Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:26:53.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Meta-analysis of the impact of stocking rate on the productivity of pasture-based milk production systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2010

B. McCarthy ,
L. Delaby ,
K. M. Pierce ,
F. Journot  and
B. Horan
B. McCarthy
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
L. Delaby
Affiliation:
INRA, AgroCampus Ouest, UMR 1080, Production du Lait, F-35590 Saint-Gilles, France
K. M. Pierce
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
F. Journot
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
B. Horan*
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study is to quantify the milk production response per cow and per hectare (ha) for an incremental stocking rate (SR) change, based on a meta-analysis of published research papers. Suitable experiments for inclusion in the database required a comparison of at least two SRs under the same experimental conditions in addition to details on experimental length and milk production results per cow and per ha. Each additional increased SR treatment was also described in terms of the relative milk production change per cow and per ha compared to the lower base SR (b_SR). A database containing 109 experiments of various lengths with 131 comparisons of SR was sub-divided into Type I experiments (common experimental lengths) and Type II experiments (variable experimental lengths). Actual and proportional changes in milk production according to SR change were analysed using linear mixed model procedures with study included as a random effect in the model. Low residual standard errors indicated a good precision of the predictive equations with the exception of proportional change in milk production per cow. For all milk yield variables analysed, the results illustrate that while production per cow is reduced, a strong positive relationship exists between SR and milk production per ha. An SR increase of one cow/ha resulted in a decrease in daily milk yield per cow of 7.4% and 8.7% for Type I and Type II data, respectively, whereas milk yield per ha increased by 20.1% and 19.6%, respectively. Within the Type II data set, a one cow/ha increase in SR also resulted in a 15.1% reduction in lactation length (equivalent to 42 days). The low predictability of proportional change in milk production per cow according to the classical SR definition of cows per ha over a defined period suggests that SR may be more appropriately defined in terms of the change in available feed offered per animal within each treatment.

Keywords

dairy cowstocking ratepasture-based systemsmeta-analysis
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 5 , 04 April 2011 , pp. 784 - 794
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

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

Ahlborn, G, Bryant, AM 1992. Production, economic-performance and optimum stocking rates of Holstein–Friesian and Jersey cows. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 52, 7–10.Google Scholar
Baker, AMC, Leaver, JD 1986. Effect of stocking rate in early season on dairy cow performance and sward characteristics. Grass and Forage Science 41, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bargo, F, Muller, LD, Delahoy, JE, Cassidy, TW 2002. Milk response to concentrate supplementation of high producing dairy cows grazing at two pasture allowances. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1777–1792.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castle, ME, MacDaid, E, Watson, JN 1972. Some factors affecting milk production from grassland at the Hannah Institute, 1950–1970. Grass and Forage Science 27, 87–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delaby, L, Peyraud, JL, Bouttier, A, Peccatte, JR 1998. Effet d’une réduction simultanée de la fertilisation azotée et du chargement sur les performances des vaches laitières et la valorisation du pâturage. Annales de Zootechnie 47, 17–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P 2006. Achieving high dry-matter intake from pasture with grazing dairy cows. In Fresh herbage for dairy cattle (ed. A Elgersma, J Dijkstra and S Tamminga), vol. 18, pp. 1–26. Wageningen UR, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dillon, P, Crosse, S, Stakelum, G, Flynn, F 1995. The effect of calving date and stocking rate on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 50, 286–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P, Berry, DP, Evans, RD, Buckley, F, Horan, B 2006. Consequences of genetic selection for increased milk production in European seasonal pasture-based systems of milk production. Livestock Production Science 99, 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P, Hennessy, T, Shalloo, L, Thorne, F, Horan, B 2008. Future outlook for the Irish dairy industry: a study of international competitiveness, influence of international trade reform and requirement for change. International Journal of Dairy Technology 61, 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faverdin, P, Delagarde, R, Delaby, L, Meschy, F 2007. Alimentation des vaches laitières. In Alimentation des bovins, ovins et caprins (ed. J Agzbriel), Tables INRA 2007, pp. 23–55. QUAE Editions, Versailles, France.Google Scholar
Glass, GV 1976. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Education Researcher 5, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoden, A, Peyraud, JL, Muller, A, Delaby, L, Faverdin, P 1991. Simplified rotational grazing management of dairy cows: effects of rates of stocking and concentrate. Journal of Agricultural Science 116, 417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, CW, Wilson, GF, Kuperus, W, Buvaneshwa, S, Wickham, BW 1993. Liveweight, feed intake and feed conversion efficiency of lactating dairy cows. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 53, 95–100.Google Scholar
Holmes, CW, Wilson, GF, Mackenzie, DDS, Flux, DS, Brookes, IM, Davey, AWF 2002. Milk production from pasture, 3rd edition. Butterworths of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Horan, B, Dillon, P, Faverdin, P, Delaby, L, Buckley, F, Rath, M 2005. The interaction of strain of Holstein–Friesian cows and pasture-based feed systems on milk yield, body weight, and body condition score. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1231–1243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Journet, M, Demarquilly, C 1979. Grazing. In Feeding strategy for the high yielding dairy cow (ed. WH Broster and H Swan), pp. 295–321. Granada Publishing, London, UK.Google Scholar
Lean, IJ, Rabiee, AR, Duffield, TF, Dohoo, IR 2009. Invited review: use of meta-analysis in animal health and reproduction: methods and applications. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 3545–3565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Du, YLP, Baker, RD, Newberry, RD 1981. Herbage intake and milk production by grazing dairy cows. 3. The effect of grazing severity under continuous stocking. Grass and Forage Science 36, 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopez-Villalobos, N, Berry, DP, Horan, B, Buckley, F, Kennedy, J, O’Donovan, M, Shalloo, L, Dillon, P 2008. Genetics of residual energy intake in Irish grazing dairy cows. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 68, 88–91.Google Scholar
Macdonald, KA, Penno, JW, Lancaster, JAS, Roche, JR 2008. Effect of stocking rate on pasture production, milk production, and reproduction of dairy cows in pasture-based systems. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 2151–2163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McFeely, PC, Browne, D, Carty, O 1975. Effect of grazing interval and stocking rate on milk production and pasture yield. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 309–319.Google Scholar
McGrath, JM, Penno, JW, Macdonald, KA, Carter, WA 1998. Using nitrogen fertiliser to increase dairy farm profitability. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 58, 117–120.Google Scholar
McMeekan, CP 1964. The rate of stocking. In Grass to milk, 3rd edition, pp. 83–88. The New Zealand Dairy Exporter, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
McMeekan, CP, Walshe, MJ 1963. The inter-relationships of grazing method and stocking rate in the efficiency of pasture utilisation by dairy cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science 61, 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michell, P, Fulkerson, WJ 1987. Effect of grazing intensity in spring on pasture growth, composition and digestibility, and on milk production by dairy cows. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 27, 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miglior, F, Muir, BL, Van Doormaal, BJ 2005. Selection indices in Holstein cattle of various countries. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1255–1263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mott, GO 1960. Grazing pressure and the measurement of pasture production. In Proceedings of the 8th International Grassland Congress (ed. CL Skidmore), pp. 606–611. Alden Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Penno, J 1999. Stocking rate for optimum profit. In Proceedings of the South Island Dairy Event (ed. D Elvidge), pp. 25–43. Christchurch, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Peyraud, JL, Delagarde, R, Delaby, L 2001. Relationship between milk production, grass dry matter intake and grass digestion. In Proceedings of the Irish Grassland Association Dairy Conference (ed. D McGilloway), pp. 1–19. Cork, Ireland.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Schmidely, P, Daudin, JJ, St-Pierre, NR 2008. Meta-analyses of experimental data in animal nutrition. Animal 2, 1203–1214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Institute of Analysis (SAS) 2006. Users guide: statistics. Version 9.1. SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
St-Pierre, NR 2001. Invited review: integrating quantitative findings from multiple studies using mixed model methodology. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 741–755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed