Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Dairy Sci ; 89(1): 111-25, 2006 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16357273

ABSTRACT

Two weeks before parturition, 38 Holstein primiparous and multiparous cows were assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: control animals (n = 13) received regular total mixed rations (TMR), the low-dose group (n = 14) received the control TMR plus 6 x 10(10) cfu/cow of Propionibacterium strain P169 (P169), and the high-dose group (n = 11) received the control TMR plus 6 x 10(11) cfu/cow of P169 from -2 to 30 wk postpartum. Weekly milk samples were analyzed for percentage of milk fat, protein, lactose, and SNF, milk urea nitrogen, and somatic cell counts. Daily milk production expressed as 4% fat-corrected milk was affected by treatment and week x parity. High-dose and low-dose P169-treated cows exhibited 7.1 and 8.5% increases above controls in daily 4% fat-corrected milk, respectively. Treatment x parity and week significantly influenced percentage of milk fat, lactose, and protein, whereas treatment x parity and treatment x week influenced SNF. Ruminal propionate levels were influenced by treatment such that high-dose P169 cows had greater molar percentage of propionate than did low-dose P169 and control cows. Change in body weight postpartum was influenced by week x parity and treatment x parity such that high-dose and low-dose P169 multiparous cows exhibited a more rapid recovery of wk-1 body weight than did control multiparous cows. There was no treatment, parity, or interaction on days to first postpartum ovulation or on estrous behavior at 45 and 90 d postpartum. We concluded that P169 might have potential as an effective direct-fed microorganism to increase milk production in dairy cows.


Subject(s)
Cattle/physiology , Diet , Lactation , Milk/chemistry , Propionibacterium , Reproduction , Acetates/analysis , Animals , Butyrates/analysis , Cell Count , Estrus/physiology , Fats/analysis , Female , Growth Hormone/administration & dosage , Hydrogen-Ion Concentration , Lactose/analysis , Milk/cytology , Milk Proteins/analysis , Nitrogen/analysis , Pregnancy , Probiotics , Propionates/analysis , Rumen/chemistry , Urea/analysis
2.
J Food Prot ; 59(3): 257-60, 1996 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10463443

ABSTRACT

The aim of this investigation was to determine if a risk of Clostridium botulinum growth and toxin production existed in four different packaged crabmeat products. Freshly picked blue crab meat was inoculated with 10(3) to 10(4) spores per g of a mixed pool of four strains of C. botulinum type E (Beluga, Minnesota, G21-5, and 070). The lump crabmeat was packaged in four different packaging containers: (i) 12-oz copolymer polyethylene cups currently used by most crab processors; (ii) 12-oz copolymer polyethylene cups with heat-shrink, tamper-evident low-density polypropylene seals; (iii) 8-oz copolymer polyethylene cups with easy-open aluminum ends: and (iv) 8-oz copolymer polypropylene cups with integral tamper-evident pull-tabs. The packages were stored at either 4 degrees C for 21 days or 10 degrees C for 15 days. Storage at 10 degrees C was used to simulate temperature abuse. The mouse bioassay was used to detect the presence of C. botulinum toxin. Psychotrophic and anaerobic populations were enumerated and were found to increase with time regardless of packaging type. No botulinum toxin was detected in any of the four packaging types stored at 4 degrees C or 10 degrees C throughout the entire storage period.


Subject(s)
Botulinum Toxins/analysis , Brachyura/chemistry , Brachyura/microbiology , Clostridium botulinum/metabolism , Shellfish/microbiology , Animals , Food Handling , Food Packaging , Meat/microbiology , Polyethylene
3.
J Food Prot ; 59(3): 299-305, 1996 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10463450

ABSTRACT

There has been a regulatory movement toward the required use of tamper-evident containers for fresh blue crab meat. North Carolina passed tamper-evident regulations in 1993. Blue crab processors had little information on possible changes in head-space gases, microbial growth, chemical decomposition, sensory quality, or shelf life caused by the new containers. Chemical, microbiological, physical, and sensory changes in fresh crab meat were monitored during 18 days of storage in ice and 13 days of storage refrigerated at 4 degrees C. "Special" blue crab meat, chosen for the study, is the least expensive commercial form of white crab meat. The crab meat was packaged in four retail containers: copolymer polyethylene cups with polyethylene snap-on lids, copolymer polyethylene cups with snap-on polyethylene lids fastened to the cup with heat-shrink low-density polypropylene seals, copolymer polyethylene cans with aluminum easy-open ends, and copolymer polypropylene cups with a tamper-evident pull-tab on the lid. Control samples packaged in industry standard copolymer polyethylene cups maintained higher oxygen levels than meat stored in tamper-evident containers. No consistent differences in quality or shelf life were detected among the containers. Market shelf life was limited to 6 days for meat held at 4 degrees C and 15 days for meat held at 0 degrees C. Sensory quality deteriorated 6 days earlier for crab meat held at 4 degrees C than meat held at 0 degrees C. Collateral work showed that toxin production by Clostridium botulinum neither occurred following 18 days of storage at 4 degrees C nor after 15 days of storage at 10 degrees C. Definite spoilage occurred before any toxin production. The study suggests that blue crab processors can safely use the new tamper-evident packaging, which has little or no effect on product quality or shelf life. Processors may choose appropriate packaging options using price, packaging quality, market appearance, and ease of production as the deciding criteria.


Subject(s)
Brachyura/microbiology , Colony Count, Microbial , Food Packaging/standards , Food Preservation , Shellfish/microbiology , Animals , Bacteria/isolation & purification , Carbon Dioxide/analysis , Food Handling , Food Microbiology , Food Packaging/methods , Meat/microbiology , Oxygen/analysis , Refrigeration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...