Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems
Technical success and effectiveness of teat cleaning and the management factors associated with them were evaluated in 9 automatic milking herds. In total, 616 teats cleaned with a cleaning cup and 716 teats cleaned with rotating brushes were included. Technical success and the effectiveness of teat...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of dairy science 2005-09, Vol.88 (9), p.3354-3362 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 3362 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 3354 |
| container_title | Journal of dairy science |
| container_volume | 88 |
| creator | Hovinen, M. Aisla, A.-M. Pyörälä, S. |
| description | Technical success and effectiveness of teat cleaning and the management factors associated with them were evaluated in 9 automatic milking herds. In total, 616 teats cleaned with a cleaning cup and 716 teats cleaned with rotating brushes were included. Technical success and the effectiveness of teat cleaning, including the location and nature of the dirt, were evaluated visually. On average, 79.9% of teat cleanings with a cleaning cup, and 85.0% of those cleaned with brushes succeeded technically; that is, the teat was correctly positioned in the cleaning device throughout the whole cleaning process. The difference between use of teat cups and brushes was significant. However, because technical success of teat cleaning is strongly dependent on herd characteristics, these results should be interpreted with caution. Factors associated with the technical success of teat cleaning with a cleaning cup were herd, days in milk, behavior of the cow, teat color, and teat location. For rotating brushes, behavior of the cow, teat location, udder and teat structure, and days in milk were associated with technical success. Excessive udder hair and technical failure of the automatic milking machine also caused a few technically unsuccessful teat cleanings with a cleaning cup. Teats with technically successful teat cleanings were evaluated for the effectiveness of teat cleaning. From originally dirty teats, the cleaning cup had a significant advantage over the brushes in the percentage of teats that became clean or almost clean during the cleaning process (79.8 vs. 72.9%). Teat orifices were least effectively cleaned compared with the teat barrel and apex. Bedding material (peat, sawdust, or straw) on the teat was cleaned almost completely. Factors associated with the effectiveness of teat cleaning were teat cleanliness before cleaning, herd, teat cleaning method, and teat condition. The variation among herds indicates the likelihood that herd management factors can be adjusted to improve milking hygiene. There is also a need to improve the precision and effectiveness of the teat cleaning mechanisms of automatic milking systems. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73019-8 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68490213</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022030205730198</els_id><sourcerecordid>68490213</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-30ab50788dc40590daf0cd442ae9132dac478f55f6d3ca344577e1339e46a8343</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS0EoqXwFyAggWCR4mdiL6uhPKQiFjNla7n2zYyHxG7tpFX_Pc7MiCJWrCzb3z333nMQek3wKSON_Lh1-XSJMaU1Zpi-x-JDyzBRtXyEjomgomZEycfo-A9yhJ7lvC1XQrF4io5IQ3DLaXOM_E-fJ9NXn2AEO_oYqthVK7Cb4G15Xk7WQs6VCa4677oZuYUwv-wwM1aLHkzwYV35UK3uYnU2jXEwo7fVd9__mj-W93mEIT9HTzrTZ3hxOE_Q5efz1eJrffHjy7fF2UVtBZNjzbC5EriV0lmOhcLOdNg6zqkBRRh1xvJWdkJ0jWPWMM5F2wJhTAFvjGScnaB3e93rFG8myKMefLbQ9yZAnLJuJFfFCFbAN_-A2zilUGbTRIlWUaVogdQesinmnKDT18kPJt1rgvUchi5h6F0YenZaY6F3YWhZal8eGkxXA7iHyoP7BXh7AEwubnfJBOvzA9digRv610obv97c-QQ6D6bviyyZ20uplWZMzOCrPdiZqM06FbHLJcWkDDRnL-eZFnsCSgS3HpLO1kOw4IqsHbWL_j82-w0Mwb53</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>195792992</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Hovinen, M. ; Aisla, A.-M. ; Pyörälä, S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hovinen, M. ; Aisla, A.-M. ; Pyörälä, S.