Milk: It's electric


Feature Article

What's in Your Milk


The hypothesis: Steroid and peptide hormones in milk increase the risk of cancer. IVAN ORANSKY sifts through the data to find the truth.

Related Articles

The cow whisperer

Dairy economics:


Milking blood from a stone

Milk and human health:


What's the state of the evidence linking milk to human disease?

Web Extras

Slideshow: From feed to bottle

Infographic: Selected milk components and their concentrations

Gary Rogers is driving down a highway in Tennessee pointing out the dairy farms and cows that dot the landscape. He has a bit of data that a Northeast city dweller finds eye-opening: "All of the black and white cows around the world are related, and I don't mean 500 years ago," he says. In fact, today, most of the nine million dairy cows in the United States share just a handful of paternal grandfathers.

That has resulted in intense selection, and Rogers, a University of Tennessee dairy scientist, is worried about the potential downstream effects. "Selection always has to be balanced by what it does to inbreeding," says Rogers. "That was one of the things that got me interested in the health issues of dairy cows. No one else is really looking at it, and it has deteriorated in the last 15 to 20 years." (For more on changes to the US dairy herd since 1900, see What's in your milk?)

So Rogers began trying to identify families that have more resistance to mastitis. Mastitis, an infection of the udder, costs US dairy farmers about $2 billion per year, says Max Paape, a research dairy scientist at the US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service. One of the signs of mastitis is the presence of large numbers of somatic cells in the milk. Normal cell counts are about 300,000-500,000 per milliliter, and the cells are mostly polymorphonuclear cells, with some epithelial cells.

Cell-count measurements have been around for a while, because they can help farmers determine if cows are ill. That's important, says Rogers, not only for maintaining the health of cows, but also for maintaining the high quality of milk: Mastitis can lead to swelling and the production of "lumpy" milk. When cell counts of milk exceed 750,000 per milliliter, farmers can't sell it in the US, so they prefer to keep counts at about 200,000. In Europe, the threshold is 400,000.

There's an economic incentive, too. In the US, farmers get a premium of $.25 per 100 pounds for milk with counts below 300,000. (In September, the average price per 100 pounds was $12.88; for more on the economics of dairy farming, see Dairy economics: Milking blood from a stone.)

Measuring cell counts, however, is time-consuming and expensive, and can't be done instantaneously while a cow is being milked. So Rogers looked for other methods that would be suitable for dairy farmers' everyday use, and that would help him gather large amounts of data for his research on the health of various herds. He knew about measuring the conductivity of milk, which has been used since the early 1970s to screen for mastitis. The inflammation and tissue damage created by mastitis allow blood components to infiltrate the milk, causing sodium and chloride ion levels to become elevated, thus making the milk a better conductor of electrical current. Typical milk has conductivity of 8-9 millimhos, while mastitis milk can have up to about 15 millimhos' conductivity. "Conductivity is highly correlated to somatic cell count," says Paape.

Conductivity can be measured instantaneously during every milking, and the cost incurred is for just a one-time setup. John Harrison, a dairy farmer outside of Knoxville, Tenn., has the equipment at his farm, but he doesn't use the numbers to determine the health of individual cows. "It's a good indicator of severe environmental infection, but not of an infection in a particular cow," he says.

"You're better off working with your dairymen to identify sick cows," says Steve Cornett, another dairy farmer near Knoxville. "Cell count is more of an indicator of stress and the condition of a herd," he adds. "You can't treat based on it, and it's better to change the [cows' living] conditions."

It's not a perfect correlation, Rogers acknowledges, as he points out a conductivity gauge that Steve Harrison (John's brother) uses at Steve's farm. That's because conductivity increases before the cell count rises. Put another way, conductivity can begin to rise before cows "go clinical," says Cornett. Moreover, some cows show increased conductivity but end up not showing any signs of mastitis. The same is true of cell count, which can sometimes reach 1 million per milliliter without clinical signs.

Still, "you may not get clinical effects, but there's something going on," says Rogers. In some of those cases, he adds, a lab can actually culture the bacteria, mycoplasma, yeast, or fungi that cause mastitis. Rogers has shown that on a genetic level, conductivity is highly correlated with the likelihood of mastitis developing (J Dairy Sci, 87:1917-24, 2004 and J Dairy Sci, 89:779-81, 2006). "A subclinical problem is still useful from a genetic standpoint."


Correction (posted March 3, 2007): When originally posted, as several commenters have noted, this story misstated the units for resistance and conductivity. The sentence that begins "Typical milk..." has been changed to correct this error, which The Scientist regrets.



