Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:29:50.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors influencing average milk yield of herds at two levels of production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 1960

Gerald Wiener
Gerald Wiener
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh, 9
Get access

Extract

An experiment was started in 1950 designed to find out what proportion of the difference in milk yield between herds is genetic in origin. Sixty-five pairs of twins were split at birth equally between farms having high-yielding herds and farms having low-yielding herds. A previous paper on this experiment reported on the growth of the twins, the present paper on milk yield and on management practices in the herds.

Twenty-four pairs of twins survived to complete one lactation and these provide an estimate of 24%±18% for the genetic part of the difference between the herds.

Aspects of rearing of the twins and of management of the herds were examined. Twins in the high-yielding herds were served and calved earlier than those in the low-yielding group but they had a longer interval between service and calving. Differences between average heifer yields and average cow yields were from one-and-a-half to two times greater in the high- than in the low-yielding herd group. There were no obvious quantitative differences in feeding practice between the two groups although differences in body size suggest that twins in the high group were done better. For the age at first service there was a positive rank correlation of 0·30 between body size differences and subsequent differences in first lactation milk yield. There was no single factor of management or environment which appeared to be the cause of the yield difference between the herds.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , September 1960 , pp. 117 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 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

Brumby, P. J., 1959. The relationship of inheritance and environment to herd production. N.Z. J. Agric, 99: 194.Google Scholar
Gilmore, L. O., 1952. Dairy Cattle Breeding. J. B. Lippincott Co., New York.Google Scholar
Milk Marketing Board, 1947. National Milk Records, Annual Report, England and Wales, for the year ended 1st October, 1947. Ann. Rep. Milk Mktg. Bd., 1947. Thames Ditton, Surrey.Google Scholar
Milk Marketing Board, 1957. Report of the Production Division. Rep. Prod. Div. Milk Mktg. Bd., 1957, No. 7. Thames Ditton, Surrey.Google Scholar
New Zealand Dairy Board, 1955. Thirty-first Annual Report, p. 73. N.Z. Dairy Bd., Wellington, N.Z.Google Scholar
Pirchner, F., & Lush, J. L., 1959. Genetic and environmental portions of the variation among herds in butterfat production. J. Dairy Sci., 42: 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A., & Asker, A. A., 1951. The genetic history and breed-structure of British Friesian cattle. Emp. J. exp. Agric, 19: 113.Google Scholar
Robertson, A., & Rendel, J. M., 1954. The performance of heifers got by artificial insemination. J. agric. Sci., 44: 184.Google Scholar
Robertson, A., & McArthur, A. T. G., 1955. Genetic differences between bull-breeding herds. Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod., 1955: 94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. D. J., & Phillips, D. S. M., 1959. Management of high- and low-producing herds. N.Z. J. Agric, 99: 198.Google Scholar
Wiener, G., 1953. Breed structure in the pedigree Ayrshire cattle population in Great Britain. J. agric. Sci., 43: 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, G., 1957. The significance of grading-up in the Ayrshire cattle population in Great Britain. J. agric. Sci., 49: 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, G., 1959. Growth of cattle twins on dairy farms with high- and low-yielding herds. Anim. Prod., 1: 61.Google Scholar