Fossomatic Method of Somatic Cell Counting in Milk: Collaborative Study

1978 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 779-784
Author(s):  
Richard D Mochrie ◽  
Robert J Monroe

Abstract Fossomatic, a fully automatic, fluoro-optoelectronic somatic cell counter, was evaluated in 6 laboratories. One set of 6 duplicate milk samples, fresh and preserved, was read with instruments as routinely calibrated to each laboratory’s direct microscopic somatic cell counts (DMSCCs), i.e., local standard. A second set was read after standardizing the instrument to a 3-sample common standard (DMSCC) shipped to each collaborator. Cell levels of the unknowns ranged from 371 to 2301 thousand (th)/ml by DMSCC, with an s per sample of 14.8% and s of a level mean of 1.8%. Fossomatic values averaged 1014 compared to 1031 th cells/ml by DMSCC, had homogeneous variance for duplicates within laboratories (s = 4.0%), and had an error per observation of 6.2%. The linear coefficient of 0.9966±0.0039 (for fresh milk and common standard) for the Fossomatic values regressed on DMSCC gave an excellent and unbiased estimate of the cell concentration in a milk sample. A small bias was evident in only 5 of 24 linear regressions (fresh or preserved within each standard) where slopes differed significantly from 1. All 5 were on values derived from a local standard with maximum biases of +18% and —28% (at a 1 million level). Preserved milk had slightly lower (P < 0.01) cell concentrations than fresh milk but only by 3.6% at 1 million. Although condition X level was significant (P < 0.01), the 6 cell levels differed by a magnitude of only 27— 45 th cells/ml. Between-laboratory variation (the component was 4.6%) and laboratory X level interaction were both significant, but their contributions to error were small. The spread in laboratories at any cell level was about 12% and the error of estimate for a sample sent to 2 laboratories was 6.8%. Although interactions were significant with this precise method, they were not of such a magnitude as to invalidate cell count estimates in practice. The Fossomatic method has been adopted as official first action.

1977 ◽  
Vol 40 (10) ◽  
pp. 671-675 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. WANG ◽  
G. H. RICHARDSON

Milk sample preparation for Optical Somatic Cell Counter II operation was simplified by using a diluter to add fixative, mix, and dilute samples. Potassium dichromate preservative tablets produced a mean increase of 7,000 in somatic cell counts in fresh milk. Samples held at 20–23 C beyond 2 days or at 4–7 C beyond 4 days showed a reduction in somatic cell count. The mean somatic cells in 3 Holstein herds tested over a 6-month period was 3.8 × 105/ml. A 22-month survey of 52.6 thousand Utah Dairy Herd Improvement samples which were shipped under ambient conditions and then held at 5 C until tested, indicated 75% below 400,000 and 2.7% above 1.6 million somatic cells/ml. Casein, noncasein protein, total protein, fat and milk weight data were also obtained on the three herds. Multiple correlations were obtained. The best correlations suggested that testing for total protein and somatic cells in a central laboratory would estimate casein and noncasein protein. Such tests are most valuable for the cheese industry.


1990 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. S. HOGAN ◽  
K. LARRY SMITH ◽  
D. A. TODHUNTER ◽  
P. S. SCHOENBERGER

Quarter, composite, and bulk tank milk samples were analyzed in a three laboratory collaborative study to determine the relationship of milk fat and protein content with milk somatic cell counts. Milk somatic cell counts were determined by two Coulter counters, a Fossomatic counter, and by direct microscopic somatic cell counting. In general, variability among somatic cell counts measured by different procedures was not related to protein or fat content of milk. The greatest percentage of variation between counts that could be explained by fat content of milk was 20.2% between a Coulter and direct microscopic somatic cell counts. The greatest percentage of variation between counts that could be explained by protein content of samples was 12.9% between a Coulter and Fossomatic counts. Breed of cow from which samples were collected also had little influence on differences among milk somatic cell counts. Differences among milk somatic cell counts due to counting methods did vary among quarter, composite, and bulk tank milk samples.


1984 ◽  
Vol 47 (9) ◽  
pp. 694-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. LINTNER ◽  
C. W. HEALD ◽  
R. J. EBERHART

Somatic cell count samples (SCCS) for use in calibration of milk somatic cell counting methods were prepared from raw bulk milk preserved with potassium dichromate. Somatic cells were separated by centrifugation, then appropriate cell dilutions were prepared in the dichromate-preserved skim milk. Somatic cell counts from SCCS stored at 4°C were stable over a 23-wk period. No bacterial contamination was detected in these samples. In a collaborative study among eight laboratories, SCCS were not affected by usual conditions by shipping. The SCCS can be used as reference standards for the direct microscopic somatic cell count and the Fossomatic and Coulter Counter somatic cell counting methods.


