Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T06:14:34.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of type of shade on physiology, behaviour and performance of grazing steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 January 2014

P. Rovira
P. Rovira*
Affiliation:
Programa Nacional de Carne y Lana, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA), CP 33000, Treinta y Tres, Uruguay
*
†E-mail: provira@tyt.inia.org.uy
Get access

Abstract

Research has addressed the issue of type of shade mainly on feedlots and high-producing dairy farms, but more studies are needed on the impact of shade on grazing beef cattle in a low-to-medium plane of nutrition. A 63-day grazing study using 24 British steers (268±4 kg) was undertaken in Uruguay (33°14'S, 54°15'W) to determine the effect of type of artificial shade on tympanic temperature (TT), behaviour and performance during summer. Cattle were allocated to six paddocks with an area of 2.5 ha each (four steers/paddock) continuously grazed. Treatments (two paddocks/treatment) were unshaded (US) and shaded with either 35% (35S) or 80% (80S) blockage of solar radiation. TT was recorded during 12 days placing an automatic device near the tympanic membrane inside the animal’s ear. Animal behaviours were measured by live observations of animals every 15 min from 1100 to 1600 h six times during the experimental period. According to the temperature–humidity index (THI), cattle was in the ‘normal’ category (THI<70, absence of heat stress) during 50% of the time, the rest being exposed to some degree of heat stress including 15% of the time with environmental conditions. Black globe temperature and surface soil temperature decreased as solar protection increased under the shade structure. Steers spent more time under the 80S structure than under the 35S between 1100 and 1600 h (83% and 49% of the time, respectively). Average 24-h TT did not differ among treatments (mean±s.e. 38.79±0.04ºC). Minimum TT was registered at 0700 h for all treatments (37.92±0.08ºC), whereas maximum TT was reached at 1700 h for both control group (39.73±0.18ºC) and 35% shade (39.48±0.12ºC) and at 1900 h for 80% shade (39.57±0.15ºC). Neither the provision nor the type of shade affected animal performance (0.622±0.060 kg/a per day), indicating the ability of cattle to acclimate and/or compensate for eventually short-term severe heat stress events. The results of this experiment suggest that the provision of shade with either 35% or 80% of blockage of solar radiation is recommended for the improvement of cattle well-being (expressed through changes in behaviour) without significantly affecting animal performance and TT. However, the overall results of the 63 days of the study can mask or dilute punctual effects of short heat stress events on cattle. More powerful experimental designs are required to address this issue in temperate regions.

Keywords

cattleheat stressshadebehaviourtympanic temperature
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , March 2014 , pp. 470 - 476
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Al Haidary, A and Al Hassan, M 2003. Effect of rationalization of water consumption for evaporative cooling on productivity of dairy cattle. Indian Journal of Animal Science 73, 695–698.Google Scholar
Andersson, M 2009. The importance of shade for dairy cattle in Sweden. Thesis MSc. Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Sweden.Google Scholar
Arias, R and Mader, TL 2009. Effects of environmental factors on body temperature of feedlot cattle. Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports, Paper 510. Animal Science Department, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.Google Scholar
Arias, RA, Mader, TL and Parkhurst, AM 2011. Effects of diet type and metabolizable energy intake on tympanic temperature of steers fed during summer and winter seasons. Journal of Animal Science 89, 1574–1580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, DV 1994. Heat stress interaction with shade and cooling. Journal of Dairy Science 77, 2044–2050.Google Scholar
Bennett, IL, Finch, VA and Holmes, CR 1985. Time spent in shade and its relationship with physiological factors of thermoregulation in three breeds of cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 13, 227–236.Google Scholar
Berman, A 2005. Estimates of heat stress relief needs for Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 83, 1377–1384.Google Scholar
Brown-Brandl, TM, Eigenberg, RA and Nienaber, JA 2006. Heat stress risk factors of feedlot heifers. Livestock Science 105, 57–68.Google Scholar
Brown-Brandl, TM, Eigenberg, RA, Nienaber, JA and Hahn, GL 2005. Dynamic response indicators of heat stress in shaded and non-shaded feedlot cattle. Par 1: Analyses of indicators. Biosystems Engineering 90, 451–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown-Brandl, TM, Nienaber, JA, Eigenberg, RA, Hahn, GL and Freetly, H 2003. Thermoregulatory responses of feeder cattle. Journal of Thermal Biology 28, 149–157.Google Scholar
Davis, MS, Mader, TL, Holt, SM and Parkhurst, AM 2003. Strategies to reduce feedlot cattle heat stress: effects on tympanic temperature. Journal of Animal Science 81, 649–661.Google Scholar
Eigenberg, RA, Brown-Brandl, TM and Nienaber, JA 2009. Shade material evaluation using a cattle response model and meteorological instrumentation. International Journal of Biometeorology 53, 501–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaughan, JB, Tait, LA, Eigenberg, RA and Bryden, WL 2004. Effect of shade on respiration rate and rectal temperature of Angus heifers. Animal Production Australia 25, 69–72.Google Scholar
Gaughan, JB, Holt, SM, Hahn, GL, Mader, TL and Eigenberg, RA 2000. Respiration rate – is it good measure of heat stress in cattle? Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 13 (suppl. C), 329–332.Google Scholar
Gaughan, JB, Bonner, S, Loxton, I, Mader, TL, Lisle, A and Lawrence, R 2010. Effect of shade on body temperature and performance of feedlot steers. Journal of Animal Science 88, 4056–4067.Google Scholar
Gaughan, JB, Goodwin, PJ, Schoorl, TA, Young, BA, Imbeah, M, Mader, TL and Hall, A 1998. Shade preferences of lactating Holstein-Friesian cows. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 38, 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Igono, MO, Bjotvedt, G and Sanford-Crane, HT 1992. Environmental profile and critical temperature effects on milk production of Holstein cows in desert climate. International Journal of Biometeorology 36, 77–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ittner, NR and Kelly, CF 1951. Cattle shades. Journal of Animal Science 10, 184–194.Google Scholar
Kadzere, CT, Murphy, MR, Silanikove, N and Maltz, E 2002. Heat stress in lactating dairy cows: a review. Livestock Production Science 77, 59–91.Google Scholar
Kendall, PE, Nielsen, PP, Webster, JR, Verkerk, GA, Littlejohn, RP and Matthews, LR 2006. The effects of providing shade to lactating dairy cows in a temperate climate. Livestock Science 103, 148–157.Google Scholar
Lefcourt, AM and Schmidtmann, ET 1989. Body temperature of dry cows on pasture: environmental and behavioral effects. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 3040–3049.Google Scholar
Mader, TL and Davis, MS 2004. Effect of management strategies on reducing heat stress of feedlot cattle: feed and water intake. Journal of Animal Science 82, 3077–3087.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mader, TL and Johnson, LJ 2010. Tympanic temperature profiles of confined beef cattle. Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports 2010, 101–103.Google Scholar
Mader, TL, Gaughan, JM and Young, BA 1999a. Feedlot diet roughage level of Hereford cattle exposed to excessive heat load. Professional Animal Science 15, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mader, TL, Dahlquist, JM, Hahn, GL and Gaughan, JB 1999b. Shade and wind barrier effects on summertime feedlot cattle performance. Journal of Animal Science 77, 2065–2072.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mader, TL, Davis, MS and Brown-Brandl, T 2006. Environmental factors influencing heat stress in feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 84, 712–719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mader, TL, Gaughan, JB, Johnson, LJ and Hahn, GL 2009. Tympanic temperature in confined beef cattle exposed to excessive heat load. International Journal of Biometeorology 54, 629–635.Google Scholar
Mader, TL, Holt, SM, Hahn, GL, Davis, MS and Spiers, DE 2002. Feeding strategies for managing heat load in feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 80, 2373–2382.Google Scholar
McDaniel, AH and Roark, CB 1956. Performance and grazing habits of Hereford and Aberdeen-Angus cows and calves on improved pastures as related to types of shade. Journal of Animal Science 15, 59–63.Google Scholar
Mitlöhner, FM, Morrow, JL, Dailey, JW, Wilson, SC, Galyean, ML, Miller, MF and McGlone, JJ 2001. Shade and water misting effects on behaviour, physiology, performance, and carcass traits of heat-stressed feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2327–2335.Google Scholar
Muller, CJC, Botha, JAB and Smith, WA 1994a. Effect of shade on various parameters of Friesian cows in a Mediterranean climate in South Africa. 1. Feed and water intake, milk production and milk composition. South African Journal of Animal Science 24, 49–55.Google Scholar
Muller, CJC, Botha, JAB, Coetzer, WA and Smith, WA 1994b. Effect of shade on various parameters of Friesian cows in a Mediterranean climate in South Africa. 2. Physiological responses. South African Journal of Animal Science 24, 56–60.Google Scholar
Muller, CJC, Botha, JA, Coetzer, WA and Smith, WW 1994c. Effect of shade on various parameters of Friesian cows in a Mediterranean climate in South Africa. 3. Behaviour. South African Journal of Animal Science 24, 61–66.Google Scholar
Nienaber, JA and Hahn, GL 2007. Livestock production system management responses to themal challenges. International Journal of Biometeorology 52, 149–157.Google Scholar
Renaudeau, D, Anais, C, Tel, L and Gourdine, JL 2010. Effect of temperature on thermal acclimation in growing pigs estimated using a nonlinear function. Journal of Animal Science 88, 3715–3724.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Renaudeau, D, Collin, A, Yahav, S, de Basilio, V, Gourdine, JL and Collier, RJ 2012. Adaptation to hot climate and strategies to alleviate heat stress in livestock production. Animal 6, 707–728.Google Scholar
Roman-Ponce, H, Thatcher, WW, Buffington, DE, Wilcox, CJ and Van Horn, H 1977. Physiological and production responses of dairy cattle to a shade structure in a subtropical environment. Journal of Dairy Science 60, 424–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovira, P and Velazco, J 2010. The effect of artificial or natural shade on respiration rate, behaviour and performance of grazing steers. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 347– 353.Google Scholar
Rovira, P and Velazco, J 2011. The effect of free or restricted access to artificial shade on respiration rate, behaviour and performance of grazing steers. Online Journal of Animal and Feed Research 6, 293–298.Google Scholar
Schütz, KE, Rogers, AR, Cox, NR and Tucker, CB 2009. Dairy cows prefer shade that offers greater protection against solar radiation in summer: shade use, behaviour, and body temperature. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 116, 28–34.Google Scholar
Schütz, KE, Rogers, AR, Poulouin, YA, Cox, NR and Tucker, CB 2010. The amount of shade influences the behaviour and physiology of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 125–133.Google Scholar
Silanikove, N 2000. Effects of heat stress on the welfare of extensively managed domestic ruminants. Livestock Production Science 67, 1–18.Google Scholar
Thorn, EC 1959. The discomfort index. Weatherwise 12, 57–59.Google Scholar
Tucker, CB, Rogers, AR and Schütz, KE 2008. Effect of solar radiation on dairy cattle behaviour, use of shade and body temperature in a pasture-based system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 109, 141–154.Google Scholar
Valtorta, SE, Leva, PE and Gallardo, MR 1997. Evaluation of different shades to improve dairy cattle well-being in Argentina. International Journal of Biometeorology 41, 65–67.Google Scholar
West, JW 2003. Effects of heat-stress on production in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2131–2144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimbelman, RB, Rhoads, RP, Rhoads, ML, Duff, GC, Baumgard, LH and Collier, RJ 2009. A re-evaluation of the impact of temperature humidity index (THI) and black globe humidity index (BGHI) on milk production in high producing dairy cows. Proceedings of AZ ARPAS, Savoy, IL: Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference Tempe, pp. 158–168.Google Scholar