department of Immunology, Veterinary Research Institute, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Stanislav Stanek

    (Department of Livestock Technology and Management, Institute of Animal Science, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Eliska Nejedla

    (Department of Livestock Technology and Management, Institute of Animal Science, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Fleischer

    (Department of Immunology, Veterinary Research Institute, Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to determine the immunoglobulin G concentration of colostrum in Czech dairy cows, to compare refractometer results with results achieved using the radial immunodiffusion method and to evaluate the reliability of three types of refractometers and recommend the best solution for the evaluation of colostrum quality. Colostrum samples (n = 1522) were collected from 38 herds between 2015 and 2017. The immunological quality of colostrum was estimated using Brix refractometers (optical, simple digital, digital Misco) and compared with the immunoglobulin G concentration assessed using radial immunodiffusion. We found high variability in the quality of colostrum. The minimum, maximum and median of individual measurements were the following: radial immunodiffusion immunoglobulin G - 5.2, 199.1, 76.9 g/l; optical refractometer - 9.5, 32.0, 23.1% Brix; simple digital refractometer - 5.4, 35.0, 19.1% Brix; digital refractometer Misco - 9.8, 37.4, 23.2% Brix. On the basis of immunoglobulin G concentration assessed using radial immunodiffusion, 20.9% of colostrum samples were of low quality (immunoglobulin G < 50 g/l). The Spearman correlation coefficients between radial immunodiffusion and the Brix refractometer readings were 0.62-0.67 (P < 0.001) according to the type of refractometer. The cut-off evaluation of the readings from optical and Misco digital refractometers both showed 20% Brix, with sensitivities of 89.4% and 88.2%, specificities of 73.2% and 74.5% and accuracies of 86.0% and 85.4%, respectively. The cut-off level for the simple digital refractometer showed 17% Brix with a sensitivity of 77.5%, specificity of 80.4% and an insufficient accuracy of 78.1%. For optical and Misco refractometers we recommend the use of two cut-off levels for the evaluation of colostrum: 23% Brix for the selection of good quality colostrum suitable for freezing and 19% Brix to discard poor quality colostrum. The different cut-off levels obtained by measuring with different types of refractometers indicate the need to check the quality of the instruments prior to their use in practice and, where appropriate, to determine their cut-off levels by comparison with results obtained using the reference method.

Suggested Citation

  • Alena Pechova & Sona Slosarkova & Stanislav Stanek & Eliska Nejedla & Petr Fleischer, 2019. "Evaluation of colostrum quality in the Czech Republic using radial immunodiffusion and different types of refractometers," Veterinární medicína, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(2), pages 51-59.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlvet:v:64:y:2019:i:2:id:122-2018-vetmed
    DOI: 10.17221/122/2018-VETMED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://vetmed.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/122/2018-VETMED.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://vetmed.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/122/2018-VETMED.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/122/2018-VETMED?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlvet:v:64:y:2019:i:2:id:122-2018-vetmed. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.