SOME STUDIES ON MILK PRODUCTION AND ITS COMPOSITION IN MAGHREBI SHE-CAMEL UNDER FARMING AND TRADITIONAL PASTORAL SYSTEMS IN EGYPT

Assiut University web-site: www.aun.edu.eg

SOME STUDIES ON MILK PRODUCTION AND ITS COMPOSITION IN MAGHREBI SHE-CAMEL UNDER FARMING AND TRADITIONAL PASTORAL SYSTEMS IN EGYPT

NABIH, A.M. ¹; MOSTAFA, T.H. ² and ABD EL-SALAAM, A.M.²

¹Animal Rroduction Research Institute, Agriculture Research Center, Minstry of Agriculture

²Animal Production Research Institute, Agriculture Research Center, Minstry of Agriculture

Received: 31 December 2017;       Accepted: 15 January 2018

INTRODUCTION

Dromedary camels are considered the strategic

stockpile of food security, play an important role as a milk source and meat in many countries  (El-Bahrawy

et al., 2015).  Increasing  human population challenge

Corresponding author: Dr. NABIH, A.M.

E-mail address: ashraf_nabih27@yahoo.com

Present address: Animal Rroduction Research Institute,

Agriculture Research Center, Minstry of Agriculture

food security and evoke the need to explore new resources of food, such as camel products (Faye and Konuspayeva, 2012). Milk composition and quality are important characteristics that determine the nutritive value and consumer acceptability. Mal et al. (2006) mentioned to camel milk has an important role in human nutrition in many regions and also widely exploited for medication and human health such as anti-cancer (Magjeed, 2005), anti-diabetic (Agrawal et al., 2011) and hypo-allergic properties (Shabo et al., 2005). Camel sustains its productivity in difficult conditions and comparatively less affected by the adverse factors like lack of feed and water. Factor such as type of food is expected to affect the quality and composition of camel milk (Mustafa et al., 2015). The information on the milk off take of camels varies according to the management of camels in their natural environment or under improved condition Yagil (1982). However, geographical origin and seasonal variations were found to be the most effective factors in camel milk composition (Konuspayeva et al., 2009). Camel milk was found to contain all the essential nutrients found in bovine milk, (Narmuratova et al., 2006). Milk yield in the dromedary camels has range widely (3.5–20 kg) (Jianlin, 2005), suggested that milk yield and composition in camels is influenced by environmental conditions, time of milking and number of milking (Aljumaah et al., 2011). Camel management systems are different from region to another, very rare references on various quantitative traits of milk under different productive systems are available (Eha et al., 2016). Kamoun and Jemmali (2012) reported that the milk yield of camel varies greatly depending on the region. Musaad et al. (2013) concluded that camel milk composition showed a wide variability in its constituents depending on the physiological, genetic and environmental factors. Milk yield of the Maghrebi she-camels under traditional extensive conditions averages 2.0 l/d though, under more favorable conditions, it ranges between 6 and 12 l/d (Ayadi et al., 2009), which suggest that the milk yield potential of this breed is greater than that recoded under the traditional extensive conditions. Variations observed in camel milk composition could be attributed to several factors such as feeding conditions (Khaskheli et al., 2005) and production systems (Bakheit et al., 2008 and Aljumaah et al., 2012). Mastitis is a major problem in traditionally managed camels and deserves further attention owning to its potential impact on milk production affecting food security. Camels affected by mastitis are reported to have considerably shorter lactation periods (Barbour et al., 1985). The disease is not usually treated in traditionally managed camels and will often take a natural course to chronicity resulting in permanent loss of milk production (Abdulrahman et al., 1991 and Obeid et al., 1996). An increase in the number of somatic cells, particularly granulocytes, in camel milk is a good indication of inflammation. As in the cow, the intensity of the cellular reaction correlates with the degree of irritation of the

mammary gland. However, a cellular fragment in the size range of somatic cells found in camel milk makes both enumeration and differentiation of somatic cells difficult (Abdulrahman et al., 1992). The bacteria isolated from camel milk are known mastitis-causing organisms in the cow, sheep and goat.  Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, E.coli and Bacillus species were the major isolates, mastitis prevalence was significantly (p < 0.05) affected by tick infestations, udder lesions, and increased age and parity of the animals (Abera et al., 2010). The objective of this study are evaluate the effect of different management system and parity order on milk yield, milk composition and bacteriological examination of Maghrebi camel under Egyptian conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study area: The study was carried out in the Marsa Matrouh Governorate (Northwest Egypt, 500 km from Cairo), to detect the effect of management system and age category on milk production, bacteriological examination and chemical composition. The experimental period lasted approximately one year.

