CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 96Milk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsMicrobial infections and disease researchAnimal health and immunology

Field trial to determine efficacy of an Escherichia coli J5 mastitis vaccine

Open access
Hogan, J.S., Smith, K.L., Todhunter, D.A., Schoenberger, P.S.·1992·Journal of Dairy Science
DOI 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(92)77741-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Efficacy of an Escherichia coli (O111:B4) J5 bacterin for preventing naturally occurring IMI and clinical mastitis was tested in a 2.5-yr field trial in a 225-cow commercial herd. Cows with odd-numbered identification were vaccinated, and cows with even-numbered identification served as unvaccinated controls for each lactation during the study. Immunizations were subcutaneous on the upper part of the rib cage just posterior to the scapula at drying off, 30 d after drying off, and at calving. Percentage of quarters infected at calving with Gram-negative bacteria did not differ between treatment groups. A total of 67% of Gram-negative bacterial IMI present at calving in control cows became clinical during the first 90 d of lactation compared with 20% in vaccinated cows. Rate of Gram-negative bacterial clinical mastitis was higher in control cows than in vaccinated cows during the first 90 d of lactation. Immunization with the E. coli J5 bacterin did not reduce level of Gram-negative bacterial IMI at calving but did reduce incidence of clinical mastitis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(92)77741-8

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Data from field trials suggest that these vaccines also reduce clinical cases of mastitis caused by species in the genera Klebsiella, Pseudomonas, Serratia, and Proteus.

    “Data from field trials suggest that these vaccines also reduce clinical cases of mastitis caused by species in the genera Klebsiella , Pseudomonas , Serratia , and Proteus [16, 28].”

    From Coliform mastitis (2003) · cites this paper as [28]

    The field-trial results report fewer clinical Gram-negative mastitis cases in vaccinated cows, supporting the general suggestion of protection. The results also identify Serratia, Pseudomonas, and Klebsiella among infections at calving, but do not report reduced clinical cases separately for those genera; no passage found mentions Proteus (searched: Proteus and genus-specific clinical cases). (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • 66.7% of coliform intramammary infections in unvaccinated cows became clinical during early lactation compared to 20% in vaccinated cows.

    “The most striking difference between vaccinated and nonvaccinated cows was that 66.7% of coliform intramammary infections in unvaccinated cows became clinical during early lactation compared to 20% in vaccinated cows [28].”

    From Coliform mastitis (2003) · cites this paper as [28]

    The results passage reports that 66.7% of Gram-negative intramammary infections at calving in unvaccinated cows became clinical during the first 90 days of lactation, compared with 20% in vaccinated cows. The percentages and timing match, but the paper applies them to Gram-negative infections, not specifically to the narrower coliform category; it also lists Pseudomonas among the organisms. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The rate of clinical mastitis caused by Gram-negative bacteria was 4 to 5-fold lower in vaccinated cows compared with controls in controlled field trials.

    “Rate of clinical mastitis caused by Gram-negative bacteria was 4 to 5-fold lower in vaccinated cows compared with controls in controlled field trials [16, 28].”

    From Coliform mastitis (2003) · cites this paper as [28]

  • Vaccination of cows with Escherichia coli (O111:B4) J5 bacterins during the dry period and at calving reduced the incidence of naturally occurring clinical coliform mastitis during early lactation.

    “Vaccination of cows with Escherichia coli (0111:B4) J5 bacterins during the dry period and at calving reduced the incidence of naturally occurring clinical coliform mastitis during early lactation (2, 5).”

    From Effects of an Escherichia coli J5 Vaccine on Mild Clinical Coliform Mastitis (1995) · cites this paper as [5]

  • Use of an E. coli J5 bacterin did not reduce incidence of IMI at calving, but immunization reduced the percentage of mammary quarters with Gram-negative bacterial IMI that displayed clinical signs.

    “The use of an E. coli J5 bacterin did not reduce incidence of IMI at calving, but immunization reduced the percentage of mammary quarters with Gram-negative bacterial IMI that displayed clinical signs (5).”

    From Effects of an Escherichia coli J5 Vaccine on Mild Clinical Coliform Mastitis (1995) · cites this paper as [5]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [8]8. Hogan, I. S., K. L. Smitb. K. H. Hoblet, P. S. Schoen- berger, D. A. Todhunter, W. D. Hueston, D. B. Pritch- Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 75, No.1, 1992

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hogan, J. S., Smith, K. L., Todhunter, D. A., & Schoenberger, P. S.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Publisher
American Dairy Science Association
Published
1992-01
Volume
75
Issue
1
Pages
78-84
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(92)77741-8
OpenAlex
W1982759563
Cited by
96
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
10.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ohio State University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Milk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Microbial infections and disease research
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal health and immunology
Keywords
Escherichia coli J5, bacterin, mastitis vaccines, intramammary infection, clinical mastitis, Gram-negative bacteria, dairy cattle, vaccine efficacy, field trials, subcutaneous immunization
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacterial Vaccines, Cattle, Escherichia coli, Escherichia coli Infections, Female, Labor, Obstetric, Lactation, Mastitis, Bovine, Parity, Pregnancy, Vaccination, Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections, Escherichia coli Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review