Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:17:27.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of Cubicle and Straw Yard Housing on the Behaviour, Production and Hoof Health of Dairy Cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

C J C Phillips  and
S A Schofield
C J C Phillips*
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW
S A Schofield
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An experiment is described where 40 spring-calving dairy cows were allocated to be housed in a deep straw yard or a cubicle house from November to April, in order to examine the effects on behaviour, milk production and hoof health. Cows in straw yards spent longer lying down and feeding, except during oestrus when they increased their time spent standing proportionately more than cows in cubicles. In the straw yard cows spent longer in associative behaviour during oestrus and had fewer unsuccessful mounting attempts. There were no differences in milk production or composition but cows in the straw yard lost more weight after calving. Cows in the cubicles had a reduction in heel depth, which is a predisposing factor to lameness. It is concluded that a straw yard system for dairy cows allows greater opportunity to display normal behaviour, leads to better hoof health and provides acceptable levels of production.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourcattle housingdairy cowhoof health
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , February 1994 , pp. 37 - 44
Copyright
© 1994 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Baggott, D G and Russell, A M 1981 General consideration of the factors predisposing to lameness. British Veterinary Journal 137: 115–130Google Scholar
Bell, E M and Miller, A M 1977 Lameness in dairy cattle - interim report. Technical Memorandum No. 286, East of Scotland College of Agriculture, UKGoogle Scholar
Castle, M E and Watkins, P 1984 Modern Milk Production p 184. Faber and Faber: LondonGoogle Scholar
Hahn, M V, McDaniel, B T and Wilk, J C 1986 Hoof growth and wear in Holstein cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 2148–2156CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawes Agricultural Trust 1980 Genstat V Mark 4.03. Rothamsted Experimental Station.Google Scholar
Lawton, S 1987 The Effect of Housing Type on Claw Conformation and Lameness in Dairy Cattle. BSc Dissertation. University of Wales: BangorGoogle Scholar
Leaver, J D 1983 Milk Production: Science and Practice p 134. Longman: LondonGoogle Scholar
Manson, F J and Leaver, J D 1988 The influence of concentrate amount on locomotion and clinical lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 47: 185–190Google Scholar
Maton, A, Daelmans, J and Lambrecht, J 1985 Housing of Animals ρ 108. Elsevier: AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
Mulvaney, P M 1977 Dairy cow condition scoring. National Institute for Research in Dairying Paper 4468Google Scholar
Phillips, C J C 1990 Adverse effects on reproductive performance and lameness of feeding grazing dairy cows partially on silage indoors. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 115: 253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowlands, G J, Russel, A M and Williams, L A 1983 Effects of season, herd size, management and veterinary practices on incidence of lameness. Veterinary Record 113: 441–445CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spindler, F 1973 Le beton utilise les onglour, les résultats d’experience allemande. L elevage 19: 73–75Google Scholar