Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T02:38:23.966Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advances in predicting nutrient partitioning in the dairy cow: recognizing the central role of genotype and its expression through time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2011

N. C. Friggens ,
L. Brun-Lafleur ,
P. Faverdin ,
D. Sauvant  and
O. Martin
N. C. Friggens*
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France AgroParisTech, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
L. Brun-Lafleur
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1080 Production du Lait, F-35590 Saint-Gilles, France Agrocampus-Ouest, UMR1080 Production du Lait, F-35000 Rennes, France Institut de l’Élevage, F-35652 Le Rheu, France
P. Faverdin
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1080 Production du Lait, F-35590 Saint-Gilles, France Agrocampus-Ouest, UMR1080 Production du Lait, F-35000 Rennes, France
D. Sauvant
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France AgroParisTech, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
O. Martin
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France AgroParisTech, UMR 791 Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
*
†E-mail: nicolas.friggens@agroparistech.fr
Get access

Abstract

In recent years, it has become increasingly clear that understanding nutrient partitioning is central to a much broader range of issues than just being able to predict productive outputs. The extent to which nutrients are partitioned to other functions such as health and reproduction is clearly important, as are the efficiency consequences of nutrient partitioning. Further, with increasing environmental variability, there is a greater need to be able to predict the ability of an animal to respond to the nutritional limitations that arise from the environment in which it is placed. How the animal partitions its nutrients when resources are limited, or imbalanced, is a major component of its ability to cope, that is, its robustness. There is mounting evidence that reliance on body reserves is increased and that robustness of dairy cows is reduced by selection for increased milk production. A key element for predicting the partition of nutrients in this wider context is to incorporate the priorities of the animal, that is, an explicit recognition of the role of both the cow's genotype (genetic make-up), and the expression of this genotype through time on nutrient partitioning. Accordingly, there has been a growing recognition of the need to incorporate in nutritional models these innate driving forces that alter nutrient partitioning according to physiological state, the genetically driven trajectories. This paper summarizes some of the work carried out to extend nutritional models to incorporate these trajectories, the genetic effects on them, as well as how these factors affect the homeostatic capacity of the animal. At present, there are models capable of predicting the partition of nutrients throughout lactation for cows of differing milk production potentials. Information concerning genotype and stage of lactation effects on homeostatic capacity has not yet been explicitly included in metabolic models that predict nutrient partition, although recent results suggest that this is achievable. These developments have greatly extended the generality of nutrient partitioning models with respect to the type of animal and its physiological state. However, these models remain very largely focussed on predicting partition between productive outputs and body reserves and, for the most part, remain research models, although substantial progress has been made towards developing models that can be applied in the field. The challenge of linking prediction of nutrient partitioning to its consequences on health, reproduction and longevity, although widely recognized, is only now beginning to be addressed. This is an important perspective for future work on nutrient partitioning.

Keywords

nutrient partitionhomeostasishomeorhesisgenotypeenvironment
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue s1: The 8th International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores (ISNH8) 6 – 9th September 2011, Aberystwyth (UK) , March 2013 , pp. 89 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baldwin, RL 1995. Modeling ruminant digestion and metabolism. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.Google Scholar
