Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:28:26.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of on-farm welfare for dairy cattle in southern Spain and its effects on reproductive parameters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2019

Laura Molina ,
Estrella Agüera ,
Francisco Maroto-Molina  and
Carlos Carmelo Pérez-Marín
Laura Molina
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cordoba, 14014 Cordoba, Spain
Estrella Agüera
Affiliation:
Department of Cellular Biology, Physiology and Immunology, University of Cordoba, 14014 Cordoba, Spain
Francisco Maroto-Molina
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Engineering, University of Cordoba, 14014 Cordoba, Spain
Carlos Carmelo Pérez-Marín*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cordoba, 14014 Cordoba, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Carlos Carmelo Pérez-Marín, Email: pv2pemac@uco.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this Research Communication we analyse the animal welfare status of dairy farms located in southern Spain and test the hypothesis that monitoring of wellbeing could increase the profitability of dairy herds by improving indices of reproduction. Twenty dairy farms were visited and a total of 1650 cows were assessed using the Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocol to determine their welfare status. These farms were selected as representatives of the main types of dairy farms found in the south of Spain. No farms attained a welfare status of ‘excellent’, but all obtained an adequate score for most parameters. Feeding assessment showed relatively low variability among farms, whereas housing and health assessments exhibited high variability. Significant correlations were found between a number of welfare parameter pairings: between percentage of collisions and time needed to lie down; between cleanliness of water points and cleanliness of various animal parts; between farms with access to an outdoor loafing area and an inadequate body condition score and with animal cleanliness; between the frequency of animals lying partly or completely outside of the lying area and the percentage of integument alterations and finally between the presence of respiratory problems and farm hygiene parameters. Furthermore, significant correlations between welfare parameters, reproductive indices and milk production were found. The percentage of cows exhibiting an inadequate body condition score and farms where cows took longer to lie down were correlated with the calving-first insemination interval. Animals showing a higher incidence of coughing and hampered respiration presented lower heat detection rates and milk production and finally farms with dirtier animals had lower milk production. This study is the first step towards including welfare in the recording of routine data in dairy cattle farms in southern Spain.

Keywords

Cattlemonitoringprofitabilitywellbeing
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 86 , Issue 2 , May 2019 , pp. 165 - 170
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

Albright, J (1993) Feeding behaviour of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 485–498.Google Scholar
Andreasen, SN, Wemelsfelder, F, Sandoe, O and Forkman, B (2013) The correlation of qualitative behavior assessment with Welfare Quality® protocol outcomes in on-farm welfare assessment of dairy cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 143, 9–17.Google Scholar
Blokhuis, HJ (2008) International cooperation in animal welfare: the Welfare Quality® project. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50, S10.Google Scholar
des Roches, A, Veissier, I, Coignard, M, Bareille, N, Guatteo, R, Capdeville, J, Gilot-Fromont, E and Mounier, L (2014) The major welfare problems of dairy cows in French commercial farms: an epidemiological approach. Animal Welfare 23, 467–478.Google Scholar
DiGiacinto Villalobos, A, Rojas Gonzáles, M, Estrada, K, önig, S and Romero Zúniga, JJ (2014) Animal Welfare in Costa Rica specialized dairy herds from a dairy cooperative. Revista de Ciencias Veterinarias 32, 7–19.Google Scholar
Franchi, GA, Garcia, PR and da Silva, IJO (2014) Welfare quality applied to the Brazilian dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Behaviour and Biometeorology 2, 60–65.Google Scholar
Fraser, AF and Broom, DM (1997) Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare. Wallingfors,, Oxon,, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Hauge, SJ, Kielland, C, Ringdal, G, Skjerve, E and Nafstad, O (2012) Factors associated with cleanliness on Norwegian dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 2485–2496.Google Scholar
Mee, JF (2012) Reproductive issues arising from different management systems in the dairy industry. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 47(Suppl 5), 42–50.Google Scholar
Naceur, M, Frouja, S, Aloulou, R, Bouallegue, M, Kaur, S, Brar, SK and Hamouda, MB (2012) Dairy cattle welfare status measured by animal-linked parameters under Tunisian rearing conditions. In Chaiyabutr, N (ed). Milk Production − an up-to-Date Overview of Animal Nutrition, Management and Health. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech, pp. 289–308.Google Scholar
Olsson, SO, Baekbo, P, Hansson, SO, Rautala, H and Østeras, O (2001) Disease recording systems and herd health schemes for production diseases. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 94, 51–60.Google Scholar
Phillips, CJ and Morris, ID (2002) The ability of cattle to distinguish between, and their preference for, floors with different levels of friction, and their avoidance of floors contaminated with excreta. Animal Welfare 11, 21–29.Google Scholar
Popescu, S, Borda, C, Diugan, EA, Spinu, M, Groza, IS and Sandru, CD (2013) Dairy cows welfare quality in tie-stall housing system with or without access to exercise. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 55, 43.Google Scholar
Relić, R and Vuković, D (2013) Reproductive problems and welfare of dairy cows. Bulletin UASVM. Veterinary Medicine 70, 301–309.Google Scholar
Roche, JR, Friggens, NC, Kay, JK, Fisher, MW, Stafford, KJ and Berry, DP (2009) Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5769–5801.Google Scholar
Rushen, J, Butterworth, A and Swanson, JC (2011) Animal behavior and well-being symposium: farm animal welfare assurance: science and application. Journal of Animal Science 89, 1219–1228.Google Scholar
Sogstad, AM, Fjeldaas, T and Osteras, O (2005) Lameness and claw lesions of the Norwegian Red dairy Cattle housed in loose stalls in relation to environment, parity and stage of lactation. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 46, 203–2017.Google Scholar
Von Keyserlingk, MAG, Rushen, J, De Pasille, AM and Weary, DM (2009) The welfare of dairy cattle-key concepts and the role of science. Journal of Animal Science 94, 4101–4111.Google Scholar
Welfare Quality® (2009) Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Cattle. Lelystad, Netherlands: Welfare Quality® Consortium.Google Scholar
Winckler, C (2006) On-farm welfare assessment in cattle from basic concepts to feasible assessment systems. 24th World Buiatrics Congress, 15.-19.10.2006. Nizza, Frankreich, pp. 493–500.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Molina et al. supplementary material

Molina et al. supplementary material 1

Download Molina et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 184.7 KB