↓ Skip to main content

Microbial contamination of water intended for milk container washing in smallholder dairy farming and milk retailing houses in southern Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Microbial contamination of water intended for milk container washing in smallholder dairy farming and milk retailing houses in southern Ethiopia
Published in
SpringerPlus, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2841-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kebede Amenu, Desalew Shitu, Mesele Abera

Abstract

The water used during handling and processing of milk products can be potential sources of microbial contamination with possible negative consequences on food safety. Especially, the water used in keeping the hygiene of milking and milk storage utensils is crucial to keep the quality and safety of the products. Therefore, the current study was designed to assess the bacteriological quality of water used for cleaning milking and milk storage equipment in smallholder dairy production in Hawassa and its surroundings. A total of 79 water samples were collected: 26 from milk collecting houses in Hawassa and 53 from selected smallholder dairy farms (Hawassa = 14, Arsi Negele = 29 and Yirgalem = 10). Out of the total samples, 18 samples were collected directly from pipe and 61 from storage containers (46 from narrow opening and 15 from wide opening containers). The overall prevalence of E. coli exceeding zero CFU/ml was 39.2 %. From analyzed samples, high prevalence of positive samples for E. coli was found in water samples taken from wide opening containers (66.7 %). A number of bacteria were isolated and presumptively identified which include Bacillus sp. 6.3 % (n = 5), Citrobacter sp. 1.3 %(n = 1), E. coli 39.2 % (n = 31), Enterobacter sp. 2.5 % (n = 2), Klebisella sp. 7.6 % (n = 6), Micrococcus sp. 6.3 % (n = 5), Pseudomonas sp. 6.3 % (n = 5), Staphylococcus aureus 6.3 % (n = 5), Staphylococcus epidermidis 13.9 % (n = 11) and Streptococcus sp. 1.3 % (n = 1). The bacteriological quality of water especially, water stored in household storage containers in present study area was found to be contaminated with different bacteria indicating potential food safety problem and health risk to the society. In this respect, people handling water should be educated on its proper handling and the risk of contamination during storage. To minimize contamination, materials with narrow mouth and lid should be used. Further study is recommended on the relationship between the bacteriological quality of water and the behavior of water users.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 11%
Engineering 6 9%
Environmental Science 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,381,002
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#935
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,568
of 365,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#130
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.