Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T20:34:48.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetical aspects of maximum rate of flow during milking

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

H. P. Donald
H. P. Donald
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh 9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Rates of flow of milk during milking have been observed on twin and single-born dairy cows with the aid of a device for continuous recording of weight of milk extracted. Each cow has been characterized by a maximum rate arrived at by averaging morning and evening observations on 2 days. Only this maximum rate has been studied.

Repeatability was high (0·8–0·9) whether measured from day to day or from lactation to lactation. Maximum rate of flow was 10–16% higher in second than in first lactations. The range extended from under 2 lb/min to over 7 lb/min.

Lactation yield of milk varied significantly with rate, rising about 50 gal for an increase of 1 lb/min. This relation is reduced or eliminated by taking into account by partial regression analysis either maximum weekly yield or the increase from the second to the peak week of lactation.

Although the higher yielding cows had larger udder areas bounded by the four teats, the regression of 305-day milk yield on rate was not changed much by taking udder area into account. Cows with short teats milked faster and had higher yields than cows with longer teats.

Differences in yield among the four quarters widened slightly between 1 and 3 months of lactation regardless of rate of flow, except possibly in the three slowest milking cows. In these the differences increased three times as much as in the other cows. The wider the inter-quarter differences in yield the less the proportion of milk obtained at the maximum rate.

Heritability of maximum rate of flow derived from observations on paired singleborn cattle and twins was 85%. Field data would probably yield a value of 60–70%. Appropriate selection of breeding stock would effectively alter rate of flow, but there is no reason yet to expect yield of milk to change except perhaps by reducing the incidence of very slow milking cows.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , October 1960 , pp. 361 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1960

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

Andreae, V. (1958). Z. Tierz. ZüchtBiol. 71, 289.Google Scholar
Baxter, E. S., Clarke, P. M., Dodd, F. H. & Foot, A. S. (1950). J. Dairy Res. 17, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, G. H., Fryer, H. C. & Roark, D. B. (1951). J. Dairy Sci. 34, 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brumby, P. (1956). Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 16, 89.Google Scholar
Clough, P. A. & Dodd, F. H. (1957). J. Dairy Res. 24, 152.Google Scholar
Crossman, J. V., Dodd, F. H., Lee, J. M. & Neave, F. K. (1950). J. Dairy Res. 17, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, F. H. (1953). J. Dairy Res. 20, 301.Google Scholar
Dodd, F. H. & Clough, P. A. (1957). Outlook on Agric. 1, 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, F. H. & Foot, A. S. (1949). J. Dairy Res. 16, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, F. H. & Foot, A. S. (1953). J. Dairy Res. 20, 138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, H. P., (1953). J. Dairy Res. 20, 355.Google Scholar
Donald, H. P. (1958). Proc. Xth Int. Congr. Genetics, 1, 225.Google Scholar
Foot, A. S. (1935). J. Dairy Res. 6, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, I. (1957). Z. Tierz. ZüchtBiol. 70, 233.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. (1958). Handbuch der Tierzüchtung, Bd. II. Haustiergenetik: 229–271. Berlin, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. & Korkman, N. (1952). Hereditas, Lund, 38, 131.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. & Malven, P. (1960). Z. Tierz. ZüchtBiol. 74, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J. W. B. & Donald, H. P. (1955). J. Dairy Res. 22, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korkman, N. (1948). K. Lantbr Akad, Tidskr. 87, 161.Google Scholar
Loppnow, H. (1959). Dtsch. tierärztl. Wschr. 66, 88.Google Scholar
Sandvik, Ø. (1957 a). J. Dairy Res. 24, 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandvik, Ø. (1957 b). Meld. Norg. LandbrHøgsk. 36, (8), 11 pp.Google Scholar
Stewart, W. E., Schultz, L. H. & Coker, S. P. (1957). J. Dairy Sci. 40, 258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittlestone, W. G. (1955). J. Dairy Res. 22, 290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar