Effect of two housing systems on performance and longevity of dairy cows in Northern Italy.

Q2 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Agronomy research Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.15159/AR.19.107
L. Leso, P. Pellegrini, M. Barbari
{"title":"Effect of two housing systems on performance and longevity of dairy cows in Northern Italy.","authors":"L. Leso, P. Pellegrini, M. Barbari","doi":"10.15159/AR.19.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The objective of the current study was to evaluate and compare performance of dairy cows housed in compost-bedded pack barns (CBP) and free stall barns, with a focus on longevityrelated parameters. Study included 30 commercial dairy farms located in the Po Valley, Italy. Twenty farms had free stall barns, among which 10 used rubber mattresses (FSM) and 10 used deep straw bedding (FSS). The remaining 10 farms had CBP. Monthly dairy herd records were obtained from the Italian DHI association for each farm included in the study over a period of one year. All farms were visited to measure characteristics and dimensions of housing facilities. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate the association between housing system and the outcome variables. In CBP total available area was larger than both in FSM and FSS. However, space per cow over the bedded pack area in CBP (6.8 ± 2.4 m2 cow-1) was relatively low for this housing system. Milk production was similar among housing systems but somatic cell count and mastitis infection prevalence resulted to be higher in CBP than in FSM and FSS. Calving interval was lower in FSS compared with both FSM and CBP while no differences were found in number of services per pregnancy. Cows housed in CBP were older and had higher parities than those in FSM and FSS while no significant differences in herd turnover rate were detected among housing systems. Results confirm that CBP housing system may improve longevity of dairy cows, which is reported to be one of the most important motivations for building this kind of housing. Nevertheless, CBP housing can pose some challenges in achieving adequate udder health and high milk quality, especially with low space per cow.","PeriodicalId":7924,"journal":{"name":"Agronomy research","volume":"17 1","pages":"574-581"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agronomy research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15159/AR.19.107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

The objective of the current study was to evaluate and compare performance of dairy cows housed in compost-bedded pack barns (CBP) and free stall barns, with a focus on longevityrelated parameters. Study included 30 commercial dairy farms located in the Po Valley, Italy. Twenty farms had free stall barns, among which 10 used rubber mattresses (FSM) and 10 used deep straw bedding (FSS). The remaining 10 farms had CBP. Monthly dairy herd records were obtained from the Italian DHI association for each farm included in the study over a period of one year. All farms were visited to measure characteristics and dimensions of housing facilities. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate the association between housing system and the outcome variables. In CBP total available area was larger than both in FSM and FSS. However, space per cow over the bedded pack area in CBP (6.8 ± 2.4 m2 cow-1) was relatively low for this housing system. Milk production was similar among housing systems but somatic cell count and mastitis infection prevalence resulted to be higher in CBP than in FSM and FSS. Calving interval was lower in FSS compared with both FSM and CBP while no differences were found in number of services per pregnancy. Cows housed in CBP were older and had higher parities than those in FSM and FSS while no significant differences in herd turnover rate were detected among housing systems. Results confirm that CBP housing system may improve longevity of dairy cows, which is reported to be one of the most important motivations for building this kind of housing. Nevertheless, CBP housing can pose some challenges in achieving adequate udder health and high milk quality, especially with low space per cow.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
意大利北部两种饲养体系对奶牛生产性能和寿命的影响。
本研究的目的是评估和比较饲养在堆肥床栏(CBP)和自由栏栏中的奶牛的生产性能,并重点关注与寿命相关的参数。研究对象包括位于意大利波河流域的30家商业奶牛场。20个养殖场设置了自由栏,其中10个养殖场使用橡胶垫层(FSM), 10个养殖场使用深秸秆垫层(FSS)。其余10个农场由CBP负责。从意大利DHI协会获得了研究中每个农场在一年内的月度奶牛群记录。对所有农场进行访问,以测量住房设施的特征和尺寸。采用线性混合模型来评价住房制度与结果变量之间的关系。CBP的可利用总面积大于FSM和FSS。然而,在CBP中,每头奶牛在床上的空间(6.8±2.4 m2奶牛-1)相对较低。不同饲养系统的产奶量相似,但体细胞计数和乳腺炎感染患病率导致CBP比FSM和FSS高。与FSM和CBP相比,FSS的产犊间隔较低,而每次妊娠的服务次数没有差异。饲养在CBP的奶牛比饲养在FSM和FSS的奶牛年龄更大,胎次更高,但不同饲养系统之间的牛群流动率无显著差异。结果证实,CBP鸡舍系统可以提高奶牛的寿命,这是建造这种鸡舍的最重要动机之一。然而,CBP住房在实现足够的乳房健康和高牛奶质量方面可能会带来一些挑战,特别是在每头奶牛的低空间下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Agronomy research
Agronomy research Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agronomy and Crop Science
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: Agronomy Research is a peer-reviewed international Journal intended for publication of broad-spectrum original articles, reviews and short communications on actual problems of modern biosystems engineering including crop and animal science, genetics, economics, farm- and production engineering, environmental aspects, agro-ecology, renewable energy and bioenergy etc. in the temperate regions of the world.
期刊最新文献
Adaptation of various maize hybrids when grown for biomass New device for air disinfection with a shielded uv radiation and ozone Genetic components for fodder yield and agronomic characters in maize lines Intra-annual height growth dynamics of Scots and lodgepole pines and its relationship with meteorological parameters in central Latvia. Insects in chicken nutrition. A review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1