Advertisement


 

Rate this article

Rating: 2.40/5 (5 votes )





How Did You Make This Resistance Measurement?
by Gene Chase, NARTE ESD Technical Consultant, ETS Inc.

[Comment posted 2007-02-26 19:37:36]
I have had to make repeatable resistance measurements of liquids. I made a fixture to do these measurements. How did you get your repeatable results?



Further confusion on units
by Bob Dodge

[Comment posted 2007-02-26 18:12:49]
While I have no argument with the discussion of the correct units above, I should point out that the product and scientific literature is rife with references to electrical resistance of liquids in Ohms, mega ohms, or mega ohms-cm. Almost any reference to highly purified water will say that its resistance is 18.2 mega ohms - cm - see, for instance, any Millipore water purifier.

This doesn't make it correct, but if you are confused, it's understandable.



Conductance as a measurement of mastitis
by Daniel miller

[Comment posted 2007-02-26 03:13:55]
As was alluded to but not emphasized in the paper, this property of mastitic milk has been known for many years and was the basis for one of the early means of mastitis detection. It fell through, however, because there are many other things besides mastitis that can change the electrical conductance of milk. Variation between cows in the consitituents of the milk affect conductance and not only between cows, but the same cow at different times of lactation and under different feeding regimens. Other cowside tests such as the California Mastitis Test are as or more effective. The Gold Standard is still culture of the milk.



Ohms and mhos, oh my
by Ivan Oransky, Deputy Editor, The Scientist

[Comment posted 2007-02-23 21:55:00]
Thanks to our commenters for pointing out this error. It is good to know that science is still a self-correcting enterprise. There was some confusion as to the proper units of measurement as I was reporting this piece.

We will have these changes made post-haste.



yes, thank you for the correction
by Thom Randolph

[Comment posted 2007-02-23 21:41:50]
the clarification is greatly appreciated.



Properties, measurements, and units
by Plamen Doynov

[Comment posted 2007-02-23 20:50:21]
To be precise (after all, it is TheScientist) Mr. Thom Randolph is almost correct in his comment. The unit of conductivity (used in North America) is Mho/meter. Please refer to the table that summarizes properties and their measurement units.
Property / Measurement Unit
resistance Ohm
conductance Siemens (or Mho)
resistivity Ohmᅡユm
conductivity Siemensᅡユm-1 (or Ohm-1ᅡユm-1, or Mhoᅡユm-1)


Conductance, susceptance, and admittance are the inverses of resistance, reactance, and impedance, respectively. To measure these properties, the Siemens is the reciprocal of the ohm. In other words, the conductance, susceptance, or admittance, in Siemens, is simply 1 divided by the resistance, reactance or impedance, respectively, in ohms. In1971 the unit ᅡモSiemensᅡヤ (S) was adopted by the General Conference on Weights and Measures as an SI derived unit, so the unit for electrical conductivity becomes Siemens per meter (S/m) (named for the German electrical engineer Werner von Siemens (1816-1892). In North American the use of unit mho/cm to measure conductivity, where the unit ᅡモmhoᅡヤ is a reciprocal ohm (mho = 1/Ohm). Actually, the word ᅡモmhoᅡヤ is the word ᅡモohmᅡヤ spelled backwards. Historically, the conductivity measurements in micromho/cm
and millimho/cm, makes it common to see these measurements in microsiemens/cm (uS/cm) and millisiemens/cm (mS/cm).




unit of conductivity is MHOs, not OHMs!
by Thom Randolph

[Comment posted 2007-02-23 19:37:20]
the paragraph stating numbers for "reistance" is wrong. If the extra blood increases conductivity, the RESISTANCE goes DOWN, not up. I susped your units are wrong, and it's the conductivity that's being described, not resistance. The portion:

"...milk a better conductor of electrical current. Typical milk has resistance of 8-9 milliohms, while mastitis milk can have up to about 15 milliohms' resistance. "Conductivity is highly correlated...."

Should probably read:

"...milk a better conductor of electrical current. Typical milk has conductivity of 8-9 millimhos, while mastitis milk can have up to about 15 millimhos' conductance. "Conductivity is highly correlated...."

Otherwise the numbers contradict the text.






Front Cover

Register for FREE Online Access

  • »Current issue
  • »Best Places to Work and Salary surveys
  • »Daily news and monthly contents emails

Register »

Subscribe to the Magazine

  • »Monthly print issues
  • »Unlimited online access
  • »Special offers on books, apparel, and more

Subscribe »

Library Subscriptions
Recommend to a Librarian

Masthead | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy
© 1986-2012 The Scientist