Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-xq6d9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-09T16:52:18.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The time spent in fresh cow pen influences total lactational performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2020

F. Hoseyni ,
D. Zahmatkesh ,
E. Mahjoubi Open the ORCID record for E. Mahjoubi [Opens in a new window] ,
M. Hossein Yazdi Open the ORCID record for M. Hossein Yazdi [Opens in a new window]  and
R. A. Patton
F. Hoseyni
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Zanjan, Zanjan45371-38791, Iran
D. Zahmatkesh*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Zanjan, Zanjan45371-38791, Iran
E. Mahjoubi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Zanjan, Zanjan45371-38791, Iran
M. Hossein Yazdi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Arak University, Arak38156, Iran
R. A. Patton
Affiliation:
Nittany Dairy Nutrition Inc, Mifflinburg, PA17844, USA
*
Author for correspondence: D. Zahmatkesh, E-mail: zahmatkesh@znu.ac.ir
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research paper addresses the effect of different grouping strategies of fresh cows on total lactational and reproductive performance. Hundred-sixty multiparous Holstein cows were enrolled in a completely randomized design and assigned to one of following treatments: 21 days in fresh pen with 12.5 kg/day concentrate (C21, n = 60), 10 days in fresh pen with 12.5 kg/day concentrate (C10, n = 50) and 10 days in fresh pen with 10 kg/day concentrate (L10, n = 50). Although there were no differences among treatments within the first 10 days in milk (DIM), C10 and L10 cows tended to produce more milk than C21 from 10 to 21 DIM. In addition, greater milk yield was obtained in C10 and L10 cows during 22–28 DIM and 29–70 DIM. Higher production in early lactation resulted in a tendency for greater milk production for C10 and L10 cows throughout a 305 days lactation. There was no difference in productivity between C10 and L10 groups at any time point. No blood metabolites (Ca, P, non-esterified fatty acids and β-hydroxy butyrate) were affected by treatments. Pregnancy at first, second and third service was 38, 39 and 40%, respectively, which were not influenced by the days in fresh pen or concentrate allowance. Collectively, our results for the first time suggest that fresh cow grouping strategy has a long-term effect on productivity but that adding 2.5 kg/day concentrate has no effect on milk yield in fresh pen.

