Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T08:49:39.344Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring diet selection in dairy cows: effect of training on choice of dietary protein level

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. J. Tolkamp  and
I. Kyriazakis
B. J. Tolkamp
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

In a 7-week experiment, the ability of lactating Holstein-Friesian cows to select a consistent diet from two similar foods differing in calculated metabolizable protein to energy (MP/ME) yield was investigated. The effect on diet selection of training through previous access to foods separately, was measured. Food intake was recorded with 28 computer-linked feeders. All foods were mixtures of grass silage and concentrates. In week 1, all feeders contained a standard food. In weeks 2 to 7 a low protein food (LP) and a high protein food (HP) were offered in 14 feeders each. Group CHOICE had access to both foods as a choice from week 2. Group TR1 was trained by access to one food during days 8 to 10 and to the other during days 11 to 13. Group TR2 received the same training as group TR1 during days 8 to 13 which was repeated once during days 14 to 19. After training, TR groups had access to both foods as a choice. Groups LOPRO and HIPRO had only access to LP or HP, respectively in weeks 2 to 5 and to both foods as a choice in weeks 6 and 7. In weeks 2 to 5 LOPRO COWS consumed less dry matter and produced less milk than CHOICE or HIPRO cows. After a week of adaptation, untrained CHOICE COWS selected 662 (s.e. 27) g HP per kg of intake, a choice that differed significantly (P < 0·01) from random. In weeks 4 to 7 TR cows established similar diet choice: 696 (s.e. 21) g HP per kg intake and the proportion selected was unaffected by length of training. The between-day variation in diet choice within cows was not affected by treatment. It is concluded that, under the circumstances tested, training was not required for cows to distinguish between two mixed foods with different calculated MP/ME ratios and to select proportions significantly different from random.

Keywords

dairy coivsfood intakefood preferencesprotein intake
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 64 , Issue 2 , April 1997 , pp. 197 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1997

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

Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. Advisory manual prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. and Wilson, R. S. 1961. The regulation of feed intake by sheep. Animal Production 3:51–62.Google Scholar
Cooper, S. D. B., Kyriazakis, I. and Nolan, J. V. 1995. Diet selection in sheep: the role of the rumen environment in the selection of a diet from two feeds that differ in their energy density. British Journal of Nutrition 74:39–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, S. D. B., Kyriazakis, I. and Oldham, J. D. 1994. The effect of late pregnancy on the diet selection made by ewes. Livestock Production Science 40: 263–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corkum, M. J., Bate, L. A., Tennessen, T. and Lirette, A. 1994. Consequences of reduction of number of feeders on feeding behaviour and stress level of feedlot steers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 41:27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elizalde, H. F. and Mayne, C. S. 1993. The effect of degree of competition per feed space on the dry matter intake and eating behaviour of dairy cows offered grass silage. In Proceedings of the third research conference, British Grassland Society, Greenmount College, pp. 137–138.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1977. The nutrient intake of laying hens given a choice of diets in relation to their protein requirement. British Poultry Science 18: 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1991. Diet selection by animals: theory and experimental design. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 50:59–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmans, G. C. and Kyriazakis, I. 1995. The idea of optimisation in animals: uses and dangers. Livestock Production Science 44:189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, J. M. 1995. Voluntary food intake and diet selection farm animals. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Forbes, J. M. and Kyriazakis, I. 1995. Food preferences in farm animals: why don't they always choose wisely? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 54:429–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis. Agricultural handbook no. 373, ARC, USDA, Washington, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Gonyou, H. W. and Stricklin, W. R. 1981. Eating behaviour of beef cattle groups; fed from a single stall or trough. Applied Animal Ethology 7:123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harb, M. Y., Reynolds, V. S. and Campling, R. C. 1985. Eating behaviour, social dominance and voluntary intake of silage in group-fed milking cattle. Grass and Forage Science 40:113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ketelaars, J. J. M. H. and Tolkamp, B. J. 1992. Toward a new theory of feed intake regulation in ruminants. 1. Causes of differences in voluntary food intake: critique of current views. Livestock Production Science 30: 269–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyriazakis, I., Emmans, G. C. and Whittemore, C. T. 1991. The ability of pigs to control their protein intake when fed in three different ways. Physiology and Behavior 50: 1197–1203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I., Leus, K., Emmans, G. C., Haley, C. S. and Oldham, J. D. 1993. The effect of breed (Large White × Landrace v. purebred Meishan) on the diets selected by pigs given a choice between two foods that differ in their crude protein content. Animal Production 56: 121–128.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Oldham, J. D. 1993. Diet selection in sheep: the ability of growing lambs to select a diet that meets their crude protein requirements. British Journal of Nutrition 69: 617–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minson, J. 1990. Forage in ruminant nutrition. Academic Press Inc., San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Newman, J. A., Parsons, A. J. and Harvey, A. 1992. Not all sheep prefer clover: diet selection revisited. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 119: 275–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nombekela, S. W., Murphy, M. R., Gonyou, H. W. and Marden, J. I. 1994. Dietary preferences in early lactating cows as affected by primary tastes and some common flavors. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 2393–2399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poppi, D. P., Gill, M. and France, J. 1994. Integration of theories of intake regulation in growing ruminants. Journal of Theoretical Biology 167: 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, S. P. and Fuller, M. F. 1995. Choice feeding systems for pigs. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. Garnsworthy, P. C. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 211–222. Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1989. Statistical methods. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1980. Genetic size-scaling rules in animal growth. Animal Production 30: 161–165.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in-vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18:104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolkamp, B. J. and Ketelaars, J. J. M. H. 1992. Towards a new theory of feed intake regulation in ruminants. 2. Costs and benefits of food consumption: an optimization approach. Livestock Production Science 30: 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F., Simm, G. and Oldham, J. D. 1995. Genotype by environment interactions: experience from Langhill. In Breeding and feeding the high genetic merit cow fed. Lawrence, T. L. J., Gordon, F. J. and Carson, A.), British Society of Animal Science occasional publication no. 19, pp. 59–66.Google Scholar
Waned, R. A., Owen, E., Naate, M. and Hosking, B. J. 1990. Feeding straw to small ruminants: effect of amount offered on intake and selection of barley straw by goats and sheep. Animal Production 51: 283–289.Google Scholar
Weller, R. F. and Phipps, R. E. 1985. Milk production from grass and maize silages. Animal Production 40: 560–561.Google Scholar
Weller, R. F. and Phipps, R. H. 1986. The effect of silage preference on the performance of dairy cows. Animal Production 42: 435.Google Scholar
Zemmelink, G. 1986. Measuring intake of tropical forages. International Dairy Federation Bulletin 196:17–21.Google Scholar