Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T12:04:15.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of draught force and diet on dry-matter intake, milk production and live-weight change in non-pregnant and pregnant cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

E. Zerbini ,
A. G. Wold  and
D. Demissie
E. Zerbini
Affiliation:
International Livestock Research Insitute, PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
A. G. Wold
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Research, PO Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
D. Demissie
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Research, PO Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Get access

Abstract

Eighteen F1 crossbred dairy cows (Friesian × Boran and Simmental × Boran) were allocated to one of three diet groups (H: natural pasture hay; H+3: natural pasture hay + 3 kg concentrate; and H+5: natural pasture hay + 5 kg concentrate) using a stratified random sampling procedure, with parity, milk production genotype, body weight and body condition score as blocking variables. Cows on each diet were then allocated to three draught forces (7, 11 and 15 kg draught force per 100 kg live weight) in a cross-over design to investigate relationships between work output, live-weight changes, dry-matter intake (DMI) and milk yield. Each cow worked for 36 days in early lactation (from calving to 90 days) and for a further 36 days in late lactation (from 250 to 340 days post partum). Work output was similar for cows on each of the three diets. Cows on the H diet consumed more hay than cows on H+3 and H−5 diets. Hay and total DMI, milk yield and milk fat were similar across draught forces and during working and resting days when the cows were not pregnant. Similar results were obtained when cows were from 82 to 172 days pregnant. Pregnancy did not affect the ability of cows to perform work at different intensities. During working days cows lost live weight both when pregnant and when non-pregnant. During rest days, non-pregnant cows on diets H, H+3 and H+5 compensated proportionately 0·12, 0·59 and 0·59, respectively, of the live weight lost during working days. Pregnant cows on diet H+3 and H+5 compensated proportionately 0·95 and 1·77 live weight, respectively. Lower total live-weight losses during the pregnant period could be attributed partly to relatively greater DMIs and lower milk production, but also to gestation. Prediction of live-weight change from total DMI above maintenance, milk yield and work output during periods of 6 working days was poor (R2 = 0·18). However, the same parameters explained adequately changes in live weight for supplemented and non-supplemented working cows (R2 = 0·38 and 0·79, respectively) during a period of 90 days.

Keywords

cowsdraught animalsfood intakelive weightmilk yield
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 225 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

REFERENCES

Atkinson, G. F. 1966. Designs for sequences of treatments with carry-over effects. Biometrics 22: 292–309.Google Scholar
Australian Agricultural Council. 1990. Feeding standards for Australian livestock. Ruminants. Ruminant subcommittee, ISIRO, Australia.Google Scholar
Berenblut, I. I. 1964. Changes-over designs with complete balance for first residual effects. Biometrics 20: 707–712.Google Scholar
Berglund, B. and Danell, B. 1987. Live weight changes, ?eed consumption, milk yield and energy balance in dairy cattle during the first period of lactation. Acta Agriculturae ?candinavka 37: 495–509.Google Scholar
Eley, R. M., Thatcher, W. W., Bazer, F. W., Wilcox, C. J., Becker, R. B., Head, H. H. and Adkinson, R. W. 1978. Development of the conceptus in the Bovine, journal of Dairy Science 61: 467–473.Google Scholar
Gemeda, T., Zerbini, E., Wold, A. G. and Demissie, D. 1995. Effect of draught work on performance and metabolism of crossbred cows. 1. Effect of work and diet on body weight change, body condition, lactation and productivity. Animal Science 60: 361–367.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. 1985. A review of the nutrient requirements of draught oxen. In Draught animal power for production (ed. Copland, J. W.), AC1AR proceedings no. W, pp. 59–63.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. and Zerbini, E. 1993. Recent trends in research on draught animal nutrition. In Human and draught animal power in crop production. Experiences, present status and research priorities, pp. 40–47. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.Google Scholar
Matthewman, R. W., Oldham, J. D. and Horgan, G. W. 1993. A note on the effect of sustained exercise on straw intake and body weight in lactating cattle. Animal Production 57: 491–494.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland and Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland. 1984. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Reference book no. 433. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Montano-Bermudez, M. and Nielsen, M. K. 1990. Reproductive performance and variation in body weight during annual cycles for crossbred beef cows with different genetic potential for milk, Journal of Animal Science 68: 2289–2296.Google Scholar
Nicholson, M. J. and Butterworth, M. H. 1986. A guide to condition scoring of Zebu cattle. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Ortigues, I. 1991. Adaptation du metabolisme energetique des ruminants a la sous-alimentation. Quantification au niveau de l'animal entier et de tissus corporels. Reproduction Nutrition Development 31: 593–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, R. A. 1990. A note on live weight and intake and digestibility of food by draught cattle after supplementation of rice straw with the fodder tree Ficus auriculata. Animal Production 51: 635–638.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A., Archibald, R. and Campbell, I. 1988. Nutrition experiments with draught cattle. Draught Animal News 9: 4–6.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A. and Lawrence, P. R. 1992. Intake, digestion, gastro-intestinal transit time and nitrogen balance in working oxen: studies in Costa Rica and Nepal. Animal Production 55: 361–370.Google Scholar
Soller, H., Reed, J. D. and Butterworth, M. H. 1991. Effect of work on utilization of cereal crop residues by oxen. Animal Feed Science and Technology 33: 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1989. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 6, 4th edition, vol. 2. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary NC.Google Scholar
Zerbini, E., Gemeda, T., Wold, A. G., Nokoe, S. and Demissie, D. 1995. Effect of draught work on performance and metabolism of crossbred cows. 2. Effect of work on roughage intake, digestion, digesta kinetics and plasma metabolites. Animal Science 60: 369–378.Google Scholar