Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T01:39:05.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of undernutrition after calving on the quantity and composition of the milk produced by dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. S. Flux  and
M. R. Patchell
D. S. Flux
Affiliation:
The Dairy Research Institute (N.Z.), Massey College P.O., Palmerston North, New Zealand.
M. R. Patchell
Affiliation:
The Dairy Research Institute (N.Z.), Massey College P.O., Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Fourteen pairs of monozygous twin cows of mixed ages were used to determine the effect of underfeeding from the 3rd to the 8th week inclusive after calving on milk and butterfat production and on the composition of the milk.

Those cows which were well fed over the 6-week period produced more milk and a larger weight of butterfat than their sisters which had been poorly fed. The milk from the well-fed cows had a lower percentage of butterfat, but higher percentages of solids-not-fat and total protein, than the milk from the poorly fed cows.

The complete lactation averages failed to show statistical significant differences in all characteristics except in the case of solids-not-fat percentage. The mean difference between the two groups for solidsnot-fat was found to be highly significant.

In general, the results support the conclusions of other workers, that underfeeding dairy cows may depress the solids-not-fat content of the milk.

It appeared that differences between the two groups in butterfat percentage over the 6-week experimental feeding period were strongly correlated with differences in weight changes and that the small amount of variance associated with milk yield differences was not significant.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , December 1954 , pp. 246 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1954

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

Barnicoat, C. R., Logan, A. G. & Grant, A. I. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1944). J. Agric. Sci. 34, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1950). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 20, 1.Google Scholar
Breikem, K. (1949). XIIth International Dairy Congress, Stock., I, Sects. I and VI, p. 28.Google Scholar
Campbell, I. L. & Flux, D. S. (1948). Proc. 8th Ann. Conf. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Production, p. 61.Google Scholar
Eckles, C. H. (1912). Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 100. (Cited by Espe, D., in Secretion of Milk, p. 121. Iowa State College Press, 1946.)Google Scholar
Eckles, C. H. & Palmer, L. S. (1916). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 25.Google Scholar
Flux, D. S. (1950). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, J. (1950). Emp. J. Exp. Agric. 18, 249.Google Scholar
Hart, E. B. & Humphrey, G. C. (1916). J. Biol. Chem. 26, 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kajanoja, P. (1944). Suom. Maataloust. Seur. Julk. 56, 1. (Dairy Sci. Abstr. 8, 209.)Google Scholar
Overman, O. R. & Wright, K. E. (1927). J. Agric. Res. 35, 637.Google Scholar
Perkins, A. E., Krauss, W. E. & Hayden, C. C. (1932). Bull. Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta. p. 515.Google Scholar
Ragsdale, A. C. & Turner, C. W. (1923). J. Dairy Sci. 5, 251.Google Scholar
Riddet, W., Campbell, I. L., McDowall, F. H. & Cox, G. A. (1941). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 23, no. 2A, 80.Google Scholar
Rowland, S. J. (1943–1944). J. Dairy Res. 13, 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, S. J. (1946). Dairy Ind. 11, 656.Google Scholar
Storgards, T. (1947). Finlands Ayrshireboskap. 21, 39. Cited by Brierem (1949).Google Scholar
Vartiovaara, U. (1947). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 5, 326.Google Scholar