Animals and experimental design

Total of forty dairy Maghrebi she-camels (Camelus dromedarius), (aging 5–12 years, weighing 370-590 kg, and between the first and eighth parities) without history of diseases, were divided into two groups (G1 and G2). Twenty camels were chosen from a dairy farming system (Center of Studies and Development of Camel Production), belonging to the Animal Production Research Institute, Marsa Matrouh Governorate and twenty camels from a traditional pastoral herd in the desert areas inhabited by pastoral tribes (Bedouins) followed the same area (Marsa Matrouh Governorate). Each of farming or pastoral group was divided into four sub groups according to their parity, including 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 and 7-8parities, 5 animals in each. Camels in the first group (G1, n = 20) were managed under farming system, all animals were kept in the experimental farm during the day, housed in semi-open barns all times and offered ration consisted of 4.5 kg DM of a forage mixture (Berseem hay and rice straw) and 3.5 kg DM of a commercial feed concentrate mixture composed of 25% wheat bran, 25% yellow corn, 9% uncorticated cotton seed meal, 20% barely, 15% rice brain,3% molasses, 2% premix and 1% common salt (Table 1). Feeds were offered to animals twice daily. Free access to clean water was provided at all times by a water tanks. Camels in the second group (G2, n = 20) were managed under traditional pastoral system; animals were brought to graze and browse the available plants and agricultural residues. The dominant vegetations of the natural pasture are Leucaena (30% CF and 20% CP), A triplex (20% CF and 15% CP), Mesquite (25% CF and 23.5% CP), Kochiaindica (14% CF and 23% CP) and Alph alpha (20% CF and 17% CP). Climatic conditions, including ambient temperature (Max. and Min.) and relative humidity as well as calculated temperature-humidity index all over the year were 25.6 and 16.7^oC, 64.6 and 58.1%), respectively. However, photoperiod fluctuate between 11 h of light and 13 h of dark during this period.

Table 1: Chemical composition of different feed stuffs used in farm camel feeding.

CFM: Concentrate feed mixture. BH: Berseem hay. RS: Rice straw

Colostrum analysis

Colostrum samples were collected 3 times within one hour of parturition (first milking), 24 and 48 hours from each dam postpartum for immunoglobulin studies. Determination of immunoglobulins, including IgA, IgM and IgG in colostrum was applied by Camel Radial Immune-Diffusion (RID) kit according to the procedure outlined by the manufacturer (The Binding Site Ltd, Birmingham, UK). The principle of the technique was derived from the work of Mancini et al. (1965) and Fahey and McKelvey (1965).

Milking and milk samples:

All camels were milked twice a day, handily in case of traditional pastoral system and by semi-automated milking machine unit in case of farming system. Milk yield was measured after the calves were allowed to suckle colostrums from their dams for the first seven days. After each milking, milk was weighed on limited day for each week and then monthly milk yield was calculated for lactation period.

Determination of milk compositions:

As reported by Farah (1993), milk samples (30ml) were collected from each lactating camels at milking time in clean glass bottles. Monthly sample of each camel were mixture from morning and evening milking was taken for the determination of composition and physical characteristics of milk all over the lactation period. Whole milk samples were stored frozen at−20°C without adding preservatives then the samples were heated to 40°C in a water bath and held at this temperature for 15 min for detection of milk parameters (protein, fat, lactose, total solids, solid not fat and ash) by using Lactoscan – Ultrasonic milk analyzer – Bulgaria.

Mineral contents of milk camels:

Levels of Ca, K, Na, and Cl in the milk samples were determined with an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (Hitachi U-2000, Tokyo, Japan) according to standard methods (AOAC, 1980). Phosphorus content was determined spectrophotometrically using the procedure of Watanabe and Olsen (1965).

Somatic cell count (SCC):

Milk samples were transported on ice-box directly to the Animal Reproduction Research Institute (ARRI) laboratory and kept at 4^oC until analysis of SCC. Somatic cell count was measured automatically using a Nucleo-counter, SCC – 100 (Chemotactec Denmark). Somatic cell count values were sorted into 4 categories<250 x10³cells/mL (grade A); 250 to 500 x10³ (grade B); 500 to <750 x10³ (grade C) and >750 x10³cells/mL (grade D) (Johnson and Young, 2003 and Park et al., 2007).

Milk samples for bacteriological examination:

Prior to milking, udder and teats were washed thoroughly and dried with a separate towel. Teat ends were cleaned with 70% alcohol before sampling. The first three streams of milk from each teat were discarded. About 20 ml of milk, was taken aseptically from all quarters affected by sub-clinical mastitis pre-tested by field test, California Mastitis Test (CMT), only to be sure that the collected milk samples from udder quarters suffered from any degree of  sub-clinical mastitis, into a separate sterile tubes for bacteriological analysis. All samples were kept on ice box (4ºC) and transported to the bacteriological Laboratory in ARRI as soon as possible for investigations.

Isolation and Identification of Bacteria:

Each milk sample was streaked onto Mannitol salt agar, Edward agar, MacConky agar, Neutrient agar and 5% sheep blood agar plates (Hi Media) and incubated at 37^oC for 24 h. Colonies were initially assessed by their morphology and hemolysis patterns, followed by Gram staining and motility tests. The isolates were identified according the procedures of Quinn et al. (2002). Biochemical tests, specifically, catalase, coagulase, oxidase, carbohydrate fermentation tests (glucose, mannitol, ribose, sorbitol, and trehalose), biochemical reaction on MacConkey agar, indole production, methyl red tests, urease production and citrate utilization tests, triple sugar  iron agar  reactions (TSI) were performed as required. In cases where no growth was detected, plates were re-incubated at 37^oC for an additional 24 h.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out using the General Linear Model Program (GLM) of SAS (2000). Data were analyzed using the following model:

YijK= μ+ Ti + DK + eijK

Where μ = overall mean,

Ti = fixed effect of management,

RESULTS

Table 2: Effect of management system and parity on immunoglobulin concentration in colostrum in Maghrebi she camels.

NS = Insignificant, * P < 0.05 and *** P < 0.001.

Means denoted within the same column for each factor with different superscripts are significantly different at P < 0.05.

Table 3: Milk yield and chemical composition of Maghrebi she-camels as affected by management system, camel parity and their interaction.

NS = Insignificant and *** P < 0.001.

Means denoted within the same column for each factor with different superscripts are significantly different at P < 0.05.

Table 4: Mineral content in milk of Maghrebi she-camels affected by management system, camel parity and their interaction.

NS = Insignificant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 and *** P < 0.001.

Means denoted within the same column for each factor with different superscripts are significantly different at P < 0.05.

Table 5: Somatic cell count from poled milk samples of Maghrebianshe-camels with different rearing systems and ages.

Table 6: Bacterial isolates of single infection from poled milk samples of Maghrebianshe-camel with different rearing systems and ages.

S.aureus = Staphylococcus aureus,  E.coli = Escherichia coli,  CNS = Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus, S.agalactiae = Streptococcus agalactia

Table 7: Bacterial isolates of mixed infection from poled milk samples of Maghrebianshe-camels with different rearing systems and ages.

DISCUSSION

Immunoglobulin concentration in camel colostrum

(Table 2) showed that overall mean of IgG, IgM, and IgA concentrations in colostrum of camels did not differ significantly (P < 0.05) under both management systems. However, concentration of IgG and IgA significantly (P < 0.05) increased, while IgM insignificantly increased by advancing animal parity. Meanwhile, the effect of interaction between management system and parity on immunoglobulin concentrations was not significant. Concentration of IgG in camel milk is 1.64 mg/ml as compared to 0.70, 0.67, 0.55, 0.63 and 0.86 mg/ml for goat, cow, sheep, buffalo and human milk, respectively (El-Agamy and Nawar, 2000). In spite of the higher mean IgG concentration in the Dromedary camels, found that mean IgG concentration in raw camel milk was 0.718 ± 0.330 mg/m, but IgG concentration differed for region Konuspayeva et al. (2007). They also found seasonal change in IgG content, being higher in winter than in summer. Concentration of IgG decreased regularly (P < 0.001) throughout the year, with the highest value in January and the lowest in July. It is highly required to investigate colostrum under farming and traditional systems to evaluate the impact of this variable on neonatal viability rate. In this respect, Bernabucci et al. (2013) mentioned that multiple factors influence the production and the composition of colostrum, including the species, breed, health status of the mammal, feeding practices, and time collected post-parturition. However, El-Hatmi et al. (2006) found that concentration of IgG at first milking in Tunisian camels dropped abruptly in the subsequent milkings. Fahmy and Maha (2010) found that the concentration of IgG1 decreased by 94% within the whole period of lactation in dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) reared in Marsa Matroh governorate during the first season of lactation. Also, in bovin, Król et al. (2012) demonstrated that feeding system has the major impact on the milk yield and its chemical composition. Milk of cows grazing the pasture were characterized by a higher content of IgG. Osman (2014) reviewed that individual animals showed a wide range of colostrum composition which suggests a prominent role of animal individuality. The chemical characteristics of colostrum were greatly affected by colostral days and slightly by lactation number.

Milk yield and composition

Data in (Table 3) showed that daily or total milk yield significantly (P < 0.001) higher for she-camels under farming systems more than those under traditional pastoral system by about 20.70 and 11.75%, respectively. Also, camel milk composition showed significant differences between both management systems. Fat, protein, lactose, total solids and solids not-fat contents attained significantly higher values in milk of farming system as compared with the traditional pastoral system. However, ash content showed significantly (P < 0.001) an opposite trend. As affected by animal parity, results in (Table 3) cleared that significant increase in daily and total milk yield and its composition by advancing parity. The interaction between management system and parity was not significant on milk yields and milk composition. Also, increasing milk yield by advancing camel parity, regardless management system, was related to developmental changes in udder and teat measurements by age progress. These results indicated significant effects of camel management system on yield and composition of milk. Remarkable variation in feeding system was achieved in camel farms or during grazing. In this study, camels were under good feeding system in the farm, while camels under pastoral system were under poor feeding of fry and wet shrubs and desert shrubs and insufficient in drinking water (thirst). The most important factor in camel milk for peoples living in dry zone is its water content (Wilson, 1998). In similarity with the present results, Bakheit et al. (2015) found that average daily milk yield was 6.85±1.32 and 3.14±0.66 liter for semi-intensive and traditional system, respectively with highly significant (P < 0.001) differences. The increase in average daily milk yield amounted to 53% under semi-intensive system compared to those under traditional system. The present values of milk composition are nearly agreement with the results of Abdalla et al. (2015) who indicated that milk of Maghrebi she-camels under normal condition contained 3.01, 3.06, 0.69, 4.33, and 11.06%for protein, fat, ash, lactose and total solids contents, respectively. Also, Obied and Hakem (2014) found a wide range of variation in the chemical composition of milk among different management systems especially under uncontrolled environmental condition as is mostly the case locally and the significant effect between the mean values of the two milk groups at (P < 0.05) were found to be in water, lactose, ash and total solids . In this respect, Shuiep et al. (2014) revealed that, camel milk under semi intensive system showed significantly (P < 0.05) higher total protein, solids not-fat and lactose contents. Whereas, fat was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in milk samples collected from traditional nomadic system. Several authors reported that camel milk composition was influenced by regional differences including feeding conditions (Al-Haj and Al-Kanhal 2010; Babiker and El Zubeir 2014) or management system, season, stage of lactation and calving number (Riyadh et al., 2012), and geographical locations or feeding conditions (Konuspayeva et al., 2009 and Bekele et al., 2011). On the other hand, Dowelmadina et al. (2014) found that the highest percentages of fat, protein, lactose, total solids and solids not fat were recorded for the camel in the traditional nomadic system, followed by the semi intensive system. Finally, Mustafa et al. (2014) showed that mean values of solid non-fat; crude fat; crude protein and lactose were (9.13 and 8.42%); (5.39 and 1.71%); (4.94 and 4.57%) and (3.64 and 3.24%) in milk of camels kept under traditional pastoral and farming system, respectively.

Mineral content in milk

Lower inorganic P and Mg than those reared under farm system. However, milk Ca and chlorine contents were not affected by management system. These trends may be due to the differences of the feeding and water intake. By advancing animal parity, Ca and P contents significantly (P < 0.05) increased up to 7-8 parities, while Na and K significantly (P < 0.05) increased up to 6-7 and 7-8 parities, respectively. Yet, Mg and chlorine contents were not affected significantly by parity. The interaction between management and parity was highly significant (P < 0.001) only on K and P, reflecting different trend of change in K and P contents in camels under farm and pastoral system by advancing camel parity (Table 4). It was demonstrated that the major mineral contents (Ca, P, Na, and K) of dromedary camel milk showed a large variation among different studies due to breed, feeding, stage of lactation, drought conditions, or analytical procedures (Mehaia et al., 1995 and Gorban and Izzeldin, 1997). In agreement with this study, Obied and Hakem (2014) found that the desert camel bulk milk had significantly higher amount of Ca, Na and K than in farm camel milk. Shawket and Ibrahem (2012) found increased (P < 0.05) content of macro-elements (Na, K and Ca %) in milk of camels fed ad lib. on fresh Atriplexhalimus due to higher Na, K and Ca contents in Atriplex than in berseemhay. On the other hand, Elnour and Bakheit (2012) and Musaad et al. (2013) indicated that mineral contents in camel milk were affected by parity. Contents of P, Na and K markedly increased with increasing parity number. Content of P in milk of camels at one and three parities were 1.13 and 1.4%, respectively, increased to 1.8% at advanced perities. Content of Na (0.65- 0.95%) and K (3.37-4.1%) increased, while Ca content (5.2-1.55%) markedly decreased (5.2 and 1.55%) by increasing camel parity. Results in (Table 4) revealed that camels reared under traditional pastoral system showed significantly higher contents of Na and K.

Somatic cell count (SCC)

The leukocytes in milk (SCC) release specific substances that attract more leukocytes to the area to fight the infection. Numbers of somatic cells remain in large concentrations after bacteria are eliminated until healing of the gland occurs. Clots formed by the aggregation of leukocytes and blood clotting factors may block small ducts and prevent complete milk removal. Damage to epithelial cells and blockage of small ducts can result in the formation of scar tissue in some cases, with a permanent loss of function of that portion of the gland. In other cases, inflammation may subside, tissue repair may occur, and function may return in that lactation or the subsequent one. On the other hand bacteria possess a wide array of defense mechanisms in an effort to avoid destruction. Staphylococci produce a toxin that can impede migration of poly-morph nuclear cells towards chemo-attractants. Also, as an infection persists and milk ducts remain clogged, secretory cells revert to non-producing state and alveoli begin to shrink (Harmon, 1994). Substances released by PMN completely destroy the alveolar structure which is replaced by connective and scar tissue. Pockets of infection become walled off and they become difficult to reach with antibiotics. For somatic cells count the ratio was highly significant (P<0.05) in traditional pastoral system than that recorded in farming system, also the numbers were increased with age (parities) and this may be attributed to bad hyagin and management applied in rearing and milking method incase of open grazing system which leads to more bacterial infections causing mastitis and so increase in somatic cell count, also the age play the same action due to old and repeat infections of mammary tissues and mammary glands in first years of reproduction, increased season after season of milking (Park et al., 2007).

Bacteriological study

Subclinical mastitis is a form of mastitis, affect all lactating farm animals, causing changes in milk yield and milk composition. Factors help in subclinical mastitis: type of bacteria, physiological status, age of lactating animal, level of milk production, inherited featured, milking and environment. Diagnosis of subclinical mastitis by SCC plus microbiological isolation and identification (Macdonald Campus of McGill University, 2012). Tests to detect changes in milk can be routinely used for screening purposes in milking herds. An increase in the SCC to more than 5x105 cells/ml is considered to be an indication of udder infection in she-camel (Eberlein, 2007). The present study gave incidence of subclinical mastitis in milk of she-camels (Camelus dromedarius). Results revealed that S.aureus, CNS, E.coli, S.agalactia and other Strept. were the main single bacterial isolates from all studied milk samples .Same isolates nearly were recorded by Suheir et al. (2005) and Sherifa and Eman (2012), detected same bacteria as a single mastitis infection of their studied she-camles. From the results of (Table) 6S. aureus isolates represented by (2% and 6%), CNS (5% and 2%), E.coli (8% and 2%), S.agalactia (1% and 2%) and other Strept.. (10% and 3%) in both groups traditional pastoral system and farming system, respectively. The differences between two systems of management were clear in contagious bacterial infections (S.aureus and Strept. agalactia) were higher in farming system than in traditional pastoral system. Meanwhile environmental bacteria (CNS, E.coli and other Strept.) were high in percentage in traditional pastoral system than in farm system. These results are attributed to different management systems, in case of traditional pastoral system the ways of feeding, manual milking and lack of bedding cleaning give a chance for environmental bacterial infection. In the contrary hand farm system by organized housing, feeding, semi-automated milking and continuous bedding changes lead to more contagious bacterial infections. Staphylococcus aureus has been identified as the main cause of sub-clinical camel mastitis, in farm system, while E.coli was the main cause in pastoral system, this confirm the results obtained by Abdulrahman et al. (1995) and Amel (2003). Total bacterial isolates in single bacterial infections showed a significant differences between both systems of management (26% and 15%) respectively in traditional pastoral system and farming system (Table 6). Same prevalence rates were obtained from studies performed in many she-camels rearing countries, such as in Palestine (Guljye et al., 2002), also cases of subclinical mastitis in she-camels have recently been reported in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Somalia (Barbour et al., 1985; Mostafa et al., 1987; Abdulrahman et al., 1991). The predisposing factors for she-camel mastitis may be due to weather, expose of udder to trauma, due to ticks or desert plant and anti-suckling devices which used by camel's owner to allow the young calves older than one year are herded together with their harms. All these factors are predispose the udders to bacterial infections. Also this study confirmed the results obtained by Guljye et al. (2002), as they showed that CNS, Staph. aureus and Strept. agalactiae were the main causes of single mastitis infection. In addition, Atofari et al. (2005) and Azmi et al. (2008), found that the most prevalent groups were Strept. group, CNS and Staph. aureus. Table (7), showed the mixed bacterial infection causing sub-clinical mastitis in eight subgroubs belong to two main groups of 200 tested she-camel milk samples. It was illustrated that CNS +E.coli, S.aureus + E.coli, S.aureus + other Strept.. , S.aureus + E.coli + other Strept. and S.aureus+ CNS+  other Strept.., were the main groups of bacterial isolates in percentages of  (7 and 2%), (6 and 4%), (7 and 5%), (6 and 3%) and (6 and 5%) respectively, with total mixed bacterial isolates (32% and 19%) in both traditional pastoral system and farming system, respectively. There is a significant differences between total bacterial isolates in mixed bacterial mastitis infection in both management systems. Mixed bacterial isolates of sub-clinical mastitis were not detected and discussed carefully in milk of she-camels as in cattle and buffaloes cows or even in sheep and goat sub-clinical mastitis. This due to most authors sum the microorganism as a total number either isolated in a single or mixed infection and not illustrated in two categories as our study explained. High defense mechanism of she-camel immune system of Maghrebian species fights most bacterial infection, as showed nearly in low percentage of single and mixed bacterial infections caused subclinical mastitis. Also it is very clear from our results that defense mechanism of mammary gland and udder tissues reduced by age of lactating she-camel. This may explain the reasons of increase the rate of infection for both single and mixed isolates by parity of lactating animals. That is why group four was more infected than third group and group three was more infected than second group and so on. These results were agree with same results obtained by Suhair et al. (2005) whom explained that there was a direct relationship between the frequency of mastitis and the calving number. During the first, second and third calving the incidence revalence of mastitis was 25% while at the fourth and fifth calving the incidence increased to 43.8%. However, mastatic cases decreased to 16.7% for more than seven calving. Same idea and same results were discussed by Abera et al. (2010).

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing results, both parity order and management system play an important role in productive performance of Maghrebi lactating camels, in terms of remarkable increase in milk yield and production of goodquality milk of Maghrebi she-camel under farm system as compared to pastoral system and by advancing parity order, without obvious effect was found on level of immunoglobulins in milk. Moreover, there were a clear differences between both types of management in case of single and mixed bacterial causes of subclinical mastitis. Also between each type of infection with parity and different types of management. Somatic cell count showed remarkable differences between traditional and farming methods of rearing and it was the mirror of infection degree.

REFERENCES

Abdalla, E.B.; Ashmawy, A.A.; Farouk, M.H.; Salama, O.A.; Khalil, F.A. and Seioudy, A.F. (2015): Milk production potential in Maghrebi she-camels. Small Ruminant Research 123: 129–135.

Abdulrahman, O.; Bornstein, S.; Osman, K.; Abdi, A. and Zakrisson, G. (1991): Prevalence of mastitis among camels in South Somalia: a pilot study. Mogadishu, Somalia, Somali Acad. Arts. and Sci., pp: 1-9.

Abdulrahman, O.; Cooray, R. and Bornstein, S. (1992): The Ultrastructure of cells and cell fragments in mammary secretions of Camelus bactrianus, J. Vet. Med. A 39: 648-655.

Abera, M.; Abdi, O.; Abunna, F. and Megersa, B. (2010): Udder health problems and major bacterial causes of camel mastitis in Jijiga, Eastern Ethiopia: implication for impacting food security. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 42, Issue 3: 341–347.

Agrawal, R.P.; Jain, S.; Shah, S.; Chopra, A. and Agarwal, V. (2011): Effect of camel milk on glycemic control and insulin requirement in patients with type 1 diabetes: 2-years randomized controlled trial. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr, 65: 1048–1052.

Al Haj, O.A. and Al Kanhal, H.A. (2010): Compositional, technological and nutritional aspects of dromedary camel milk. Int. Dairy J. 20: 811-821.

Aljumaah, R.; Almutairi, F.; Ayadi, M.; Alshaikh, M.; Aljumaah, A. and Hussein, M. (2011): Factors influencing the prevalence of subclinical mastitis in lactating dromedary camels in Riyadh region, Saudi Arabia. Trop. Anim. Health Prod, 43: 1605–1610.

Aljumaah, R.S.; Almutairi, F.F.; Ismail, E.; Alshaikh, M.A.; Sami, A. and Ayadi, M. (2012): Effects of production system, breed, parity and stage of lactationon milk composition of dromedary camels in Saudi Arabia. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 11: 141–147.

Amel, M.A. (2003): Bacteria and Fungi isolated from she-camel mastitis in Red sea area of the Sudan. M.V.Sc. Thesis, University of Khartoum, Sudan.

AOAC (1980): Official Methods of Analysis. 13^th. ed., Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.

Atofari, J.; Founan, M.; Nanua, J.; Mwatha, E. and Okemo, P. (2005): Microorganism associated with subclinical mastitis and their impact in milk production in camels (Camelus dromedarius) in semi-arid lands of Northern Kenya. Int. J. Agric. Rural Dev., 6: 182-187.

Azmi, D.; Hawari, A. and Dhia, S. (2008): Mastitis in one humped she-camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Jordan. J. Biol. Sci., 8: 958-961.

Ayadi, M.; Hammadi, M.; Khorchani, T.; Barmat, A.; Atigui, M. and Caja, G. (2009): Effects of milking interval and cisternal udder evaluation in Tunisian Maghrebi dairy dromedaries (Camelus dromedarius L.). J. Dairy Sci, 92: 1452–1459.

Babiker, W.I.A. and El Zubeir, I.E.M. (2014): Impact of Husbandry, stages of lactation and parity number on yield and chemical composition of dromedary camel milk. Emir J. Food and Agriculture. 26: 333-341.

Bakheit, S.A.; Majid, A.M. and Abu-Nikhila, A.M. (2008): Camels (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral systems in North Kordofan, Sudan: Seasonal and parity effects on milk composition. J. Camelid Sci, 1: 32-36.

Bakheit, S.A.; Bernard, F. and Ibrahim, I.E. (2015): Effect of improving management system on camel milk production. University of Kordofan J. Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, UKJNRES, 2(2): 13-22.

Barbour, E.; Nabbut, N.; Frerichs, W.; Al-Nakhli, H. and Al-Mukaye, A. (1985): Mastitis in (Camelus dromedarius) in Saudi Arabia, Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 17: 173-179.

Bekele, T.; Lunderheim, N. and Dahlbron, K. (2011): Milk feeding and feeding behaviour in the camel (Camelus dromedarius) during 4 watering regimens. J. Dairy Sci, 94: 1310-1317.

Bernabucci, U.; Basirico, L. and Morera, P. (2013): Impact of hot environment on colostrum and milk composition. Cell. Mol. Biol., 59 (1): 67-83.

Dowelmadina, I.M.M.; El Zubeir, I.E.M.; Salim, A.D.A. and Arabi, O.H.M.H. (2014): Influence of some factors on composition of Dromedary camel milk in Sudan. Global J. Animal Scientific Research, 2(2): 120-129.

Eberlein, V. (2007): Hygienic status of camel milk in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) under tow different milking. Assiut Vet. Med. J., 58(133): 12-55.

Eha, M.; Mustafa, B. and Atti, A.K.A. (2016): Milk composition of the udder quarters of she-camel (Camelus dromedarius) raised under intensive farming system, Assiut Vet. Med. J., I.J.S.K.; 5(1): 9-12.

El-Agamy, E.I. and Nawar, M. (2000): Nutritive and immunological values of camel milk: A comparative study with milk of other species. In: Proc. 2^nd International Camelid Conference: Agroecons. Camelid Farm, Almaty, Kazakhstan.8-12 Sept.

El-Bahrawy, K.A.; Khalifa, M.A. and Rateb, S.A. (2015): Recent advances in dromedary camel reproduction: An Egyptian field experience. Emir. J. Food Agric, 27 (4): 350-354.

El-Hatmi, H.; Levieux, A. and Levieux, D. (2006): Camel (Camelus dromedarius) immunoglobulin G, α-lactalbumin, serum albumin and lactoferrin in colostrum and milk during the early post partum period. J. Dairy Res., .73(3): 288-293.

Elnour, A.A.H.M. and Bakheit, S.A. (2012): The effect of parity number on some mineral level rations in camel’s milk. A case study: North Kordofan State, Sudan. in: Proceedings of the 3^rd Conference of the International Society of Camelid Research and Development.

Fahey, J.L. and McKelvey, E.M. (1965): Quantitative determination of serum immunoglobulins in antibody agar plates. J. Immunol., 94: 84.

Fahmy, B.G.A. and Maha, M.M. (2010): Interrelationships between somatic cell count and biochemical changes in Egyptian camel milk. SCVMJ, XV (1) 45-72.

Faye, B. and Konuspayeva, G. (2012): The sustainability challenge to the dairysector – the growing importance of non-cattle milk production world-wide. Int. Dairy J. 24: 50–56.

Farah, Z. (1993): Composition and characteristics of camel milk BY Laboratory of Dairy Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. J. Dairy Res., 60: 603-626.

Gorban, A.M.S., and Izzeldin, O.M. (1997): Mineral content of camel milk and colostrum. J. Dairy Res., 64: 471–474.

Guljye, A.; Van Creveld, C. and Yaqil, R. (2002): Detection of subclinical mastitis

in dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) using somatic cell counts and the N-acetyl-beta-Dglucosaminidase test. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 34: 95-104.

Harmon, R.J. (1994): Physiology of mastitis and factors affecting somatic cell counts. J. Dairy Sci. 77: 2103-2112.

Jianlin, H. (2005): Camelids. In: Pond, W.G., Bell, A.W. (Eds.), Encycl. Anim. Sci. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp. 187–190.

Johnson, R.G. and Young, A.J. (2003): The association between milk urea nitrogen and DHI Production variables in western commercial dairy herds. J. Dairy Sci, 86: 3008–3015.

Kamoun, M. and Jemmali, B. (2012): Milk yield and characteristics of Tunisian camel. J. Anim. Sci, 1:12-13.

Khaskheli, M.; Arain, M.A.; Chaudhry, S.; Soomro, A.H. and Qureshi, T.A. (2005): Physicochemical quality of camel milk. J. Agric. Soc. Sci, 2: 164-166.

Konuspayeva, G.; Faye, B. and Loiseau, G. (2009): The composition of camel milk, a meta-analysis of the literature data, J. Food Comp. Anal, 22: 95-101.

Konuspayeva, G.; Faye, B.; Loiseau, G. and Levieux, D. (2007): Lactoferrin and immunoglobulin contents in camel’s milk (Camelus bactrianus, Camelus dromedaries, and Hybrids) from Kazakhstan. J. Dairy Sci., 90(1): 1-9.

Król, J.; Brodziak, A.; Litwińczuk, Z. and Barłowska, J. (2012): Selected factors determining the content of lactoferrin, lysozyme and immunoglobulins G in bovine milk A search for antibacterial agents, 107-124.

Macdonald Campus of McGill University (2012): Faculty of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, http://animsci.agrenv.mcgill.ca/ courses/4 50/topics/13.pdf

Magjeed, N. (2005): Corrective effect of milk camel on some cancerbiomarkers in blood of rats intoxicated with aflatoxin B1. J. Saudi Chem. Soc., 9: 253–263.

Mal, G.; Sena, D.S.; Jain, V.K. and Sahani, M.S. (2006): Therapeutic value of camel milk as a nutritional supplement for multiple drug resistant (MDR) tuberculosis patients, Isr. J. Vet. Med.; 61: 88-91.

Mancini, G.; Carbonara, A.O. and Hermans, D. (1965): Immunochemical quantitation of antigens by single radial immunodiffusion. Immunochem., 2: 235.

Mehaia, M.A.; Hablas, M.A.; Abdel-Rahman, K.M. and El-Mougy, S.A. (1995): Milk composition of Majaheim, Wadah and Hamra camels in Saudi Arabia. Food Chem, 52: 115–122.

Mostafa, A.; Ragab, A.; Safwat, E.; El-Sayed, Z.; Abd-el-Rahman, M.; El-Danaf, M. and Shouman, M. (1987): Examination of raw she-camel milk for detection of subclinical mastitis. J. Egyp. Vet. Med. Assoc., 47: 117-128.

Musaad, A.M.; Faye, B. and Al-Mutairi, S.E. (2013): Seasonal and physiological variation of gross composition of camel milk in Saudi Arabia. Emir. J. Food Agric. 25(8): 618-624.

Mustafa, A.B.; Mohamed, E.H.A.; Haroun, E.; Attia, K.A. and Nikhala, M.A. (2014): Effect of parity on camel milk composition under traditional pastoral and farmed systems in Sudan. Int. J. of Advances in Pharmacy, Biology and Chemistry (IJAPBC) 3(2): 266-272.

Mustafa, B.; EHA, M.; Atti, A.K.A.; Abunokhila, A.M.; Rahmatalla, S.A. and Elterife, A.M.A. (2015): Effect of parity on milk yield and dam body change postpartum of dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) under farming system in Sudan, I.J.A.P.B.C.; 4(1): 131-137.

Narmuratova, M.; Konuspayeva, G.; Loiseau, G.; Serikbaeva, A.; Barouh, N.; Montet, D. and Faye, B. (2006): Fatty acids composition of dromedary Bactrian camel milk in Kazakhstan, J. Camel Pract. Res.; 13: 45-50.

Obeid, A.I., Bagadi, H.O. and Mukhtar, M.M. (1996): Mastitis in Camelus dromedarius and the somatic cell content of camels' milk, Research Vet., Sci., 61(1): 55-58.

Obied, A.A. and Hakem, B.Z. (2014): Milk composition of Libyan Maghrebi camels (Camels dromedaries) reared under farm and desert conditions. Int. Conference on Chemical, Environment and Biological Sciences. Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia): 92-94.

Osman, M.M.H. (2014): Assessment of cows and she-camel colostrum and some factors affecting their chemical composition. M.V.Sc. Thesis, Department of Dairy Production, Faculty of Animal Production, University of Khartoum.

Park, Y.K.; Koo, H.C.; Kim, S.H.; Hwang, S.Y.; Jung, W.K.; Kim, J.M.; Shin, S.; Kim, R.T. and Park, Y.H. (2007): The analysis of milk components and pathogenic bacteria isolated from bovine raw milk in korea. J. Dairy Sci., 90 (12):5405–5414.

Quinn, P.J.; Markey, B.K.; Carter, M.E.; Donnelly, W.J. and Leonard, F.C. (2002): Veterinary Microbiology and Microbial Disease. First Published A Blackwell Science Company

Riyadh, S.A.; Faris, F.A.; Elsyed, I.; Mohammed, A.A.; Ahmed, S. and Moez, A. (2012): Effects of production system, breed, parity, and stage of lactation on milk composition of dromedary camels of Saudi Arabia. J. Animal Vet. Advances, 11:141-147.

SAS (2000): SAS user's guide: Statistics. SAS Inst. Inc. Cary NC.

Shabo, Y.; Barzel, R.; Margoulis, M. and Yagil, R. (2005): Camel milk for foodallergies in children. Immun. Allerg, 7: 780–796.

Shawket, M.S. and Ibrahem, A.H. (2012): Impact of long-Term feeding atriplex (Saltbush) on camel's milk production under arid conditions. in: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference of the International Society of Camelid Research and Development.

Sherifa M. Sabra and Eman M. Sharaf (2012): Subclinical mastitis in she-camels at taif, Assiut Vet. Med. J., 58:133.

Shuiep, E.S.; El Zubeir, I.E.M. and Yousif, I.A. (2014): Compositional Quality of Camel Milk and Some Husbandry Practices Associated with Camel Milk Production in Two Production Systems in Sudan SUST. J. Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences (SJAVS), 15(2): 10-18.

Suheir, I. Abdalla; Salim, M.O. and Yasin, T.E (2005): Bacteria, mycoplasma and fungi associated with sub-clinical mastitis in camel. Sudan J. Vet. Res., 20: 23-31.

Watanabe, F.S. and Olsen, S.R. (1965): Test of an ascorbic acid method for determining phosphorus in water and NaHCO3 extracts from soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc, 29: 677–678.

Wilson, R.T. (1998): Camels. CTA series, Mac Millan Educational Press LTD, London, Uk. pp.: 120-124.

Yagil, R. (1982): Camels and camel milk. Rome, Italy, FAO, 69 P (FAO animal Production and Health Paper n°26).