返璞归真:混合全混日粮时的精确性及其对挤奶性能的影响

Alex Bach
{"title":"返璞归真:混合全混日粮时的精确性及其对挤奶性能的影响","authors":"Alex Bach","doi":"10.3168/jdsc.2023-0423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Details from every mixing load of total mixed ration (TMR) fed to ∼19,000 cows distributed in 92 pens from 21 farms, along with individual milk yield of each cow in every pen and farm, were collected from a feeding and management system (algoMilk; <span>www.algomilk.com</span><svg><path></path></svg>) between 2020 and 2022 on a daily basis to assess the impact of quality of mixing TMR on animal performance. Divergence between expected and actual amounts of ingredients mixed in every load was calculated and expressed as a percentage relative to expected amounts. Ingredients were classified as (1) energy grains (i.e., corn, wheat), (2) protein sources (i.e., soybean meal, canola meal), (3) hays (i.e., alfalfa hay), (4) grain silages (i.e., corn silage), (5) nongrain silages (i.e., alfalfa silage), (6) minerals (i.e., salt, sodium bicarbonate), and (7) straw (i.e., wheat straw). Milk yield was averaged within farm and pen on a weekly basis, and mixing divergences were also averaged by load or by ingredient type and week within pen and farm. The weekly standard deviation (SD) of mixing divergences was calculated for every pen and farm. The average divergence of the total amount of TMR prepared was 1.52 ± 0.017% (mean ± SD), which means that, in general, mixing errors were caused by adding an excess of one or more ingredients. Energy grains (1.20 ± 0.037%), grain silages (1.78 ± 0.023%), hays (2.29 ± 0.044%), and protein sources (1.82 ± 0.043%) were mixed in excessive amounts (mean ± SD), whereas nongrain silages (−1.5 ± 0.037%), molasses (−3.05 ± 0.067%), minerals (96.9 ± 0.084%), and straw (−0.6 ± 0.063%) were mixed (mean ± SD) in lower amounts than expected. Divergence in the total amount of TMR was weakly quadratically (concave) correlated (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.04) with milk yield. Similarly, divergence in the amounts of grains, protein sources, hay, silages, minerals, and molasses mixed in the TMR wagon in relation to the formulated ration was also weakly and quadratically (concave) with milk yield. Minimizing mixing errors may have positive effects on milking performance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94061,"journal":{"name":"JDS communications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001138/pdfft?md5=5dc68ca4a9a4f6b4dbebad543cf2d414&pid=1-s2.0-S2666910223001138-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Back to basics: Precision while mixing total mixed rations and its impact on milking performance\",\"authors\":\"Alex Bach\",\"doi\":\"10.3168/jdsc.2023-0423\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Details from every mixing load of total mixed ration (TMR) fed to ∼19,000 cows distributed in 92 pens from 21 farms, along with individual milk yield of each cow in every pen and farm, were collected from a feeding and management system (algoMilk; <span>www.algomilk.com</span><svg><path></path></svg>) between 2020 and 2022 on a daily basis to assess the impact of quality of mixing TMR on animal performance. Divergence between expected and actual amounts of ingredients mixed in every load was calculated and expressed as a percentage relative to expected amounts. Ingredients were classified as (1) energy grains (i.e., corn, wheat), (2) protein sources (i.e., soybean meal, canola meal), (3) hays (i.e., alfalfa hay), (4) grain silages (i.e., corn silage), (5) nongrain silages (i.e., alfalfa silage), (6) minerals (i.e., salt, sodium bicarbonate), and (7) straw (i.e., wheat straw). Milk yield was averaged within farm and pen on a weekly basis, and mixing divergences were also averaged by load or by ingredient type and week within pen and farm. The weekly standard deviation (SD) of mixing divergences was calculated for every pen and farm. The average divergence of the total amount of TMR prepared was 1.52 ± 0.017% (mean ± SD), which means that, in general, mixing errors were caused by adding an excess of one or more ingredients. Energy grains (1.20 ± 0.037%), grain silages (1.78 ± 0.023%), hays (2.29 ± 0.044%), and protein sources (1.82 ± 0.043%) were mixed in excessive amounts (mean ± SD), whereas nongrain silages (−1.5 ± 0.037%), molasses (−3.05 ± 0.067%), minerals (96.9 ± 0.084%), and straw (−0.6 ± 0.063%) were mixed (mean ± SD) in lower amounts than expected. Divergence in the total amount of TMR was weakly quadratically (concave) correlated (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.04) with milk yield. Similarly, divergence in the amounts of grains, protein sources, hay, silages, minerals, and molasses mixed in the TMR wagon in relation to the formulated ration was also weakly and quadratically (concave) with milk yield. Minimizing mixing errors may have positive effects on milking performance.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JDS communications\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001138/pdfft?md5=5dc68ca4a9a4f6b4dbebad543cf2d414&pid=1-s2.0-S2666910223001138-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JDS communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001138\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDS communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在 2020 年至 2022 年期间,从饲喂和管理系统(algoMilk; www.algomilk.com)中收集了分布在 21 个牧场 92 个牛栏中的∼19,000 头奶牛的总混合日粮(TMR)每次混合的详细情况,以及每个牛栏和牧场中每头奶牛的产奶量,以评估总混合日粮的混合质量对动物生产性能的影响。计算每次混合的原料预期量与实际量之间的差异,并以相对于预期量的百分比表示。配料分为:(1) 能量谷物(即玉米、小麦);(2) 蛋白质来源(即豆粕、菜籽粕);(3) 干草(即苜蓿干草);(4) 谷物青贮(即玉米青贮);(5) 干草(即苜蓿干草)、玉米青贮)、(5)非谷物青贮(如苜蓿青贮)、(6)矿物质(如食盐、碳酸氢钠)和(7)秸秆(如小麦秸秆)。牧场和圈舍内的产奶量按周计算平均值,混合差异也按负载或配料类型以及圈舍和牧场内的周计算平均值。计算每个牛栏和牧场每周混合差异的标准偏差(SD)。配制的 TMR 总量的平均偏差为 1.52 ± 0.017%(均值 ± 标差),这意味着一般来说,混合错误是由于添加了过量的一种或多种原料造成的。能量谷物(1.20 ± 0.037%)、谷物青贮(1.78 ± 0.023%)、干草(2.29 ± 0.044%)和蛋白质来源(1.82 ± 0.043%)的混合量过大(平均值 ± SD),而非谷物青贮(-1.5 ± 0.037%)、糖蜜(-3.05 ± 0.067%)、矿物质(96.9 ± 0.084%)和秸秆(-0.6 ± 0.063%)的混入量(平均值 ± SD)低于预期。TMR 总量的差异与产奶量呈弱二次方(凹)相关(R2 = 0.04)。同样,TMR 车中混合的谷物、蛋白源、干草、青贮饲料、矿物质和糖蜜的量与配制的日粮相比,也与产奶量呈弱二次方(凹)相关。尽量减少混合误差可能会对挤奶性能产生积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Back to basics: Precision while mixing total mixed rations and its impact on milking performance

Details from every mixing load of total mixed ration (TMR) fed to ∼19,000 cows distributed in 92 pens from 21 farms, along with individual milk yield of each cow in every pen and farm, were collected from a feeding and management system (algoMilk; www.algomilk.com) between 2020 and 2022 on a daily basis to assess the impact of quality of mixing TMR on animal performance. Divergence between expected and actual amounts of ingredients mixed in every load was calculated and expressed as a percentage relative to expected amounts. Ingredients were classified as (1) energy grains (i.e., corn, wheat), (2) protein sources (i.e., soybean meal, canola meal), (3) hays (i.e., alfalfa hay), (4) grain silages (i.e., corn silage), (5) nongrain silages (i.e., alfalfa silage), (6) minerals (i.e., salt, sodium bicarbonate), and (7) straw (i.e., wheat straw). Milk yield was averaged within farm and pen on a weekly basis, and mixing divergences were also averaged by load or by ingredient type and week within pen and farm. The weekly standard deviation (SD) of mixing divergences was calculated for every pen and farm. The average divergence of the total amount of TMR prepared was 1.52 ± 0.017% (mean ± SD), which means that, in general, mixing errors were caused by adding an excess of one or more ingredients. Energy grains (1.20 ± 0.037%), grain silages (1.78 ± 0.023%), hays (2.29 ± 0.044%), and protein sources (1.82 ± 0.043%) were mixed in excessive amounts (mean ± SD), whereas nongrain silages (−1.5 ± 0.037%), molasses (−3.05 ± 0.067%), minerals (96.9 ± 0.084%), and straw (−0.6 ± 0.063%) were mixed (mean ± SD) in lower amounts than expected. Divergence in the total amount of TMR was weakly quadratically (concave) correlated (R2 = 0.04) with milk yield. Similarly, divergence in the amounts of grains, protein sources, hay, silages, minerals, and molasses mixed in the TMR wagon in relation to the formulated ration was also weakly and quadratically (concave) with milk yield. Minimizing mixing errors may have positive effects on milking performance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JDS communications
JDS communications Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Editorial Board Hot topic: Influenza A H5N1 virus exhibits a broad host range, including dairy cows Hot topic: Epidemiological and clinical aspects of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 in dairy cattle Hot topic: Avian influenza subtype H5N1 in US dairy—A preliminary dairy foods perspective
×
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