1980 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-218
Author(s):  
Robert D Bremel ◽  
◽  
T Bredar ◽  
R Case ◽  
B Cathardi ◽  
...  

Abstract In the membrane filter-deoxyribonucleic acid test, somatic cells are trapped on a special filter. A chemical determination of the DNA of the trapped material gives an estimate of the number of cells. The MF-DNA was evaluated and compared with the direct microscopic somatic cell counts (DMSCCs) in 10 laboratories. Cell levels in the 10 bulk milk samples analyzed ranged from 380,000 to 1,700,000/mL. Regression analysis gave a relation of 0.181 absorbance at 490 nm, when 2.5 mL of milk was analyzed and 5.0 mL reagent was used for color development. The 95% confidence limits on the slope were 0.158-0.204. Analysis of variance showed that both procedures had significant (P<0.001) systematic errors, but that only the DMSCC method showed a significant laboratory X sample interaction (P<0.001). The repeatability standard deviation of the MF-DNA procedure was 117,000 cells/mL (14%), and the reproducibility standard deviation was 198,000/ mL (23%). This compared favorably with the DMSCC method which had a repeatability of I62,000/mL (19%) and a reproducibility of 287,000/mL (34%). The error of the MF-DNA was constant at all cell counts, whereas there was a tendency for the error to increase in the DMSCC method at high cell counts. This method has been adopted as official first action.


1994 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 932-938
Author(s):  
David Mckenna

Abstract AOAC method 978.26, Somatic Cells in Milk—Optical Somatic Cell Counting Method (Fossomatic), using Fossomatic 215 was adopted first action in 1978 and final action in 1984. The method specifying a second-generation cell counter, the Fossomatic 90, was approved final action in 1989. This demonstrates that the method has been well tested and has satisfied all the requirements of the Association. Since then, the manufacturer, Foss Electric, has introduced a third generation of equipment, which is being distributed as 3 different models. These are the Fossomatic 250, Fossomatic 300, and Fossomatic 360. The models differ only in their packaging and the speed at which they perform analyses.


Foods ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 268
Author(s):  
Daphne T. Lianou ◽  
Charalambia K. Michael ◽  
Natalia G. C. Vasileiou ◽  
Efthymia Petinaki ◽  
Peter J. Cripps ◽  
...  

Objectives were to investigate somatic cell counts (SCC) and total bacterial counts (TBC) in the raw bulk-tank milk of sheep flocks in Greece, to study factors potentially influencing increased SCC and TBC in the bulk-tank milk of sheep and to evaluate possible associations of SCC and TBC with milk content. Throughout Greece, 325 dairy sheep flocks were visited for collection of milk sampling for somatic cell counting, microbiological examination and composition measurement. Geometric mean SCC were 0.488 × 106 cells mL−1; geometric mean TBC were 398 × 103 cfu mL−1; 228 staphylococcal isolates were recovered form 206 flocks (63.4%). Multivariable analyses revealed annual incidence risk of clinical mastitis, age of the farmer and month into lactation period (among 53 variables) to be significant for SCC > 1.0 × 106 cells mL−1 and month into lactation period at sampling and availability of mechanical ventilators (among 58 variables) to be significant for TBC > 1500 × 103 cfu mL−1. Negative correlation of SCC with fat, total protein and lactose and positive correlation of SCC with added water were found. With SCC > 1.0 × 106 cells mL−1, significant reduction of protein content (2%) was observed, whilst in flocks with SCC > 1.5 × 106 cells mL−1, significantly lower annual milk production per ewe (42.9%) was recorded.


1973 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 950-956
Author(s):  
Wesley N Kelley

Abstract A collaborative study was conducted to compare tbe automated optical somatic cell counting method (OSCC) with the direct microscopic somatic cell counting method (DMSCC) for raw milk. Samples were prefixed with formaldehyde and introduced into an Auto-Analyzer system. Dilution, clarification, and cell counting were performed automatically. Eight collaborators participated in the study, analyzing 48 samples in duplicate, using 2 different sampling rates. The results were compared with DMSCC counts reported by 3 different analysts. Statistical results show that the standard deviation for the DMSCC method was 0.1086 and for the OSCC method, at a sampling rate of 30/hr, 0.0911. From comparison of results it appears that the OSCC method is as accurate as, and more precise than, the DMSCC method. The faster sampling rate of the OSCC method (60/hr) has some effect on precision but little effect on accuracy. The method has been adopted as official first action.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-281
Author(s):  
Dimitris C. Chatzopoulos ◽  
Daphne T. Lianou ◽  
Charalambia K. Michael ◽  
Dimitris A. Gougoulis ◽  
Vasia S. Mavrogianni ◽  
...  

AbstractThe objectives of this work were (a) to determine the presence of streptococci in samples from small ruminant dairy farms (bulk-tank milk and, where possible, teatcup swabs), (b) to investigate the potential adverse effects of streptococci on milk quality and (c) to investigate the importance of some husbandry factors for the isolation of streptococci. Bulk-tank milk samples and teatcups swab samples were examined bacteriologically for the presence of streptococci. Somatic cell counting and milk composition measurements were also performed. The husbandry factors present in each farm were assessed for potential associations with the isolation of streptococci. Streptococci were isolated from milk samples from 31.4% of sheep and 17.4% of goat farms and from 4.8% of sheep and 5.9% of goat teatcups. Streptococci were isolated more frequently from the upper part than the lower part of teatcups: 5.0% vs. 1.9%. Most isolates (57.9%) were identified as Streptococcus uberis. Most isolates (68.4%) were slime-producing; slime-production was more frequent among isolates from teatcups (83.3%) than from bulk-tank milk (55.0%). Somatic cell counts and milk composition did not differ between farms in which streptococci were or were not isolated. Machine-milking was associated with the isolation of streptococci from bulk-tank milk samples. The initial stage of the milking period (first two months) was found to be associated with the isolation of streptococci from milking machine teatcups in sheep farms only.


1979 ◽  
Vol 42 (7) ◽  
pp. 567-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. E. GINN ◽  
V. S. PACKARD ◽  
D. R. THOMPSON

The automatic Milk Cell Counter (MCC) and semi-automatic electronic cell counter (ESCC) of Coulter Electronics were compared with each other and with the direct microscopic cell count (DMSCC) on raw milk samples with various cell counts. The average DMSCC count on 241 samples of milk with Wisconsin Mastitis Test (WMT) results of 22 mm and higher was 55,000 cells/ml above the average MCC count when calibrated to a 4.4-μm minimum particle diameter. This difference is statistically significant at the 1% level. On 24 different raw milk samples of widely varying somatic cell count analyzed in replicate six times per sample, the standard deviations for replicate samples were 34,300, 34,900 and 136,000 for the MCC, ESCC and DMSCC, respectively. For these tests, the MCC had been calibrated to a 4.3-μm minimum particle diameter. The average difference between counts by the MCC and ESCC methods was only 6080/ml, but this was statistically significant at the 5% level. The average MCC count with the equipment set at 4.3-μm minimum particle diameter was 58,000 above the average DMSCC count.


1987 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. LINTNER ◽  
A. L. LANGE ◽  
C. W. HEALD ◽  
R. J. EBERHART

Somatic cell count samples (SCCS) for use in comparison of milk somatic cell counting methods were prepared from the cell sediment deposited in a creamery milk separator. Bovine milk somatic cells were resuspended from the sediment, and serial cell dilutions were prepared in bronopol-preserved milk diluent. Over a 1-year period, sets of SCCS were prepared each month and sent to milk-testing laboratories in the U.S.A., Canada and Europe, and counted by the methods in use at those Laboratories: (a) direct microscopic somatic cell count (DMSCC), (b) Fossomatic counter and (c) Coulter counter. Cell counts were normalized to eliminate the effect of month to month variation in the cell content of the SCCS. Counts obtained by the three methods were similar, although Coulter counter results tended to be lower, and significantly lower (P< 0.05) in SCCS with cell counts greater than 700,000 cells/ml than those counts by the other two methods. The effect of shipping on SCCS stability was assessed for SCCS samples sent to and returned from other laboratories, and counted by the Fossomatic method on their return. Counts were similar before and after shipping, except that results for SCCS with cell counts greater than 1,000,000 cells/ml were significantly higher (P<0.05) after their return.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document