Baldwin, RL, France, J, Beever, DE, Gill, M, Thornley, JHM 1987. Metabolism of the lactating cow. III. Properties of mechanistic models suitable for evaluation of energetic relationships and factors involved in the partition of nutrients. Journal of Dairy Research 54, 133–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banos, G, Coffey, MP 2010. Genetic association between body energy measured throughout lactation and fertility in dairy cattle. Animal 4, 189–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banos, G, Brotherstone, S, Coffey, MP 2005. Genetic profiles of total body energy content of Holstein cows in the first three lactations. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 2616–2623.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bareille, N, Faverdin, P, Hay, M 1997. Modification of feed intake response to a β2-agonist by bovine somatotropin in lactating or dry dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 52–66.Google Scholar
Baudracco, J, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Holmes, CW, Comeron, EA, Macdonald, KA, Barry, TA 2012. e-Cow: an animal model that predicts herbage intake, milk yield and live weight change in dairy cows at grazing, with and without supplementary feeding. Animal (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bauman, DE, Currie, WB 1980. Partitioning of nutrients during pregnancy and lactation: a review of mechanisms involving homeostasis and homeorhesis. Journal of Dairy Science 63, 1514–1525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beerda, B, Ouweltjes, W, Šebek, LBJ, Windig, JJ, Veerkamp, RF 2007. Effects of genotype by environment interactions on milk yield, energy balance, and protein balance. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 219–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP, Veerkamp, RF, Dillon, P 2006. Phenotypic profiles for body weight, body condition score, energy intake, and energy balance across different parities and concentrate feeding levels. Livestock Science 104, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, DP, Bermingham, ML, Good, M, More, SJ 2011. Genetics of animal health and disease in cattle. Irish Veterinary Journal 64, 5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP, Buckley, F, Dillon, P, Evans, RD, Rath, M, Veerkamp, RF 2002. Genetic parameters for level and change of body condition score and body weight in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2030–2039.Google Scholar
Bjerre-Harpøth, V, Friggens, NC, Thorup, VM, Larsen, T, Ingvartsen, KL, Moyes, KM 2012. Decreased nutrient density to increase physiological imbalance for dairy cows at different stages of lactation: 1. Milk yield and component responses. Journal of Dairy Science (in press).Google Scholar
Broster, WH, Broster, VJ 1998. Body score of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 65, 155–173.Google Scholar
Brun-Lafleur, L 2011. Modélisation du fonctionnement d'un troupeau laitier pour anticiper les conséquences de son pilotage. PhD thesis, Agrocampus-Ouest, Rennes, France.Google Scholar
Brun-Lafleur, L, Delaby, L, Husson, F, Faverdin, P 2010. Predicting energy × protein interaction on milk yield and milk composition in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4128–4143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bryant, JR, López-Villalobos, N, Holmes, C, Pryce, JE 2005. Simulation modelling of dairy cattle performance based on knowledge of genotype, environment and genotype by environment interactions: current status. Agricultural Systems 86, 121–143.Google Scholar
Bryant, JR, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Pryce, JE, Holmes, CW, Johnson, DL 2006. Reaction norms used to quantify the responses of New Zealand dairy cattle of mixed breeds to nutritional environment. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 49, 371–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, JR, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Holmes, CW, Pryce, JE, Pitman, GD, Davis, SR 2007. The effect of level of feeding, genetic merit, body condition score and age on biological parameters of a mammary gland model. Animal 1, 175–183.Google Scholar
Bryant, JR, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Holmes, C, Pryce, JE, Rossi, J, Macdonald, KA 2008. Development and evaluation of a pastoral simulation model that predicts dairy cattle performance based on animal genotype and environmental sensitivity information. Agricultural Systems 97, 13–25.Google Scholar
Chilliard, Y, Ferlay, A, Faulconnier, Y, Bonnet, M, Rouel, J, Bocquier, F 2000. Adipose tissue metabolism and its role in adaptations to undernutrition in ruminants. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 59, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coffey, MP, Emmans, GC, Brotherstone, S 2001. Genetic evaluation of dairy bulls for energy balance traits using random regression. Animal Science 73, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffey, MP, Simm, G, Hill, WG, Brotherstone, S 2003. Genetic evaluations of dairy bulls for daughter energy balance profiles using linear type scores and body condition score analysed using random regression. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2205–2212.Google Scholar
Collier, RJ, Baumgard, LH, Lock, AL, Bauman, DE 2005. Physiological limitations, nutrient partitioning. In Yields of farmed species. Constraints and opportunities in the 21st century (ed. R Sylvester-Bradley and J Wiseman), pp. 351–377. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Cutullic, E, Delaby, L, Michel, G, Disenhaus, C 2009. Consequence on reproduction of two feeding levels with opposite effects on milk yield and body condition loss in Holstein and Normande cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92 (E-suppl. 1), 355.Google Scholar
Danfær, A 1990. A dynamic model of nutrient digestion and metabolism in lactating dairy cows. pp. 1–511. National Institute of Animal Sciences Report nr. 671, Frederiksberg, Denmark.Google Scholar
Delaby, L, Faverdin, P, Michel, G, Disenhaus, C, Peyraud, JL 2009. Effect of different feeding strategies on lactation performance of Holstein and Normande dairy cows. Animal 3, 891–905.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, J, France, J, Dhanoa, MS, Maas, JA, Hanigan, MD, Rook, AJ, Beever, DE 1997. A model to describe growth patterns of the mammary gland during pregnancy and lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 2340–2354.Google Scholar
Dillon, P, Berry, DP, Evans, RD, Buckley, F, Horan, B 2006. Consequences of genetic selection for increased milk production in European seasonal pasture based systems of milk production. Livestock Science 99, 141–158.Google Scholar
Doeschl-Wilson, AB, Knap, PW, Kinghorn, BP, Van der Steen, HAM 2007. Using mechanistic animal growth models to estimate genetic parameters of biological traits. Animal 1, 489–499.Google Scholar
Drackley, JK, Overton, TR, Douglas, GN 2001. Adaptations of glucose and long-chain fatty acid metabolism in liver of dairy cows during the periparturient period. Journal of Dairy Science 84 (E-suppl.), E100–E112.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC 1997. A method to predict the food intake of domestic animals from birth to maturity as a function of time. Journal of Theoretical Biology 186, 189–199.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC, Kyriazakis, I 2001. Consequences of genetic change in farm animals on food intake and feeding behaviour. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 60, 115–125.Google Scholar
Faverdin, P, Bareille, N 1999. Lipostatic regulation of feed intake in ruminants. In Regulation of feed intake. Proceedings of the 5th Zodiac Symposium (ed. D Haide, EA Huisman, JWM Osse and MWA Verstegen), Wageningen, Netherlands, 22–24 April 1998, pp. 89–102. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Faverdin, P, Delaby, L, Delagarde, R 2007. The feed intake in dairy cows and its prediction during lactation. Productions Animales 20, 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faverdin, P, Dulphy, JP, Coulon, JB, Verite, R, Garel, JP, Rouel, J, Marquis, B 1991. Substitution of roughage by concentrates for dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 27, 137–156.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC 2003. Body lipid reserves and the reproductive cycle: towards a better understanding. Livestock Production Science 83, 219–226.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Badsberg, JH 2007. The effect of breed and parity on lactation curves of body condition estimated using a non-linear function. Animal 1, 565–574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friggens, NC, Newbold, JR 2007. Towards a biological basis for predicting nutrient partitioning: the dairy cow as an example. Animal 1, 87–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friggens, NC, Emmans, GC, Veerkamp, RF 1999. On the use of simple ratios between lactation curve coefficients to describe parity effects on milk production. Livestock Production Science 62, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friggens, NC, Ingvartsen, KL, Emmans, GC 2004. Prediction of body lipid change in pregnancy and lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 988–1000.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Disenhaus, C, Petit, HV 2010. Nutritional sub-fertility in the dairy cow: towards improved reproductive management through a better biological understanding. Animal 4, 1197–1213.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Emmans, GC, Kyriazakis, I, Oldham, JD, Lewis, M 1998. Feed intake relative to stage of lactation for dairy cows consuming total mixed diets with a high or low ratio of concentrate to forage. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 2228–2239.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Berg, P, Theilgaard, P, Korsgaard, IR, Ingvartsen, KL, Løvendahl, PL, Jensen, J 2007a. Breed and parity effects on energy balance profiles through lactation: evidence for genetically driven body reserve change. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5291–5305.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Ridder, C, Løvendahl, P 2007b. On the use of milk composition measures to predict the energy balance of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5453–5467.Google Scholar
