Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-25T20:41:30.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of dry period length on milk production and energy balance in two cow breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2017

E. Andrée O’Hara ,
A. Omazic ,
I. Olsson ,
R. Båge ,
U. Emanuelson  and
K. Holtenius
E. Andrée O’Hara*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
A. Omazic
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
I. Olsson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
R. Båge
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
U. Emanuelson
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
K. Holtenius
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7024, SE 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
*
†Email: lisa.ohara@slu.se
Get access

Abstract

Shortening the dry period (DP) has been proposed as a strategy to improve energy balance (EB) in cows in early lactation. This study evaluated the effects of shortening the DP on milk yield (MY), EB and residual feed intake (RFI) in two breeds; Swedish Red (SR) and Swedish Holstein (SH). Cows were blocked by breed and parity and then randomly assigned to one of two treatments; short DP of 4 weeks (4W, n=43) or conventional DP of 8 weeks (8W, n=34). Cows were kept and fed under the same conditions, except for the 4 weeks when the 4W group were still lactating prepartum and thus kept with the lactating cows. Milk yield and BW were recorded and body condition score (BCS) was rated from 10 weeks prepartum to 12 weeks postpartum. Dry matter intake (DMI) was recorded for lactating cows postpartum. Milk yield was reduced by 6.75 kg/day during the first 12 weeks postpartum (P<0.001) for the 4W cows compared with 8W cows, but there was no significant difference in total MY (3724 kg compared with 3684 kg, P=0.7) when the milk produced prepartum was included. Protein content was higher in 4W cows (3.42%) than in 8W cows (3.27%) (P<0.001) postpartum. In the 8W group, cows lost more BCS after calving (P<0.05). Cows of SR breed had higher BCS than cows of SH breed (SR=3.7, SH=3.2, P<0.001), but no differences in BW were found between breed and treatment. Energy balance was improved for cows in the 4W group (P<0.001), while feed efficiency, expressed as RFI, was reduced for 4W cows than for 8W cows (5.91 compared with −5.39, P<0.01). Shortening the DP resulted in improved EB postpartum with no difference between the breeds and no milk losses when including the milk produced prepartum.

Keywords

dry matter intakefeed efficiencyearly lactationbody conditionmilk composition
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , March 2018 , pp. 508 - 514
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: National Veterinary Institute, Travvägen 12 A, SE 751 89 Uppsala, Sweden.

References

Agenas, S, Burstedt, E and Holtenius, K 2003. Effects of feeding intensity during the dry period. 1. Feed intake, body weight, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 870–882.Google Scholar
Andersen, JB, Madsen, TG, Larsen, T, Ingvartsen, KL and Nielsen, MO 2005. The effects of dry period versus continuous lactation on metabolic status and performance in periparturient cows. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 3530–3541.Google Scholar
Annen, EL, Collier, RJ, McGuire, MA and Vicini, JL 2004a. Effects of dry period length on milk yield and mammary epithelial cells. Journal of Dairy Science 87 (suppl.), E66–E76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annen, EL, Collier, RJ, McGuire, MA, Vicini, JL, Ballam, JM and Lormore, MJ 2004b. Effect of modified dry period lengths and bovine somatotropin on yield and composition of milk from dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3746–3761.Google Scholar
Bachman, KC 2002. Milk production of dairy cows treated with estrogen at the onset of a short dry period. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 797–803.Google Scholar
Bernier-Dodier, P, Girard, CL, Talbot, BG and Lacasse, P 2011. Effect of dry period management on mammary gland function and its endocrine regulation in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 4922–4936.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brolund, L 1990. Technical utilization of cell count in the milk-recording service (Cellhaltens tekniska utnyttjande i kokontrollen). In Djurhälsovård 88/89. Meddelande nr 161, pp. 40–41. Swedish Association for Livestock Breeding and Production, Eskilstuna, Sweden (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Coppock, CE, Everett, RW, Natzke, RP and Ainslie, HR 1974. Effect of dry period length on Holstein milk-production and selected disorders at parturition. Journal of Dairy Science 57, 712–718.Google Scholar
de Vries, R, Brandt, M, Lundh, A, Holtenius, K, Hettinga, K and Johansson, M 2016. Short communication: influence of shortening the dry period of Swedish dairy cows on plasmin activity in milk. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 9300–9306.Google Scholar
Drackley, JK, Wallace, RL, Graugnard, D, Vasquez, J, Richards, BF and Loor, JJ 2014. Visceral adipose tissue mass in nonlactating dairy cows fed diets differing in energy density1. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 3420–3430.Google Scholar
Gillund, P, Reksen, O, Karlberg, K, Randby, AT, Engeland, I and Lutnaes, B 1999. Body condition scoring in Norwegian cattle. Utproving av en holdvurderingsmetode pa NRF-kyr. Norsk Veterinartidsskrift 111, 623–632. (in Norweigan).Google Scholar
Grummer, RR and Rastani, RR 2004. Why reevaluate dry period length? Journal of Dairy Science 87 (suppl.), E77–E85.Google Scholar
Heeren, JAH, Steeneveld, W and Berentsen, PBM 2014. Economic comparison of a sixty day dry period with no dry period on Dutch dairy farms. Livestock Science 168, 149–158.Google Scholar
Herd, RM and Arthur, PF 2009. Physiological basis for residual feed intake. Journal of Animal Science 87, E64–E71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ingvartsen, KL and Andersen, JB 2000. Integration of metabolism and intake regulation: a review focusing on periparturient animals. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1573–1597.Google Scholar
Janovick, NA and Drackley, JK 2010. Prepartum dietary management of energy intake affects postpartum intake and lactation performance by primiparous and multiparous Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3086–3102.Google Scholar
Kok, A, van Middelaar, CE, Engel, B, van Knegsel, ATM, Hogeveen, H, Kemp, B and de Boer, IJM 2016. Effective lactation yield: a measure to compare milk yield between cows with different dry period lengths. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 2956–2966.Google Scholar
Lindgren, E 1979. The nutritional value of roughage determined in vivo and by laboratory methods. PhD thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A 2015. Visual scoring of ruminant body condition: trapped in inaccuracy. Journal of Veterinary Science Technology 6, e118.Google Scholar
Pezeshki, A, Mehrzad, J, Ghorbani, GR, Rahmani, HR, Collier, RJ and Burvenich, C 2007. Effects of short dry periods on performance and metabolic status in Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5531–5541.Google Scholar
Rastani, RR, Grummer, RR, Bertics, SJ, Gümen, A, Wiltbank, MC, Mashek, DG and Schwab, MC 2005. Reducing dry period length to simplify feeding transition cows: milk production, energy balance, and metabolic profiles. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1004–1014.Google Scholar
Roche, JF, Mackey, D and Diskin, MD 2000. Reproductive management of postpartum cows. Animimal Reproduction Science 60, 703–712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salleh, MS, Mazzoni, G, Höglund, JK, Olijhoek, DW, Lund, P, Løvendahl, P and Kadarmideen, HN 2017. RNA-Seq transcriptomics and pathway analyses reveal potential regulatory genes and molecular mechanisms in high- and low- residual feed intake in nordic dairy cattle. BMC Genomics 18, 258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santschi, DE, Lefebvre, DM, Cue, RI, Girard, CL and Pellerin, D 2011. Complete-lactation milk and component yields following a short (35-d) or a conventional (60-d) dry period management strategy in commercial Holstein herds. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 2302–2311.Google Scholar
Sjaunja, LO, Baevre, L, Junkkarinen, L, Pedersen, J and Setala, J 1991. A Nordic proposal for an energy corrected milk (ECM) formula. In Performance Recording of Animals: State of the Art, 1990 (ed. P Gaillon and Y Chabert), pp. 156–192, Pudoc, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Steeneveld, W, van Knegsel, ATM, Remmelink, GJ, Kemp, B, Vernooij, JCM and Hogeveen, H 2014. Cow characteristics and their association with production performance with different dry period lengths. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 4922–4931.Google Scholar
Sverige, V 2014. Cattle statistics. Retrieved on 2 December 2015 from http://www.vxa.se.Google Scholar
Swanson, EW 1965. Comparing continuous milking with 60-day dry periods in successive lactations. Journal of Dairy Science 48, 1205–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandehaar, MJ, Armentano, LE, Weigel, K, Spurlock, DM, Tempelman, RJ and Veerkamp, R 2016. Harnessing the genetics of the modern dairy cow to continue improvements in feed efficiency. Journal of Dairy Science 6, 4941–4954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Es, AJH 1975. Feed evaluation for dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 2, 95–107.Google Scholar
van Knegsel, ATM, Remmelink, GJ, Jorjong, S, Fievez, V and Kemp, B 2014. Effect of dry period length and dietary energy source on energy balance, milk yield, and milk composition of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 1499–1512.Google Scholar
van Knegsel, ATM, van der Drift, SGA, Čermáková, J and Kemp, B 2013. Effects of shortening the dry period of dairy cows on milk production, energy balance, health, and fertility: a systematic review. The Veterinary Journal 198, 707–713.Google Scholar
Volden, H 2011. NorFor – The Nordic Feed Evaluation System. In Norfor – the Nordic Feed Evaluation System. EAAP European Association for Animal Production Publication (ed. H. Volden), pp 1–180. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, WJ, Wallace, CR, Hansen, LB, Chester-Jones, H and Crooker, BA 2007. Effects of genetic selection for milk yield on somatotropin, insulin-like growth factor-I, and placental lactogen in Holstein cows. Jounal of Dairy Science 90, 3314–3325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed