Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T19:46:07.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of concentrate amount on locomotion and clinical lameness in dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

F. J. Manson  and
J. D. Leaver
F. J. Manson
Affiliation:
West of Scotland Agricultural College, Crichton Royal Farm, Dumfries
J. D. Leaver
Affiliation:
West of Scotland Agricultural College, Crichton Royal Farm, Dumfries
Get access

Abstract

An experiment with two groups of 24 cows during weeks 3 to 22 of lactation examined the influence of 7 (L) or 11 (H) kg concentrates per day on the prevalence of lameness. Grass silage was offered ad libitum. The cows were scored on a 1 to 5 scale for their locomotion on a weekly basis (1 = normal locomotion; 5 = severely lame). Cows scoring 3 or more were considered to be clinically lame. This allowed the prevalence of lameness, its severity and duration to be measured and statistically analysed. There were significantly more observations of lameness in the H cows than the L cows (0·077 and 0·021 observations per cow week) and the severity and duration of lameness incidents were significantly greater. The major causes of lameness were solar problems in the hind feet. The prevalence declined in both treatments as lactation progressed. The predisposing causes of the higher incidence in treatment H could have been the higher concentrate: forage ratio, the greater daily metabolizable energy intake or the greater daily crude protein intake. For treatments L and H, mean milk yields were 20·5, 23·7 kg/day; milk fat 41·7, 39·0 g/kg; milk protein 31·4, 32·0 g/kg; live-weight change -0·12, +0·11 kg/day; and condition score 2·04, 2·18.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , October 1988 , pp. 185 - 190
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

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

Alexander, R. H. and McGowan, M. 1966. The routine determination of in vitro digestibility of organic matter in forages — an investigation of the problems associated with continuous large-scale operation. Journal of the British Grassland Society 21: 140–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, R. H. and McGowan, M. 1969. The assessment of the nutritive value of silage by determination of in vitro digestibility on homogenates prepared from fresh undried silage. Journal of the British Grassland Society 24: 195–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broster, W. H. and Thomas, C. 1981. The influence of level and pattern of concentrate input on milk output. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition — 1981 (ed. Haresign, W.), pp. 49–69. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhough, P. R., MacCallum, F. J. and Weaver, A. D. 1981. Lameness in Cattle. 2nd ed. Wright Scientechnica, Bristol.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, W. 1976. Influence of the composition of the ration and the feeding frequency on pH-regulation in the rumen and on feed intake in ruminants. Livestock Production Science 3: 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J. M. 1981. Lameness in dairy cows. University of Edinburgh!Dalgety Spillers Newsheet, March. Dairy Herd Health and Productivity Service.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1980. GENSTAT V Mark 4.03. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Leaver, J. D. and Webster, D. M. 1982. Assessment of lameness in dairy cattle. West of Scotland Agricultural College, Crichlon Royal Farm Report 1982, pp. 33–34.Google Scholar
Livesey, C. T. and Fleming, F. L. 1984. Nutritional influences on laminitis, sole ulcer and bruised sole in Friesian cows. Veterinary Record 114: 510–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lucey, S., Rowlands, G. J. and Russell, A. M. 1986. The association between lameness and fertility in dairy cows. Veterinary Record 118: 628–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manson, F. J. 1986. A study of lameness in dairy cows with reference to nutrition and hoof shape. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Glasgow.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvany, P. M. 1977. Dairy cow condition scoring. National Institute for Research in Dairying, Paper 4468.Google Scholar
Nilsson, S. A. 1966. Recent opinions about cause of ulceration of the hoof in cattle. Nordisk Veterinarmedicin 18: 241–252.Google Scholar
Peterse, D. J., Korver, S., Oldenbroek, J. K. and Talmon, F. P. 1984. Relationship between levels of concentrate feeding and incidence of sole ulcers in dairy cattle. Veterinary Record 115: 629–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reid, I. M. and Little, W. 1986. Health. In Principles and Practice of Feeding Dairy Cows (ed. Broster, W. H., Phipps, R. H. and Johnson, C. L.). Technical Bulletin 8, National Institute for Research in Dairying, pp. 231–247.Google Scholar
Toussaint-raven, E. 1973. Lameness in cattle and footcare. Netherlands Journal of Veterinary Science 5: 105–111.Google Scholar
Toussaint-raven, E. 1985. Cattle Footcare and Claw Trimming. Farming Press Ltd, Ipswich.Google Scholar
Weaver, A. D. 1979. The prevention of bovine laminitis. Bovine Practitioner 15: 70–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar