Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T20:13:54.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grazing behaviour of dairy cattle selected for high and average milk yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

B. Fuerst-Waltl ,
J. Sölkner  and
M. C. Appleby
B. Fuerst-Waltl
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, University of Agricultural Sciences Vienna, Gregor Mendel-Str. 33, 1180 Vienna, Austria
J. Sölkner
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, University of Agricultural Sciences Vienna, Gregor Mendel-Str. 33, 1180 Vienna, Austria
M. C. Appleby
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, School of Agriculture Building, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

The present study was designed to examine the effects of selection for milk production as well as stage of pregnancy, on the grazing behaviour of dairy cattle. Subjects were 43 Holstein-Friesian cows from the Langhill Dairy Herd in Edinburgh. The herd consists of two genetic lines, one selected for high milk solids yield and a control line of average genetic index for milk solids yield. Animals of both genetic lines were observed as non-lactating heifers in 1992 and as first lactating and dry cows in 1993. Behaviour was recorded using scan-sampling procedures during seven observation periods at day and two periods at night. For analysis animals were grouped by their first lactation 305-day ECM (energy-corrected milk) yield for four observation periods during the day and for both night time observations animals were additionally grouped by stage of pregnancy. The majority of selected animals was in the high yielders’ group. In September 1992 and 1993 herbage intake on pasture was also investigated.

No significant influence of 305-day ECM yield on time spent grazing, lying or ruminating was found. The influence of stage of pregnancy was stronger, although results for heifers and cows were contradictory. During the day heifers which were closer to parturition spent less time grazing (P < 0.10 in two of three periods) and more time lying (P < 0.05 in one period) whereas lactating cows in late pregnancy spent more time grazing and less time lying (P < 0.01 and P < 0.10, respectively). High yielders had higher herbage intakes than low yielders but this result was significant for heifers only (P < 0.01).

Type
Research Article
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 24: Metabolic stress in dairy cows , 1999 , pp. 197 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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

Arnold, G. W. 1981. Grazing behaviour. In Grazing animals. (ed. Morley, F. H. W.), pp. 79–104. World Animal Science, Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Arnold, G. W. and Dudzinsky, M. L. 1978. Ethology of free-ranging domestic animals, pp. 1–31. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bao, J., Giller, P. S. and Kett, J. J. 1992. The effect of milk production level on grazing behaviour of Friesian cows under variable pasture conditions. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 31:23–33.Google Scholar
Brumby, P. J. 1959. The grazing behaviour of dairy cattle in relation to milk production, live weight and pasture intake. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 2:797–807.Google Scholar
Burgstaller, G. 1986. Praktische Rinderfütterung. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Fuerst-Waltl, B., Appleby, M.C., Sölkner, J. and Oldham, J. D. 1997. Grazing behaviour of dairy cattle in relation to genetic selection for milk production. Bodenkultur 48: 199–209.Google Scholar
Hancock, J. 1953. Grazing behaviour of cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts 21:1–13.Google Scholar
Hancock, J. 1954. Studies of grazing behaviour in relation to grassland management. 1. Variations in grazing habits of dairy cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 44: 420–432.Google Scholar
Hart, R. H., Bissio, J. M., Samuel, J. and Waggoner, J. W. 1993. Grazing systems, pasture size and cattle grazing behaviour, distribution and gains. Journal of Range Management 46:81–87.Google Scholar
Hodgson, J. and Wilkinson, J. M. 1967. The relationship between liveweight and herbage intake in grazing cattle. Animal Production 9:365–376.Google Scholar
Korver, S. 1988. Genetic aspects of feed intake and feed efficiency in dairy cattle: a review. Livestock Production Science 20: 1–13.Google Scholar
Langhill Farm. 1994. Langhill Farm report. Report and herd brochure from the Langhill Dairy Cattle Research Centre, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Lathrop, W. J., Kress, D. D., Havstad, K.M., Doornbos, D. E. and Ayers, E. L. 1988. Grazing behavior of rangeland beef cows differing in milk production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 21:315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, P. and Bateson, P. 1986. Measuring behaviour, an introductionary guide, pp. 54–56. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mayes, R. W., Lamb, C. S. and Colgrove, P. M. 1986. The use of dosed and herbage n-alkanes as markers for the determination of herbage intake. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 107: 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C. J.C. and Hecheimi, K. 1989. The effect of forage supplementation, herbage height and season on the ingestive behaviour of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24: 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C. J.C. and Leaver, J. D. 1985. Seasonal and diurnal variation in the grazing behaviour of dairy cows. In: Grazing (ed. Frame, J.). British Grassland Society occasional symposium no. 19, pp. 98–104.Google Scholar
Phillips, C. J.C. and Leaver, J. D. 1986. The effect of forage supplementation on the behaviour of grazing dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16: 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spedding, C. R. W., Large, R. V. and Kydd, D. D. 1966. The evaluation of herbage species by grazing animals. Proceedings of the 10th international grassland congress, Helsinki, pp. 474–483.Google Scholar
Staack, M. 1991. Effects of dietary forage and selection for milk production on the behaviour of dairy cattle. Diplomarbeit, Universität Witzenhausen, Germany.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1988. SAS /STAT user’s guide, version 6.03 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC Google Scholar
Vanzant, E. S., Cochran, R. C. and Johnson, D. E. 1991. Pregnancy and lactation in beef heifers grazing tallgrass prairie in the winter: influence on intake, forage utilization and grazing behavior. Journal of Animal Science 69: 3027–3038.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veerkamp, R. F., Simm, G. and Oldham, J. D. 1995. Genotype by environment interaction — experience from Langhill. In Breeding and feeding the high genetic merit cow. (ed. Lawrence, T. L. J., Gordon, F. J. and Carson, A.), pp. 59–66. Occasional publication no. 19 of the British Society of Animal Science, pp. 59–66.Google Scholar