In Algeria’s arid and semi-arid regions, the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) is an important aspect of the country’s social and economic life. For hundreds of years, this animal has been essential to nomadic herders, providing them with transportation, meat and milk. Camel milk was once primarily considered a food source (Senoussi et al., Reference Senoussi, Brahimi, Kadri and Faye2024; Chikha and Faye, Reference Chikha and Faye2025), but people are now starting to realise its unique health benefits (Khaliq et al., Reference Khaliq, Mishra, Niroula, Baba, Shaukat and Rabbani2024; Kocyigit et al., Reference Kocyigit, Abdurakhmanov and Kocyigit2024). It used to be consumed in people’s own homes and shared with neighbours during hard times, but now it is being sold as more people in cities become aware of its health benefits. Camel milk is different from cow’s milk because it has a composition that is more like human milk. It has less cholesterol and lactose but more important minerals including salt, potassium, iron, zinc and magnesium, as well as more vitamin C (Aidara-Kane et al., Reference Aidara-Kane, Angulo, Conly, Minato, Silbergeld, McEwen, Collignon, Balkhy, Collignon and Conly2018; Alhassani, Reference Alhassani2024). The milk also contains many bioactive proteins, such as insulin-like peptides, lactoferrin and immunoglobulins, which have been linked to health benefits, including the control of diabetes, the treatment of infectious diarrhoea and even the treatment of cancers (Agrawal et al., Reference Agrawal, Jain, Shah, Chopra and Agarwal2011; Alebie et al., Reference Alebie, Yohannes and Worku2017).
The camel dairy sector in Algeria has changed a lot in the last several years. It has gone from traditional nomadic techniques to semi-intensive agricultural systems. The main reason for this trend is that more and more people in cities are turning to camel milk because they believe it is a functional diet with many health benefits. The camel is a great choice for dairy production in Algeria’s tough climate because it can produce milk even in hot, dry weather, for long lactations (8–18 months) and high daily yields, even during severe drought. But these improvements have also made it harder to keep udders healthy and make sure the milk is hygienic.
Mastitis is considered a public health disease and is usually associated with elevated direct costs, including treatment expenses, discarded milk and reduced yield; indirect costs include premature culling of productive animals and long-term impairment of herd genetics (Samara et al., Reference Samara, Ayadi and Aljumaah2014). However, detailed epidemiological data on its prevalence in Algerian camel populations, especially in the emerging semi-intensive dairy farms, are limited. Additionally, the specific range of bacterial pathogens causing mastitis in these settings is not well understood. Crucially, data on the antimicrobial susceptibility of these pathogens are limited, which hampers the development of effective treatment and control measures. This lack of information is particularly concerning given the global rise in antimicrobial resistance and the associated public health risks of antibiotic residues and resistant bacteria in milk intended for human consumption (Robinson et al., Reference Robinson, Bu, Carrique-mas, Fèvre, Gilbert, Grace, Hay, Jiwakanon, Kakkar and Kariuki2017; Irfan et al., Reference Irfan, Almotiri and AlZeyadi2022).
Therefore, this study was conducted to fill key knowledge gaps regarding camel mastitis in Algeria. The research aimed to determine the prevalence of mastitis in selected camel herds, identify and characterise the variety of bacterial pathogens causing these infections and assess the antimicrobial resistance profiles of the isolated strains. Collecting such baseline data is crucial for developing effective udder health management strategies, ensuring milk quality for consumers and supporting the sustainability and productivity of the growing semi-intensive camel dairy industry. Additionally, understanding the microbial environment and resistance mechanisms is essential for promoting responsible antimicrobial use and stewardship in this emerging agricultural sector.
Material and methods
Study population and farm selection
This study was conducted on nine semi-intensive dromedary dairy farms distributed over five peri-urban districts in eastern Algeria. The nine farms presented herds ranging from 12 to 35 lactating she-camels (mean 20 ± 7), with a total of 179 animals enrolled, distributed across Eloued (n = 3 farms), Biskra (n = 2), M'sila (n = 2), Oum el Bouaghi (n = 1) and Batna (n = 1). All nine farms operated under a semi-intensive system, defined here as permanent housing or penning at night with access to communal pasture or fallow agricultural land during the day, supplemented with alfalfa hay, concentrate feed (principally barley and date by-products) and water available ad libitum. Milking was performed manually, twice daily (morning and evening), following a brief presentation of the calf to stimulate milk let-down, a standard practice in this system. Farmers opted for early weaning at 3 months of age to increase milk availability. The median number of days postpartum at the time of examination was 126 days (range: 8–210 days), and parity ranged from first to sixth lactation. These farms were purposively selected based on owner cooperation, herd size sufficient to yield an adequate sample and representativeness of the dominant semi-intensive production system in the study area. All animals were clinically healthy at the time of examination and had received no antibiotics within the past 4 weeks.
Screening for mastitis and clinical examination
All 179 enrolled she-camels (716 quarters) underwent systematic screening for mastitis. The initial screening involved a thorough clinical examination of the udder and observation of foremilk. Camels with visible abnormalities in the udder (such as swelling, heat, pain, redness, fibrosis, atrophy or wounds) or in the milk (including watery secretion, clots, flakes, pus, serous or bloody discolouration or altered consistency) during manual stripping of the teat orifice were provisionally classified as suspected clinical mastitis cases. Camels lacking obvious clinical signs were screened for subclinical mastitis using the California Mastitis Test (CMT). Briefly, an equal volume (approximately 2 ml) of fresh milk from each quarter was mixed with the CMT reagent on the test paddle. Gel formation and viscosity were scored immediately (0–3, where 0 = negative, 1 = trace, 2 = distinct gel and 3 = strong gel) according to standard procedure (Balemi et al., Reference Balemi, Gumi, Amenu, Girma, Gebru, Tekle, Ríus, D'souza, Agga and Kerro Dego2021). Quarters scoring 2 or 3 were considered positive for subclinical mastitis. Importantly, CMT scores were interpreted for each animal by comparing quarters bilaterally, as interquarter comparisons within the same animal are the primary interpretive framework for CMT (Younan et al., Reference Younan, Ali, Bornstein and Müller2001). The overall prevalence of mastitis at the animal level was calculated as the proportion of enrolled camels showing either clinical or subclinical mastitis (CMT ≥ 2) in at least one quarter.
Milk sample collection for bacteriology
Aseptic milk samples were collected from all quarters diagnosed with clinical mastitis and from all quarters testing positive (CMT ≥ 2) for subclinical mastitis, following strict hygiene procedures to reduce contamination. Quarters with a CMT score of 0 or 1 (negative or trace) were not routinely sampled. Before sampling, the teat end and surrounding area were carefully cleaned with 70% ethanol-soaked cotton swabs and then allowed to dry thoroughly. The first three streams of milk were discarded. Approximately 10–15 ml of milk was then collected directly into sterile, pre-labelled, wide-mouth plastic containers for each sampled quarter. Samples were immediately placed on ice in a portable cooler (4°C) and transported to the microbiology laboratory within 5 h for processing. Samples from unaffected quarters (CMT negative or trace) were not routinely collected unless part of a specific paired comparison within the study design, which was not the primary focus here.
Bacteriological culture and identification
Milk samples were processed following the National Mastitis Council (NMC) recommended procedures for mastitis bacteriology (NMC N, 2017). Ten microliters (10 µl) of each sample were streaked onto two selective and differential culture media: 5% defibrinated sheep blood agar and MacConkey agar plates. The plates were incubated aerobically at 37°C and examined daily for microbial growth over 24–48 h. Initial identification of bacterial isolates was based on colony morphology, haemolysis pattern and Gram staining. Gram-positive cocci were further characterised by catalase testing (to distinguish staphylococci from streptococci), coagulase testing (tube and slide) for S. aureus confirmation and CAMP reaction, aesculin hydrolysis and growth in 6.5% NaCl broth for streptococcal speciation. Gram-negative rods were confirmed as E. coli by indole production, methyl-red reaction, Voges–Proskauer test and citrate utilisation (IMViC). Positive controls (reference strains S. aureus ATCC 25923, E. coli ATCC 25922 and Streptococcus uberis ATCC 700407) and sterile broth as a negative control were included in each batch (Kirkan et al., Reference Kirkan, Parin and Çapakçioglu2021). Samples containing more than two distinct bacterial species were classified as contaminated and excluded from further analysis.
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing
Antimicrobial susceptibility was determined by the Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method on Mueller–Hinton agar (or Mueller–Hinton agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood for fastidious organisms), following the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI, 2024) (CLSI VET01-S) guidelines. The disc concentrations used were: ampicillin 10 µg, doxycycline 30 µg, tetracycline 30 µg, streptomycin 10 µg, erythromycin 15 µg and trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole 25 µg (1.25/23.75 µg). Inhibition zone diameters were measured and interpreted as susceptible (S), intermediate (I) or resistant (R) using CLSI breakpoints applicable to each pathogen category (CLSI M100-S31) (CLSI, 2021). The panel of antimicrobials was selected to reflect agents used to treat bovine and camelid mastitis in Algeria, where no registered intramammary preparations are currently licensed specifically for dromedary camels; products registered for cattle are therefore used empirically, with the understanding that withdrawal periods may differ. Multidrug resistance (MDR) was defined as non-susceptibility to at least one agent in three or more antimicrobial categories, following the standardised criteria of Magiorakos et al. (Reference Magiorakos, Srinivasan, Carey, Carmeli, Falagas, Giske, Harbarth, Hindler, Kahlmeter and Olsson-liljequist2012).
Data management and analysis
Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). All collected data, including clinical assessments, CMT scores, bacteriological culture results and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles, were recorded in Microsoft Excel 2019. Each record included farm location, camel identification, udder quarter status, mastitis classification (clinical or subclinical), bacterial isolate and antimicrobial susceptibility outcomes. Mastitis prevalence was calculated at both the animal and quarter levels. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CI), were generated for mastitis prevalence, pathogen distribution and antimicrobial susceptibility.
Results
Prevalence of mastitis
Among 179 lactating camels (716 quarters) examined across nine semi-intensive dairy farms, mastitis was detected in 32 animals (67 quarters), representing an animal-level prevalence of 17.9% (95% CI: 12.6–24.3) and a quarter-level prevalence of 9.4% (95% CI: 7.4–11.7). Clinical mastitis was identified in 13 animals (25 quarters), representing animal-level and quarter-level prevalences of 7.3% (95% CI: 3.9–12.1) and 3.5% (95% CI: 2.3–5.1), respectively. Subclinical mastitis was detected in 19 animals (42 quarters), corresponding to prevalences of 10.6% (95% CI: 6.5–16.0) and 5.9% (95% CI: 4.26–7.9) at the animal and quarter levels, respectively.
Relative frequency of isolated pathogens
The analysis reveals distinct aetiological patterns between clinical and subclinical cases of mastitis. While S. aureus was the most frequently isolated pathogen, accounting for 8 (32.0%; 95% CI: 12.5–55.9) clinical and 15 (35.7%; 95% CI: 21.6–2.0) subclinical quarter isolates (combined prevalence 23% [34.3%; 95% CI: 23.2–46.9]), E. coli was isolated from 1 (4%; 95% CI: 0.1–20.4) clinical and 8 (19.0%; 95% CI: 8.6–34.1) subclinical quarters (combined prevalence 9% [13.4%; 95% CI: 6.3–24]). Although this distribution may appear unexpected, E. coli typically induces acute clinical mastitis via endotoxin-mediated inflammation; its prevalence in subclinical forms may suggest less virulent strains or effective host immune containment in this herd. All other pathogens, including Streptococcus spp. and mixed infection profiles, are presented descriptively in Table 1.
Relative frequency of pathogens isolated from all positive samples of she-camel milk
Table 1 Long description
The table reports how often specific pathogens, alone or in combinations, were isolated from positive she-camel milk samples, split into clinical mastitis cases (25), sub-clinical cases (42), and all cases combined (67). In the combined group, S. aureus is the most frequent isolate at 23 cases (34.3%), followed by Streptococcus species at 12 cases (17.9%) and E. coli at 9 cases (13.4%). Mixed infections are also reported: S. aureus plus Streptococcus species occurs in 10 cases (14.9%), Streptococcus species plus E. coli in 7 cases (10.4%), and S. aureus plus E. coli in 6 cases (9.0%). Comparing clinical to sub-clinical cases, S. aureus is similar in frequency (32.0% vs 35.7%), while E. coli is higher in sub-clinical cases (19.0%) than clinical cases (4.0%). Streptococcus species alone is more common in clinical cases (24%) than sub-clinical cases (14.3%). Each percentage is accompanied by a 95% confidence interval, and some categories have small counts, so uncertainty may be substantial, especially for rarer isolates.
Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles
Table 2 shows the antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of 43 bacterial isolates: 17 S. aureus, 15 Streptococcus spp. and 11 E. coli. Trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole demonstrated excellent efficacy, with 100% susceptibility against both S. aureus (100%; 95% CI: 80.5–100) and Streptococcus spp. (100%; 95% CI: 78.2–100) and high efficacy (81.8%; 95% CI: 48.2–97.7) against E. coli. Erythromycin was universally effective against Streptococcus spp. (100%; 95% CI: 78.2–100), and it showed variable activity against S. aureus (76.5%; 95% CI: 50.1–93.2) and E. coli (54.5%; 95% CI: 23.4–83.3). Doxycycline was highly effective against S. aureus (94.1%; 95% CI: 71.3–99.8) but only moderately effective against Streptococcus spp. (53.3%; 95% CI: 26.6–78.7) and E. coli (63.6%; 95% CI: 30.8–89.1). Ampicillin showed moderate effectiveness against S. aureus (64.7%; 95% CI: 38.3–85.8) and Streptococcus spp. (60%; 95% CI: 32.3–83.7), but lower efficacy against E. coli (45.5%; 95% CI: 16.7–76.6). Tetracycline resistance was particularly high in E. coli (72.7%; 95% CI: 39.0–94) and notable in S. aureus (35.3%; 95% CI: 14.2–61.7). Streptomycin showed limited effectiveness against Gram-positive pathogens (∼47% in both) but demonstrated better coverage against E. coli (72.7%; 95% CI: 39.0–94). Based on the criteria of Magiorakos et al. (Reference Magiorakos, Srinivasan, Carey, Carmeli, Falagas, Giske, Harbarth, Hindler, Kahlmeter and Olsson-liljequist2012), MDR was identified in 5/17 (29.4%; 95% CI: 10.3–56) S. aureus isolates, 3/15 (20.0%; 95% CI: 4.3–48.1) Streptococcus spp. isolates and 7/11 (63.6%; 95% CI: 30.8–89.1) E. coli isolates. The most common MDR combination in E. coli was resistance to penicillins, tetracyclines and macrolides.
Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of bacterial isolates from all positive samples of she-camel milk
Table 2 Long description
The table reports antimicrobial susceptibility and resistance counts and percentages, with confidence intervals, for S. aureus, Streptococcus species, and E. coli isolated from positive she-camel milk samples, by antibiotic and disc potency. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole has the strongest overall activity: all S. aureus and all Streptococcus isolates are susceptible, and most E. coli are susceptible with a small resistant fraction. Erythromycin is fully effective against Streptococcus, while S. aureus shows lower susceptibility and E. coli is roughly split between susceptible and resistant. Doxycycline performs very well against S. aureus but is only about half susceptible in Streptococcus and around two thirds susceptible in E. coli. Ampicillin shows moderate susceptibility across all three groups, with E. coli having the lowest susceptibility among them. Tetracycline shows moderate susceptibility in S. aureus and Streptococcus but low susceptibility and high resistance in E. coli. Streptomycin shows about half susceptibility in S. aureus and Streptococcus, but higher susceptibility in E. coli. Percentages should be interpreted with caution because the isolate counts are small and confidence intervals are wide.
Discussion
Under extensive management, she-camels naturally resist mastitis because of their anatomy, behaviour and environment (Obied et al., Reference Obied, Bagadi and Mukhtar1996; Wilson, Reference Wilson2020). The high, firmly attached udder helps prevent trauma and contact with contaminants like soil and faeces. Short, strong teats with functioning sphincters also block bacteria from entering and reduce infection risk (Mohamud et al., Reference Mohamud, Mohamed, Jama, Mishra and Mohamed2020). Regularly emptying each quarter through natural suckling prevents milk stasis and limits bacterial growth. Additionally, herd mobility and dispersion lower animal density and reduce the chance of cross-transmission of infections (Ayadi et al., Reference Ayadi, Aljumaah, Musaad, Samara, Abdelrahman, Alshaikh, Saleh and Faye2013). Dry, sunny conditions create a drying effect that hinders the growth of bacteria that cause mastitis (Jilo, Reference Jilo2017; Aqib et al., Reference Aqib, Muzammil, Naseer, Shoaib, Bakht, Zaheer, Khan, Khan, Usman and Shafeeq2022).
This study, carried out in semi-intensive dairy systems, found mastitis prevalence of 17.9% at the animal level and 9.3% at the quarter level (95% CI: 7.4–11.7), similar to rates reported in North and East Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia (Abbas and Agab, Reference Abbas and Agab2002; Abera et al., Reference Abera, Abdi, Abunna and Megersa2010). Clinical mastitis accounted for 7.3% of animals (3.5% at the quarter level), while subclinical mastitis was slightly more common at 10.61% (5.9% at the quarter level). Subclinical infections are of particular concern, as they often go undetected on visual inspection yet adversely affect milk yield and udder health (Asfaw et al., Reference Asfaw, Derbew and Tilahun2025). The high quarter-level rate of subclinical mastitis shows its silent but persistent nature. It emphasises the importance of routine diagnostic tests, such as the CMT (Djeddi et al., Reference Djeddi, Houssou, Rabah, Gouasmia, Miloudi, Hima, Djeddi and Soltani2025), in herd health programmes rather than relying solely on visible symptoms. In classical dairy cattle, subclinical mastitis is typically two to four times more prevalent than clinical mastitis; the closer distribution observed here may reflect the management and environmental conditions of the semi-intensive system (Halasa et al., Reference Halasa, Huijps, Østerås and Hogeveen2007). This suggests that in semi-intensive dairy camel systems, factors such as poor hygiene, overcrowding and poorly maintained milking equipment may contribute to the occurrence of both mastitis types. Poor sanitation facilitates pathogen transmission, while faulty equipment can cause teat injuries, increasing the risk of infection. The similar distribution of clinical and subclinical cases highlights the need to address both in mastitis prevention efforts. Improving hygiene, regular equipment checks and monitoring udder health can help lower disease rates and ensure milk quality (Jama et al., Reference Jama, Hussein, Darod and Ahad2024).
From a microbiological perspective, S. aureus was the most common pathogen (Selmi et al., Reference Selmi, Tayh, Ben Yahia, Ben Chehida and Messadi2026), isolated from 8 clinical and 15 subclinical quarters (combined prevalence 34.3%; 95% CI: 23.2–46.9). Its consistent detection across both clinical and subclinical quarters underscores the need for targeted control measures, irrespective of mastitis presentation. Streptococcus spp. was recovered from six clinical and six subclinical quarters (combined prevalence 17.9%; 95% CI: 9.6–29.2). These findings are consistent with those of Younan et al. (Reference Younan, Ali, Bornstein and Müller2001), indicating that they act as opportunistic or secondary pathogens. E. coli was detected in one clinical and eight subclinical quarters (combined prevalence 13.4%; 95% CI: 6.3–24). This distribution contrasts with the pattern typical in cattle, where E. coli usually causes acute clinical mastitis. This difference may be due to camel-specific immune responses to Gram-negative bacteria, possibly linked to a lower inflammatory reaction and adaptation to dry environments (Abo Hashem et al., Reference Abo Hashem, Ibrahim, Goda and Enany2020; Alebie et al., Reference Alebie, Molla, Adugna, Tesfaye and Ejo2021). Dehydration-related physiologic changes could also affect immune cell activity, allowing E. coli to colonise longer (Adah et al., Reference Adah, Ayo and Adah2022). The presence of non-toxigenic E. coli strains, described in camels and goats (Cortés et al., Reference Cortés, De la Fuente, Blanco, Blanco, Blanco, Dhabi, Mora, Justel, Contreras and Sánchez2005; Njage, Reference Njage2012), suggests that these bacteria can evade the host immune response and establish persistent infections. These host–pathogen dynamics, influenced by camel-specific immune traits (Al-Saadi et al., Reference Al-Saadi, Abbas and Al-medhtiy2019) and environmental factors (Jama et al., Reference Jama, Hussein, Darod and Ahad2024), underline the need for udder health protocols explicitly tailored for camels rather than cattle.
The epidemiological trends indicate that both contagious and environmental bacteria circulate within herds. This suggests issues in milking hygiene, biosecurity or treatment effectiveness. These results point to the necessity of integrated control programmes targeting both pathogen types, customised to the unique husbandry conditions of dairy camels.
Mixed infections involving combinations of S. aureus, E. coli and Streptococcus spp. were common, collectively accounting for a substantial proportion of isolates. For example, S. aureus + E. coli co-infections made up 16.0% of clinical cases and 4.8% of subclinical cases, while S. aureus + Streptococcus spp. combinations appeared in both types (16.0% vs. 14.3%). These polymicrobial profiles may enhance pathogenicity through synergistic effects, complicating treatment and prolonging the duration of infection (Isaac et al., Reference Isaac, Breser, De Lillo, Bohl, Calvinho and Porporatto2025). The variation in species composition suggests that both contagious and environmental pathogens are present within the studied farms, reflecting issues such as poor hygiene practices, ineffective treatments or both.
S. aureus and Streptococcus spp. showed high susceptibility to trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole (100%) and erythromycin (76.5% and 100%, respectively), with moderate susceptibility to tetracycline and streptomycin. However, resistance to ampicillin was considerable, especially in E. coli, where more than half of the isolates (54.5%) were resistant. Similar results were reported by Njage (Reference Njage2012). E. coli also showed the lowest susceptibility among all isolates to tetracycline (27.3%), raising concerns about the limited effectiveness of commonly used antibiotics. The increased resistance rates in E. coli may reflect its environmental origin and more frequent exposure to antimicrobial residues or subtherapeutic antibiotic doses in feed or water. These findings align with other studies on antimicrobial resistance in food animals, which often highlight E. coli as a major reservoir and vector of resistance genes (Fischer et al., Reference Fischer, Liljander, Kaspar, Muriuki, Fuxelius, Bongcam-rudloff, de Villiers, Huber, Frey and Daubenberger2013). The widespread susceptibility of Gram-positive isolates to trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole and erythromycin is encouraging, indicating that these antibiotics still have therapeutic potential (Kirkan et al., Reference Kirkan, Parin and Çapakçioglu2021). However, their continued effectiveness depends heavily on responsible use. The moderate-to-high resistance rates observed against older antibiotics like ampicillin and tetracycline highlight the need to review empirical treatment protocols. Additionally, the detection of multidrug-resistant isolates underscores the urgent need to establish antimicrobial stewardship programmes tailored to camel husbandry (Balemi et al., Reference Balemi, Gumi, Amenu, Girma, Gebru, Tekle, Ríus, D'souza, Agga and Kerro Dego2021; Elbehiry et al., Reference Elbehiry, Marzouk, Moussa, Alenzi, Al-maary, Mubarak, Alshammari, Al-sarar, Alsubki and Hemeg2021). From a clinical management perspective, these results suggest that while effective treatment options remain, empirical therapy without prior bacteriological culture and sensitivity testing may lead to treatment failure. This is especially true for cases caused by E. coli or mixed infections, where resistance patterns tend to be more variable. Incorporating routine microbiological screening and developing localised antibiograms could significantly improve treatment outcomes and reduce economic losses (Memon et al., Reference Memon, Baloch, Memon, Leghari, Kunbhar, Korejo, Sethar, Soomro, Soomro and Kalhoro2019). Furthermore, the findings have larger implications beyond veterinary practice. Camel milk is often consumed fresh and unpasteurised in many regions due to cultural practices and perceived medicinal benefits. The presence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in camel milk not only endangers animal health but also poses public health risks through zoonotic transmission or via the food chain. Therefore, addressing antimicrobial resistance in mastitis pathogens should be part of a One Health approach that integrates animal, human and environmental health within a comprehensive framework.
Despite the limited sample size, justified by the reproductive biology and spatial distribution of camels in Algeria’s semi-intensive system, this study confirms that mastitis, both clinical and subclinical, is a common condition in lactating she-camels and is caused by a diverse range of pathogens, with S. aureus, Streptococcus spp. and E. coli being the most prominent. The rise of antimicrobial resistance, especially among E. coli isolates, presents a significant challenge to treatment effectiveness. An integrated mastitis control strategy that combines improved hygiene, regular diagnostic monitoring, targeted therapy based on culture and sensitivity and responsible antibiotic use is urgently needed. These measures are not only vital for enhancing animal productivity and welfare but also essential for protecting public health, especially considering cultural practices of raw camel milk consumption, and for ensuring the sustainability of camel-based dairy systems in the face of increasing antibiotic resistance.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Dr Y Telhaoui for her generous support and assistance.
Funding statement
This article did not receive any specific funding from public or private agencies.
Competing interests
The authors have no conflict of interest to state.
Data availability
The data presented in the current study are available on request from the corresponding author.
Ethical approval
This mastitis investigation was conducted in full compliance with ethical standards for research involving animals. All procedures related to animal handling, clinical examinations and milk sampling were performed to minimise stress and discomfort to the camels. Additionally, informed consent was obtained from all herd owners before sample collection.
