Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:07:40.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How does changing the feeding bin affect cows’ behaviour?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

Maria Soonberg ,
Tanel Kaart  and
David Richard Arney
Maria Soonberg*
Affiliation:
Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 46, Tartu, 51006, Estonia
Tanel Kaart
Affiliation:
Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 46, Tartu, 51006, Estonia
David Richard Arney
Affiliation:
Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 46, Tartu, 51006, Estonia
*
Author for correspondence: Maria Soonberg, Email: maria.soonberg@student.emu.ee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a system in which cows are grouped and given differential access to feeding bins with different rations, and where these groups change over time, it is important to find out how a change in the ration (and hence feeding bin) affects the cow's feeding behaviour. Monitoring the locomotion of cows can be used to predict oestrus and improve health (lameness diagnosis), but activity monitors can also be used to estimate both activity and numbers of feeding visits by cows. Ice tag activity monitors were attached to the right hind legs of ten cows. Walking, standing, lying data and health records were used to record changes before and after a change in each cow's feeding bin. Results comparing activity before and after feeding bin change revealed significant increases in motion index, number of steps taken per minute and number of lying bouts per minute (all P < 0.001). Comparing the behaviours of cows subsequently followed during the dry period showed significant differences in motion indices and number of steps taken per minute (P < 0.001) in the dry period. The results indicate that cows are affected by feeding bin change and group change, which can lead to an increase in behaviour associated with the stress response, especially in heifers.

Keywords

behaviorfeed groupswelfare
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 86 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 43 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © Hannah Dairy Research Foundation 2019 

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

Bewley, JM, Boyce, RE, Hockin, J, Munksgaard, L, Eicher, SD, Einstein, ME and Schultz, MM (2010) Influence of milk yield, stage of lactation, and body condition on dairy cattle lying behaviour measured using an automated monitoring sensor. Journal of Dairy Research 77, 1–6.Google Scholar
Blokhuis, H, Jones, B, Miele, M and Veissier, I (2013) Assessing and improving farm animal welfare: the way forward. In Blokhuis, H., Miele, M., Veissier, I., Jones, B. (eds), Improving farm animal welfare. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 215–222.Google Scholar
Boyland, NK, Mlynski, DT, James, R, Brent, LJN and Croft, DP (2016) The social network structure of a dynamic group of dairy cows: from individual to group level patterns. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 174, 1–10.Google Scholar
Broom, DM and Fraser, AF (2007) Domestic Animal Behaviour and Welfare, 4th Edn. Cambridge: Reading, UK by Cambridge University Press, p. 89.Google Scholar
Brzozowska, A, Łukaszewicz, M, Sender, G, Kolasińska, D and Oprządek, J (2014) Locomotion activity of dairy cows in relation to season and lactation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 156, 6–11.Google Scholar
Færevik, G, Tjentland, K, Løvik, S, Andersen, IL and Bøe, KE (2008) Resting pattern and social behaviour of dairy calves housed in pens with different sized lying areas. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 114, 54–64.Google Scholar
Fraser, D (1995) Science, values and animal welfare: exploring the ‘inextricable connection’. Animal Welfare 4, 103–117.Google Scholar
Grandin, T (1997) Assessment of stress during handling and transport. Journal of Animal Science 75, 249–257.Google Scholar
Grunert, KG (2006) Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat consumption. Meat Science 74, 149–160.Google Scholar
Hasegawa, N, Nishiwaki, A, Sugawara, K and Ito, I (1997) The effects of social exchange between two groups of lactating primiparous heifers on milk production, dominance order, behaviour and adrenocortical response. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 51, 15–27.Google Scholar
King, MTM, Crossley, RE and DeVries, T (2016) Synchronization of dairy cows does not limit the behavioural response to treatment in mixed treatment experimental designs. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 3, 98–103.Google Scholar
Kondo, S, Kawakami, N, Kohama, H and Nishino, S (1984) Changes in activity, spatial pattern and social behaviour in calves after grouping. Applied Animal Ethology 11, 217–228.Google Scholar
Ladewig, J and Smidt, D (1989) Behaviour, episodic secretion of cortisol, and adrenocortical reactivity in bulls subjected to tethering. Hormones and Behaviour 23, 344–360.Google Scholar
Løvendahl, P and Munksgaard, L (2016) An investigation into genetic and phenotypic variation in time budgets and yield of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 408–417.Google Scholar
Miele, M, Blokhuis, H, Bennett, R and Bock, B (2013) Changes in farming and in stakeholder concern for animal welfare. In Blokhuis, H., Miele, M., Veissier, I., Jones, B. (eds), Improving farm animal welfare. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 19–47.Google Scholar
Müller, C, Ladewig, J, Thielscher, H and Smidt, D (1989) Behaviour and heart rate of heifers housed in tether stanchions without straw. Physiology & Behaviour 46, 751–754.Google Scholar
Nielsen, PP (2013) Automatic registration of grazing behaviour in dairy cows using 3D activity loggers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 148, 179–184.Google Scholar
O'Driscoll, K, Boyle, L and Hanlon, A (2008) A brief note on the validation of a system for recording lying behaviour in dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 111, 195–200.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A, Lidfors, L, Arney, DR, Kaart, T and Aland, A (2017) Behaviour and performance of dairy cows after transfer from tied to cubicle housing. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 21, 82–92.Google Scholar
Soonberg, M and Arney, DR (2014) Dairy cow behaviour at individual feeding bins, can we estimate intakes from behavioural observations? Research for Rural Development 1, 114–117.Google Scholar
Steensels, M, Bahr, C, Berckmans, D, Halachmi, I, Antler, A and Maltz, E (2012) Lying patterns of high producing healthy dairy cows after calving in commercial herds as affected by age, environmental conditions and production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 136, 88–95.Google Scholar
Stoye, S, Porter, MA and Stamp Dawkins, M (2012) Synchronized lying in cattle in relation to time of day. Livestock Science 149, 70–73.Google Scholar
Tolkamp, BJ, Haskell, MJ, Langford, FM, Roberts, DJ and Morgan, CA (2010) Are cows more likely to lie down the longer they stand? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 124, 1–10.Google Scholar
Verbeke, W, Perez-Cueto, FJA, de Barcellos, MD, Krystallis, A and Grunert, KG (2010) European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science 84, 284–292.Google Scholar
Von Keyserlingk, MAG, Olenick, D and Weary, DM (2008) Acute behavioural effects of regrouping dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1011–1016.Google Scholar