Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T06:15:27.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of supplementary light on the production and behaviour of dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. J. C. Phillips  and
S. A. Schofield
C. J. C. Phillips
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University College of North Wales, Bangor LL57 2UW
S. A. Schofield
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University College of North Wales, Bangor LL57 2UW
Get access

Abstract

In experiment 1, 12 cows (treatment L) received natural daylight (mean 8 h), 10 h supplementary light (mean intensity 481 lux) and dark (mean 6 h), and 12 cows (treatment N) received natural daylight (mean 8 h) and dark (mean 16 h) for 8 weeks. Supplementary light increased milk yield and tended to increase food intake and loss of live weight. There were no significant effects on milk composition although milk fat concentration tended to be reduced for cows in treatment L. Daily feeding times were not affected by treatment although more feeding took place during the supplementary light in treatment L. Supplementary light increased the time spent lying down per day and reduced the distance walked per day, although cows in treatment L spent less time lying during the light supplementation period. In both treatments, the activity rate was increased on the day of oestrus, but in treatment L the incidence of oestrus-specific behaviour was significantly reduced compared with treatment N.

In experiment 2, 16 cows received natural daylight (mean 9 h) and 10 h supplementary light of mean intensity 0, 101, 191 or 529 lux in a change-over design. There were no significant effects of supplementary light or its intensity on the food intake, milk yield or live-weight change of the cows, but milk fat concentration was reduced for cows receiving supplementary light at 101 or 529 lux and milk protein concentration was reduced for cows receiving light at 529 lux.

Type
Papers
Information
Animal Production , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , April 1989 , pp. 293 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

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

Broadbent, P. J., McIntosh, J. A. R. and Spence, A. 1970. The evaluation of a device for feeding group-housed animals individually. Animal Production 12: 245–252.Google Scholar
Gill, J. L. 1978. Design and Analysis of Experiments in the Animal and Medical Sciences. Vol. 1. Iowa State University Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. P. and Reid, D. 1951. Studies on the behaviour of cattle and sheep in relation to the utilization of grass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 41: 350–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koprowski, J. A. and Tucker, H. A. 1973. Serum prolactin during various physiological states and its relationship to milk production in the bovine. Endocrinology 93: 645–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1980. GENSTAT V, Mark 4.03. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden. Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Leining, K. B., Tucker, H. A. and Kesner, J. S. 1980. Growth hormone, glucocorticoid and thyroxine response to duration, intensity and wavelength of light i n prepubertal bulls. Journal of Animal Sciences 51: 932–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrill, F. D., Eide, R. N., Leonard, R. O. and Bath, D. L. 1969. Effect of corral lighting on feed intake and milk production of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 52: 947 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Peters, R. R., Chapin, L. T., Emery, R. S. and Tucker, H. A. 1981. Milk yield, feed intake, prolactin, growth hormone and glucocorticoid response of cows to supplemented light. Journal of Dairy Science 64: 1671–1678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, R. R., Chapin, L. T., Leining, K. B. and Tucker, H. A. 1978. Supplemental lighting stimulates growth and lactation in cattle. Science, Washington 199: 911–912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, R. R. and Tucker, H. A. 1978. Prolactin and growth hormone responses to photoperiod in heifers. Endocrinology 103: 229–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, C. J. C. and Leaver, J. D. 1986. The effect of forage supplementation on the behaviour of grazing dairy cows. Applied Animal Ethology 16: 233–247.Google Scholar
Purchas, R. W., MacMillan, K. L. and Hafs, H. D. 1970. Pituitary and plasma growth hormone levels in bulls from birth to one year of age. Journal of Animal Science 31: 358–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sachet, J., Ward, G. and Hansen, R. 1958. Influence of artificial lighting on milk production and feed consumption of dairy cattle. Colorado Agricultural Experimentation Station and Colorado Farm Power Council Pamphlet.Google Scholar
Schofield, S. A. 1988. Oestrus detection methods and oestrous behaviour of dairy cows in different environments. Ph.D Thesis, Faculty of Science, University of Wales, Bangor.Google Scholar
Stanisiewski, E. P., Mellenberger, R. W., Anderson, C. R. and Tucker, H. A. 1985. Effect of photoperiod on milk yield and milk fat in commercial dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 68: 1134–1140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stricklin, W. R. 1987. Some factors affecting feeding patterns of beef cattle. Proceedings of Symposium on Feed Intake in Beef Cattle, pp. 314–320. Agriculture Experiment Station, Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
Sweetman, W. J. 1950. Artificial breeding in Alaska and the effect of extra light during the short winter days. Journal of Dairy Science 33: 391–392 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Tantda, H., Swanson, L. V. and Hohenboken, W. D. 1984. Effect of artificial photoperiod on eating behavior and other behavioral observations of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 67: 585–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, H. A. 1985. Photoperiodic influences on milk production in dairy cows. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition — 1985 (ed. Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 211–221. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinn, S. A., Chapin, L. T. and Tucker, H. A. 1983. Does photoperiod and time of feeding affect growth and eating pattern of heifers? Journal of Dairy Science 66: Suppl. 1, p. 217 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Zinn, S. A., Chapin, L. T. and Tucker, H. A. 1988. A note on the effects of previous photoperiod exposure and gradual transitions of light intensity at dawn and dusk on growth in Holstein heifers. Animal Production 46: 300–303.Google Scholar