Garnsworthy, PC, Topps, JH 1982. The effect of body condition of dairy cows at calving on their food intake and performance when given complete diets. Animal Production 35, 113–119.Google Scholar
Goelzer, A, Brikci, FB, Martin-Verstraete, I, Noirot, P, Bessières, P, Aymerich, S, Fromion, V 2008. Reconstruction and analysis of the genetic and metabolic regulatory networks of the central metabolism of Bacillus subtilis. BMC Systems Biology 2, 20.Google Scholar
Gong, JG, Lee, WJ, Garnsworthy, PC, Webb, R 2002. Effect of dietary-induced increases in circulating insulin concentrations during the early postpartum period on reproductive function in dairy cows. Reproduction 123, 419–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grala, TM, Lucy, MC, Phyn, CVC, Sheahan, AJ, Lee, JM, Roche, JR 2011. Somatotropic axis and concentrate supplementation in grazing dairy cows of genetically diverse origin. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 303–315.Google Scholar
Hammond, J 1944. Physiological factors affecting birth weight. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2, 8–12.Google Scholar
Hanigan, MD, Palliser, CC, Gregorini, P 2009. Altering the representation of hormones and adding consideration of gestational metabolism in a metabolic cow model reduced prediction errors. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5043–5056.Google Scholar
Hanigan, MD, Bateman, HG, Fadel, JG, McNamara, JP 2006. Metabolic models of ruminant metabolism: recent improvements and current status. Journal of Dairy Science 89 (E-suppl.), E52–E64.Google Scholar
Hanigan, MD, Rius, AG, Kolver, ES, Palliser, CC 2007. A redefinition of the representation of mammary cells and enzyme activities in a lactating dairy cow model. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 3816–3830.Google Scholar
Hoggard, N, Hunter, L, Trayhurn, P, Williams, LM, Mercer, JG 1998. Leptin and reproduction. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 57, 421–427.Google Scholar
Horan, B, Mee, JF, O'Connor, P, Rath, M, Dillon, P 2005. The effect of strain of Holstein–Friesian cow and feeding system on postpartum ovarian function, animal production and conception rate to first service. Theriogenology 63, 950–971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horan, B, Faverdin, P, Delaby, L, Rath, M, Dillon, P 2006. The effect of strain of Holstein–Friesian dairy cows and pasture-based system on grass intake and milk production. Animal Science 82, 435–444.Google Scholar
Ingvartsen, KL 2006. Feeding- and management-related diseases in the transition cow – physiological adaptations around calving and strategies to reduce feeding-related diseases. Animal Feed Science and Technology 126, 175–213.Google Scholar
Kaske, M, Groth, A 1997. Changes in factors affecting the rate of digesta passage during pregnancy and lactation in sheep fed on hay. Reproduction, Nutrition, Developement 37, 573–588.Google Scholar
Kebreab, E, Dijkstra, J, Bannink, A, France, J 2009. Recent advances in modeling nutrient utilization in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 87 (E-suppl.), E111–E122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kebreab, E, Mills, JAN, Crompton, LA, Bannink, A, Dijkstra, J, Gerrits, WJJ, France, J 2004. An integrated mathematical model to evaluate nutrient partition in dairy cattle between the animal and its environment. Animal Feed Science and Technology 112, 131–154.Google Scholar
Kennedy, GC 1953. The role of depot fat in the hypothalamic control of food intake in the rat. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B 139, 578–592.Google Scholar
Kennedy, GC 1967. Ontogeny of mechanisms controlling food and water intake. In Alimentary canal, vol. 1, Control of food and water intake (ed. CF Code), pp. 337–352. American Physiological Society, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Koenen, EPC, Veerkamp, RF, Dobbelaar, P, De Jong, G 2001. Genetic analysis of body condition score of lactating Dutch Holstein and Red-and-White heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 1265–1270.Google Scholar
Lavelle, C, Berry, H, Beslon, G, Ginelli, F, Giavitto, J-L, Kapoula, Z, Le Bivic, A, Peyrieras, N, Radulescu, O, Six, A, Thomas-Vaslin, V, Bourgine, P 2008. From molecules to organisms: towards multiscale integrated models of biological systems. Theoretical Biology Insights 1, 13–22.Google Scholar
Leclerc, H, Duclos, D, Barbat, A, Druet, T, Ducrocq, V 2008. Environmental effects on lactation curves included in a test-day model genetic evaluation. Animal 2, 344–353.Google Scholar
Lemosquet, S, Abdou Arbi, O, Siegel, A, Guinard-Flament, J, Van Milgen, J, Bourdon, J 2010. A generic stoichiometric model to analyse the metabolic flexibility of the mammary gland in lactating dairy cows. In Modelling nutrient digestion and utilisation in farm animals. Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop (ed. D Sauvant, J Van Milgen, P Faverdin and NC Friggens), pp. 279–288. Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Loor, JJ 2010. Genomics of metabolic adaptations in the peripartal cow. Animal 4, 1110–1139.Google Scholar
Loor, JJ, Dann, HM, Janovick Guretzky, NA, Everts, RE, Oliveira, R, Green, CA, Litherland, NB, Rodriguez-Zas, SL, Lewin, HA, Drackley, JK 2006. Plane of nutrition pre-partum alters hepatic gene expression and function in dairy cows as assessed by longitudinal transcript and metabolic profiling. Physiological Genomics 27, 29–41.Google Scholar
Lucy, MC 2003. Mechanisms linking nutrition and reproduction in postpartum cows. Reproduction 61, 415–427.Google Scholar
Lucy, MC, Verkerk, GA, Whyte, BE, Macdonald, KA, Burton, L, Cursons, RT, Roche, JR, Holmes, CW 2009. Somatotropic axis components and nutrient partitioning in genetically diverse dairy cows managed under different feed allowances in a pasture system. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 526–539.Google Scholar
Martin, O, Sauvant, D 2007. Dynamic model of the lactating dairy cow metabolism. Animal 1, 1143–1166.Google Scholar
Martin, O, Sauvant, D 2010a. A teleonomic model describing performance (body, milk and intake) during growth and over repeated reproductive cycles throughout the lifespan of dairy cattle. 1. Trajectories of life function priorities and genetic scaling. Animal 4, 2030–2047.Google Scholar
Martin, O, Sauvant, D 2010b. A teleonomic model describing performance (body, milk and intake) during growth and over repeated reproductive cycles throughout the lifespan of dairy cattle. 2. Voluntary intake and energy partitioning. Animal 4, 2048–2056.Google Scholar
Maxin, G 2011. Développement d'un modèle de prédiction de la matière grasse du lait basé sur les flux de nutriments chez la vache laitière. PhD thesis, Agrocampus-Ouest, Rennes, France.Google Scholar
McNamara, JP 1991. Regulation of adipose-tissue metabolism in support of lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 706–719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNamara, JP 2004. Research, improvement and application of mechanistic, biochemical, dynamic models of metabolism in lactating dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 112, 155–176.Google Scholar
McNamara, JP, Baldwin, RL 2000. Estimation of parameters describing lipid metabolism in lactation: challenge of existing knowledge described in a model of metabolism. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 128–143.Google Scholar
Monod, J 1970. Le hasard et la necessité: essai sur la philosophie naturelle de la biologie moderne. Le Seuil, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Neal, HDSC, Thornley, JHM 1983. The lactation curve in cattle: a mathematical model of the mammary gland. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 101, 389–400.Google Scholar
Oldham, JD, Emmans, GC 1989. Prediction of responses to required nutrients in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 3212–3229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olson, KM, Cassell, BG, Hanigan, MD 2010. Energy balance in first-lactation Holstein, Jersey, and reciprocal F-1 crossbred cows in a planned crossbreeding experiment. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4374–4385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Østergaard, S, Sørensen, JT, Kristensen, AR 2000. A stochastic model simulating the feeding-health-production complex in a dairy herd. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 721–733.Google Scholar
Petruzzi, H, Danfær, A 2004. A dynamic model of feed intake regulation in dairy cows. Model description. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 13, 1–23.Google Scholar
Pollott, GE 2000. A biological approach to lactation curve analysis for milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 2448–2458.Google Scholar
Pond, CM 1984. Physiological and ecological importance of energy storage in the evolution of lactation: evidence for a common pattern of anatomical organization of adipose tissue in mammals. In Physiological strategies in lactation (ed. M Peaker, RG Vernon and CH Knight), pp. 1–29. The Zoological Society of London, London, UK.Google Scholar
Pryce, JE, Bolormaa, S, Chamberlain, AJ, Bowman, PJ, Savin, K, Goddard, ME, Hayes, BJ 2010. A validated genome-wide association study in 2 dairy cattle breeds for milk production and fertility traits using variable length haplotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3331–3345.Google Scholar
Réale, D, Festa-Bianchet, M 2000. Mass-dependent reproductive strategies in wild bighorn sheep: a quantitative genetic approach. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 13, 679–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reznick, D, Nunney, L, Tessier, A 2000. Big houses, big cars, superfleas and the costs of reproduction. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15, 421–425.Google Scholar
Rhoads, RP, Sampson, JD, Lucy, MC, Spain, JN, Spiers, DE, Tempelman, RJ, Coussens, PM 2005. Hepatic gene expression profiling during adaptation to a period of chronic heat stress in lactating dairy cows. FASEB Journal 19, A1673–A1673.Google Scholar
Roche, JR, Berry, DP, Kolver, ES 2006. Holstein–Friesian strain and feed effects on milk production, body weight, and body condition score profiles in grazing dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3532–3543.Google Scholar
Roche, JR, Friggens, NC, Kay, JK, Fisher, MW, Stafford, KJ, Berry, DP 2009. Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare: a review. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5769–5801.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D 1992. La modélisation systémique nutrition. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 32, 217–230.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D 1994. Modelling homeostatic and homeorhetic regulations in lactating animals. Livestock Production Science 39, 105–113.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Martin, O, Mertens, DR 2009. Meta-analysis of influence of dietary NDF on energy partitioning in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92 (E-suppl. 1), 790.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Van Milgen, J, Faverdin, P, Friggens, NC (ed.) 2010. Modelling nutrient digestion and utilisation in farm animals. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop, pp. 1–427. Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Schmidely, P, Duvaux-Ponter, C, Laporte-Broux, B, Tessier, J, Friggens, NC 2011. Characterizing individual differences in performance responses to a nutritional challenge. In Book of abstracts, 62nd Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, 303pp.Google Scholar
Seo, S, Lewin, HA 2009. Reconstruction of metabolic pathways for the cattle genome. BMC Systems Biology 3, Article No. 33.Google Scholar
Sumner, JM, McNamara, JP 2007. Expression of lipolytic genes in the adipose tissue of pregnant and lactating Holstein dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5237–5246.Google Scholar
Sumner-Thomson, JM, Vierck, JL, McNamara, JP 2011. Differential expression of genes in adipose tissue of first-lactation dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 361–369.Google Scholar
Taylor, SCS 1980. Genetic size-scaling rules in animal growth. Animal Production 30, 161–165.Google Scholar
Theilgaard, P, Sánchez, J, Pascual, JJ, Berg, P, Friggens, NC, Baselga, M 2007. Late reproductive senescence in a rabbit line hyper selected for reproductive longevity, and its association with body reserves. Genetics Selection Evolution 39, 207–223.Google Scholar
Tolkamp, BJ, Ketelaars, JJMH 1992. Towards a new theory of feed intake in ruminants. 2. Costs and benefits of feed consumption – an optimization. Livestock Production Science 30, 297–317.Google Scholar
Tylutki, TP, Fox, DG, Durbal, VM, Tedeschi, LO, Russell, JB, Van Amburgh, ME, Overton, TR, Chase, LE, Pell, AN 2008. Cornell net carbohydrate and protein system: a model for precision feeding of dairy cattle. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 174–202.Google Scholar
van der Waaij, EH 2004. A resource allocation model describing consequences of artificial selection under metabolic stress. Journal of Animal Science 82, 973–981.Google Scholar
van Knegsel, ATM, van den Branda, H, Dijkstra, J, Tamminga, S, Kemp, B 2005. Effect of dietary energy source on energy balance, production, metabolic disorders and reproduction in lactating dairy cattle. Reproduction Nutrition Development 45, 665–688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veerkamp, RF, Goddard, ME 1998. Covariance functions across herd production levels for test day records on milk fat and protein yields. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 1690–1701.Google Scholar
Vetharaniam, I, Davis, SR, Soboleva, TK, Shorten, PR, Wake, GC 2003a. Modeling the interaction of milking frequency and nutrition on mammary gland growth and lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 1987–1996.Google Scholar
Vetharaniam, I, Davis, SR, Upsdell, M, Kolver, ES, Pleasants, AB 2003b. Modeling the effect of energy status on mammary gland growth and lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 3148–3156.Google Scholar
Yan, T, Mayne, CS, Keady, TWJ, Agnew, RE 2006. Effects of dairy cow genotype with two planes of nutrition on energy partitioning between milk and body tissue. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 1031–1042.Google Scholar
Yearsley, J, Tolkamp, BJ, Illius, AW 2001. Theoretical developments in the study and prediction of food intake. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 60, 145–156.Google Scholar