</creatorcontrib><description>Technical success and effectiveness of teat cleaning and the management factors associated with them were evaluated in 9 automatic milking herds. In total, 616 teats cleaned with a cleaning cup and 716 teats cleaned with rotating brushes were included. Technical success and the effectiveness of teat cleaning, including the location and nature of the dirt, were evaluated visually. On average, 79.9% of teat cleanings with a cleaning cup, and 85.0% of those cleaned with brushes succeeded technically; that is, the teat was correctly positioned in the cleaning device throughout the whole cleaning process. The difference between use of teat cups and brushes was significant. However, because technical success of teat cleaning is strongly dependent on herd characteristics, these results should be interpreted with caution. Factors associated with the technical success of teat cleaning with a cleaning cup were herd, days in milk, behavior of the cow, teat color, and teat location. For rotating brushes, behavior of the cow, teat location, udder and teat structure, and days in milk were associated with technical success. Excessive udder hair and technical failure of the automatic milking machine also caused a few technically unsuccessful teat cleanings with a cleaning cup. Teats with technically successful teat cleanings were evaluated for the effectiveness of teat cleaning. From originally dirty teats, the cleaning cup had a significant advantage over the brushes in the percentage of teats that became clean or almost clean during the cleaning process (79.8 vs. 72.9%). Teat orifices were least effectively cleaned compared with the teat barrel and apex. Bedding material (peat, sawdust, or straw) on the teat was cleaned almost completely. Factors associated with the effectiveness of teat cleaning were teat cleanliness before cleaning, herd, teat cleaning method, and teat condition. The variation among herds indicates the likelihood that herd management factors can be adjusted to improve milking hygiene. There is also a need to improve the precision and effectiveness of the teat cleaning mechanisms of automatic milking systems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0302</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-3198</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73019-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16107426</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JDSCAE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Savoy, IL: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Animal productions ; Animals ; automatic milking ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cattle ; cleaning equipment ; dairy cows ; dairy herd management ; Dairying - instrumentation ; Dairying - methods ; effectiveness of teat cleaning ; Female ; Food industries ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Hygiene ; Lactation ; Logistic Models ; Mammary Glands, Animal - anatomy & histology ; Methods of analysis, processing and quality control, regulation, standards ; milking equipment ; Odds Ratio ; teat cleaning ; teat orifice ; teats ; technical success of teat cleaning ; Terrestrial animal productions ; Vertebrates ; Vision, Ocular</subject><ispartof>Journal of dairy science, 2005-09, Vol.88 (9), p.3354-3362</ispartof><rights>2005 American Dairy Science Association</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Dairy Science Association Sep 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-30ab50788dc40590daf0cd442ae9132dac478f55f6d3ca344577e1339e46a8343</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-30ab50788dc40590daf0cd442ae9132dac478f55f6d3ca344577e1339e46a8343</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73019-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=17050624$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16107426$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hovinen, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aisla, A.-M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pyörälä, S.</creatorcontrib><title>Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems</title><title>Journal of dairy science</title><addtitle>J Dairy Sci</addtitle><description>Technical success and effectiveness of teat cleaning and the management factors associated with them were evaluated in 9 automatic milking herds. In total, 616 teats cleaned with a cleaning cup and 716 teats cleaned with rotating brushes were included. Technical success and the effectiveness of teat cleaning, including the location and nature of the dirt, were evaluated visually. On average, 79.9% of teat cleanings with a cleaning cup, and 85.0% of those cleaned with brushes succeeded technically; that is, the teat was correctly positioned in the cleaning device throughout the whole cleaning process. The difference between use of teat cups and brushes was significant. However, because technical success of teat cleaning is strongly dependent on herd characteristics, these results should be interpreted with caution. Factors associated with the technical success of teat cleaning with a cleaning cup were herd, days in milk, behavior of the cow, teat color, and teat location. For rotating brushes, behavior of the cow, teat location, udder and teat structure, and days in milk were associated with technical success. Excessive udder hair and technical failure of the automatic milking machine also caused a few technically unsuccessful teat cleanings with a cleaning cup. Teats with technically successful teat cleanings were evaluated for the effectiveness of teat cleaning. From originally dirty teats, the cleaning cup had a significant advantage over the brushes in the percentage of teats that became clean or almost clean during the cleaning process (79.8 vs. 72.9%). Teat orifices were least effectively cleaned compared with the teat barrel and apex. Bedding material (peat, sawdust, or straw) on the teat was cleaned almost completely. Factors associated with the effectiveness of teat cleaning were teat cleanliness before cleaning, herd, teat cleaning method, and teat condition. The variation among herds indicates the likelihood that herd management factors can be adjusted to improve milking hygiene. There is also a need to improve the precision and effectiveness of the teat cleaning mechanisms of automatic milking systems.</description><subject>Animal productions</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>automatic milking</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>cleaning equipment</subject><subject>dairy cows</subject><subject>dairy herd management</subject><subject>Dairying - instrumentation</subject><subject>Dairying - methods</subject><subject>effectiveness of teat cleaning</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Food industries</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Hygiene</subject><subject>Lactation</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Mammary Glands, Animal - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Methods of analysis, processing and quality control, regulation, standards</subject><subject>milking equipment</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>teat cleaning</subject><subject>teat orifice</subject><subject>teats</subject><subject>technical success of teat cleaning</subject><subject>Terrestrial animal productions</subject><subject>Vertebrates</subject><subject>Vision, Ocular</subject><issn>0022-0302</issn><issn>1525-3198</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS0EoqXwFyAggWCR4mdiL6uhPKQiFjNla7n2zYyHxG7tpFX_Pc7MiCJWrCzb3z333nMQek3wKSON_Lh1-XSJMaU1Zpi-x-JDyzBRtXyEjomgomZEycfo-A9yhJ7lvC1XQrF4io5IQ3DLaXOM_E-fJ9NXn2AEO_oYqthVK7Cb4G15Xk7WQs6VCa4677oZuYUwv-wwM1aLHkzwYV35UK3uYnU2jXEwo7fVd9__mj-W93mEIT9HTzrTZ3hxOE_Q5efz1eJrffHjy7fF2UVtBZNjzbC5EriV0lmOhcLOdNg6zqkBRRh1xvJWdkJ0jWPWMM5F2wJhTAFvjGScnaB3e93rFG8myKMefLbQ9yZAnLJuJFfFCFbAN_-A2zilUGbTRIlWUaVogdQesinmnKDT18kPJt1rgvUchi5h6F0YenZaY6F3YWhZal8eGkxXA7iHyoP7BXh7AEwubnfJBOvzA9digRv610obv97c-QQ6D6bviyyZ20uplWZMzOCrPdiZqM06FbHLJcWkDDRnL-eZFnsCSgS3HpLO1kOw4IqsHbWL_j82-w0Mwb53</recordid><startdate>20050901</startdate><enddate>20050901</enddate><creator>Hovinen, M.</creator><creator>Aisla, A.-M.</creator><creator>Pyörälä, S.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Am Dairy Sci Assoc</general><general>American Dairy Science Association</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050901</creationdate><title>Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems</title><author>Hovinen, M. ; Aisla, A.-M. ; Pyörälä, S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-30ab50788dc40590daf0cd442ae9132dac478f55f6d3ca344577e1339e46a8343</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Animal productions</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>automatic milking</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>cleaning equipment</topic><topic>dairy cows</topic><topic>dairy herd management</topic><topic>Dairying - instrumentation</topic><topic>Dairying - methods</topic><topic>effectiveness of teat cleaning</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Food industries</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Hygiene</topic><topic>Lactation</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Mammary Glands, Animal - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Methods of analysis, processing and quality control, regulation, standards</topic><topic>milking equipment</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>teat cleaning</topic><topic>teat orifice</topic><topic>teats</topic><topic>technical success of teat cleaning</topic><topic>Terrestrial animal productions</topic><topic>Vertebrates</topic><topic>Vision, Ocular</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hovinen, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aisla, A.-M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pyörälä, S.</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of dairy science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hovinen, M.</au><au>Aisla, A.-M.</au><au>Pyörälä, S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems</atitle><jtitle>Journal of dairy science</jtitle><addtitle>J Dairy Sci</addtitle><date>2005-09-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>3354</spage><epage>3362</epage><pages>3354-3362</pages><issn>0022-0302</issn><eissn>1525-3198</eissn><coden>JDSCAE</coden><abstract>Technical success and effectiveness of teat cleaning and the management factors associated with them were evaluated in 9 automatic milking herds. In total, 616 teats cleaned with a cleaning cup and 716 teats cleaned with rotating brushes were included. Technical success and the effectiveness of teat cleaning, including the location and nature of the dirt, were evaluated visually. On average, 79.9% of teat cleanings with a cleaning cup, and 85.0% of those cleaned with brushes succeeded technically; that is, the teat was correctly positioned in the cleaning device throughout the whole cleaning process. The difference between use of teat cups and brushes was significant. However, because technical success of teat cleaning is strongly dependent on herd characteristics, these results should be interpreted with caution. Factors associated with the technical success of teat cleaning with a cleaning cup were herd, days in milk, behavior of the cow, teat color, and teat location. For rotating brushes, behavior of the cow, teat location, udder and teat structure, and days in milk were associated with technical success. Excessive udder hair and technical failure of the automatic milking machine also caused a few technically unsuccessful teat cleanings with a cleaning cup. Teats with technically successful teat cleanings were evaluated for the effectiveness of teat cleaning. From originally dirty teats, the cleaning cup had a significant advantage over the brushes in the percentage of teats that became clean or almost clean during the cleaning process (79.8 vs. 72.9%). Teat orifices were least effectively cleaned compared with the teat barrel and apex. Bedding material (peat, sawdust, or straw) on the teat was cleaned almost completely. Factors associated with the effectiveness of teat cleaning were teat cleanliness before cleaning, herd, teat cleaning method, and teat condition. The variation among herds indicates the likelihood that herd management factors can be adjusted to improve milking hygiene. There is also a need to improve the precision and effectiveness of the teat cleaning mechanisms of automatic milking systems.</abstract><cop>Savoy, IL</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>16107426</pmid><doi>10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73019-8</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-0302 |
| ispartof | Journal of dairy science, 2005-09, Vol.88 (9), p.3354-3362 |
| issn | 0022-0302 1525-3198 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68490213 |
| source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Animal productions Animals automatic milking Biological and medical sciences Cattle cleaning equipment dairy cows dairy herd management Dairying - instrumentation Dairying - methods effectiveness of teat cleaning Female Food industries Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General aspects Hygiene Lactation Logistic Models Mammary Glands, Animal - anatomy & histology Methods of analysis, processing and quality control, regulation, standards milking equipment Odds Ratio teat cleaning teat orifice teats technical success of teat cleaning Terrestrial animal productions Vertebrates Vision, Ocular |
| title | Visual Detection of Technical Success and Effectiveness of Teat Cleaning in Two Automatic Milking Systems |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T11%3A25%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Visual%20Detection%20of%20Technical%20Success%20and%20Effectiveness%20of%20Teat%20Cleaning%20in%20Two%20Automatic%20Milking%20Systems&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20dairy%20science&rft.au=Hovinen,%20M.&rft.date=2005-09-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=3354&rft.epage=3362&rft.pages=3354-3362&rft.issn=0022-0302&rft.eissn=1525-3198&rft.coden=JDSCAE&rft_id=info:doi/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73019-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68490213%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=195792992&rft_id=info:pmid/16107426&rft_els_id=S0022030205730198&rfr_iscdi=true |