Keywords

305-day milkfresh cowgroupingproductivity
Type
Animal Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 158 , Issue 3 , April 2020 , pp. 247 - 253
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aghaziarati, N, Amanlou, H, Zahmatkesh, D, Mahjoubi, E and Hossein Yazdi, M (2011) Enriched dietary energy and protein with more frequent milking offers early lactation cows a greater productive potential. Livestock Science 136, 108–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, MS and Piantoni, P (2014) Carbohydrate nutrition: managing energy intake and partitioning through lactation. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 30, 577–597.Google ScholarPubMed
Allen, MS and VandeHaar, M (2016) Diet formulation for lactating cows: the good, the bad, the ugly. Pages 105–112. Proceedings 2016 Southwest Nutrition Conference.Google Scholar
AOAC (1990) Official Methods of Analysis, 15th Edn.Washington, DC, USA: Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem.Google Scholar
Bauer, A (2016) They Share Their Best Fresh Cow Investments. Hoard's Dairyman. Available at https://hoards.com/article-20144-they-share-their-best-fresh-cow-investments.html.Google Scholar
Boomer, G and Kearnan, J (2009) 0409 PD: Evaluate fresh cow performance with DairyComp 305. Available at https://www.progressivedairy.com/news/products-services/0409-pd-evaluate-fresh-cow-performance-with-dairycomp-305.Google Scholar
Cabrera, VE and Kalantari, AS (2016) Economics of production efficiency: nutritional grouping of the lactation cow. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 825–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chebel, RC, Silva, PRB, Endres, MI, Ballou, MA and Luchterhand, KL (2016) Social stressors and their effects on immunity and health of periparturient dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 3217–3228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, JG and Green, MJ (2016) Use of early lactation milk re-cording data to predict the calving to conception interval in dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 4699–4706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVries, MJ and Veerkamp, RF (2000) Energy balance of dairy cattle in relation to milk production variables and fertility. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drackley, JK (2006) Advances in transition cow biology: new frontiers in production diseases. Pages 24–34 in Production Diseases in Farm Animals. Proceedings 12th International Conference. N. Joshi and T. H. Herdt, ed. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Espadamala, A, Pallares, P, Lago, A and Silva-Del-Rio, N (2016) Fresh-cow handling practices and methods for identification of health disorders on 45 dairy farms in California. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 9319–9333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grummer, RR (1995) Impact of changes in organic nutrient metabolism on feeding the transition dairy cow. Journal of Animal Science 73, 2820–2833.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guterbock, WM (2004) Diagnosis and treatment programs for fresh cows. Veterinary Clinics of North America. Food Animal Practice 20, 605–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernandez-Urdaneta, A, Coppock, CE, McDowell, RE, Gianola, D and Smith, NE (1976) Changes in forage-concentrate ratio of complete feeds for dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 59, 695–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosseini-Ghaffari, M, Khafipour, E and Steele, MA (2017) Systems biology and ruminal acidosis. In Periparturient Diseases of Dairy Cows: A Systems Biology Approach. The Netherlands: Springer International Publishing, pp. 51–69.Google Scholar
Hutjens, MF and Aalseth, EP (2005) Caring for Transition Cows. Wisconsin. USA: Hoard's Dairyman Books.Google Scholar
Iranian Council of Animal Care (1995) Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals, vol. 1. Isfahan, Iran: Isfahan University of Technology.Google Scholar
Jackson, PGG and Cockroft, PD (2008) Clinical Examination of Farm Animals. John Wiley & Sons., Blackwell Science, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 0EL, UK.Google Scholar
Leroy, JLMR, Opsomer, G, Van Soom, A, Goovaerts, IGF and Bols, PEJ (2008) Reduced fertility in high-yielding dairy cows: Are the oocyte and embryo in danger? Part I. The importance of negative energy balance and altered corpus luteum function to the reduction of oocyte and embryo quality in high-yielding dairy cows. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43, 612–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Littell, RC, Milliken, GA, Stroup, WW, Wolfinger, RD and Schabenberger, O (2006) SAS for Mixed Models, vol. 2. Cary, NC: SAS Publishing.Google Scholar
Madouasse, A, Huxley, JN, Browne, WJ, Bradley, AJ, Dryden, IL and Green, MJ (2010) Use of individual cow milk recording data at the start of lactation to predict the calving to conception interval. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4677–4690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council (2001) Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th rev. ed. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press.Google Scholar
Ospina, PA, Nydam, DD, Stokol, T and Overton, TR (2010) Evaluation of nonesterified fatty acids and β-hydroxybutyrate in transition dairy cattle in the northeastern United States: critical thresholds for prediction of clinical diseases. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 546–554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rossow, HA and Aly, SS (2013) Variation in nutrients formulated and nutrients supplied on 5 California dairies. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 7371–7381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schei, I, Voldenb, V and Bævrea, L (2005) Effects of energy balance and metabolizable protein level on tissue mobilization and milk performance of dairy cows in early lactation. Livestock Production Science 95, 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soviani, S, Heuer, C, Van Straalen, WM and Noordhuizen, JPTM (2000) Diseases in high producing dairy cows following post parturient negative energy balance. In Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine. Proceedings of a meeting held at the University of Edinburgh on the 29th, 30th and 31st of March 2000. Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 137–150.Google Scholar
Stone, W (2004) Nutritional approaches to minimize subacute ruminal acidosis and laminitis in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA (1991) Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildman, EE, Jones, GM, Wagner, PE, Boman, RL, Trout, HF and Lesch, TN (1982) A dairy cow body condition scoring system and its relationship to selected production variables in high producing Holstein dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 65, 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar