Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:40:15.502Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modelling feeding strategies to improve milk production, rumen function and discomfort of the early lactation dairy cow supplemented with fodder beet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2020

A. E. Fleming Open the ORCID record for A. E. Fleming [Opens in a new window] ,
D. Dalley ,
R. H. Bryant ,
G. R. Edwards  and
P. Gregorini
A. E. Fleming*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln7647, Christchurch, New Zealand
D. Dalley
Affiliation:
DairyNZ Ltd, Canterbury Agriculture and Science Centre, Lincoln University, Gerald Street, PO Box 85066, Lincoln7647, Canterbury, New Zealand
R. H. Bryant
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln7647, Christchurch, New Zealand
G. R. Edwards
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln7647, Christchurch, New Zealand
P. Gregorini
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln7647, Christchurch, New Zealand
*
Author for correspondence: A. E. Fleming, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Feeding fodder beet (FB) to dairy cows in early lactation has recently been adopted by New Zealand dairy producers despite limited definition of feeding and grazing management practices that may prevent acute and sub-acute ruminal acidosis (SARA). This modelling study aimed to characterize changes of rumen pH, milk production and total discomfort from FB and define practical feeding strategies of a mixed herbage and FB diet. The deterministic, dynamic and mechanistic model MINDY was used to compare a factorial arrangement of FB allowance (FBA), herbage allowance (HA) and time of allocation. The FBA were 0, 2, 4 or 7 kg dry matter (DM)/cow/day (0FB, 2FB, 4FB and 7FB, respectively) and HA were 18, 24 or 48 kg DM/cow/day above ground. All combinations were offered either in the morning or afternoon or split across two equal meals. Milk production from 2FB diets was similar to 0FB but declined by 4 and 16% when FB increased to 4 and 7 kg DM, respectively. MINDY predicted that 7FB would result in SARA and that rumen conditions were sub-optimal even at moderate FBA (pH < 5.6 for 160 and 90 min/day, 7FB and 4FB respectively). Pareto front analysis identified the best compromise between high milk production and low total discomfort was achieved by splitting the 2FB diet into two equal meals fed each day with 48 kg DM herbage. However, due to low milk response and high risk of acidosis, it is concluded that FB is a poor supplement for lactating dairy cows.

Keywords

Fodder beetmilk productionminimum total discomfortmodellingsub-acute ruminal acidosis
Type
Animal Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 158 , Issue 4 , May 2020 , pp. 313 - 325
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Auldist, MJ, Marett, LC, Greenwood, JS, Hannah, M, Jacobs, JL and Wales, WJ (2013) Effects of different strategies for feeding supplements on milk production responses in cows grazing a restricted pasture allowance. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1218–1231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baldwin, RL (1995) Modelling Ruminant Digestion and Metabolism 2–6 Boundary Row. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Bargo, F, Muller, LD, Delahoy, JE and 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
Broderick, GA and Radloff, WJ (2004) Effect of molasses supplementation on the production of lactating dairy cows fed diets based on alfalfa and corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 2997–3009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broderick, GA, Luchini, ND, Reynal, SM, Varga, GA and Ishler, VA (2008) Effect on production of replacing dietary starch with sucrose in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 4801–4810.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, KC, Di, HJ and Moir, JL (2013) Nitrogen losses from the soil/plant system: a review. Annals of Applied Biology 162, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakwizira, E, Meenken, ED, Maley, S, George, M, Hubber, R, Morton, J and Stafford, A (2013) Effects of potassium, sodium and chloride fertiliser rates on fodder beet yield and quality in Canterbury. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 75, 261–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakwizira, E, de Ruiter, JM and Maley, S (2016) Growth and nitrogen partitioning of fodder beet crops grown under varying amounts of water and nitrogen in shallow soils. Agronomy New Zealand 46, 85–97.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, DG, Robertson, S and Choung, JJ (1993) Sugars versus starch as supplements to grass silage: effects on ruminal fermentation and the supply of microbial protein to the small intestine, estimated from the urinary excretion of purine derivatives, in sheep. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 63, 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, P, Givens, DI and Brunnen, JM (1987) The chemical composition, digestibility and energy value of fodder-beet roots. Animal Feed Science and Technology 18, 225–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, DC, Stockdale, CR and Doyle, PT (2006) Feeding an energy supplement with white clover silage improves rumen fermentation, metabolisable protein utilisation, and milk production in dairy cows. Australian journal of Agricultural Research 57, 367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosse, S and Gleeson, P (1986) Effects of two levels of concentrate feeding post-calving on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 321–326.Google Scholar
Dalley, DE, Moate, PJ, Roche, JR and Grainger, C (1999) Dry matter intake, nutrient selection and milk production of dairy cows grazing rainfed perennial pastures at different herbage allowances in spring. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 39, 923–931.Google Scholar
Dalley, DE, Malcolm, BJ, Chakwizira, E and de Ruiter, JM (2017) Range of quality characteristics of New Zealand forages and implications for reducing the nitrogen leaching risk from grazing dairy cows. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 60, 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalley, DE, Waugh, D, Griffin, A, Higham, C, De Ruiter, JM and Malcolm, B (2019) A comparison of fodder beet and maize silage as supplements to pasture in late lactation to increase milk production and reduce urinary nitrogen excretion. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 63, 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P, Crosse, S, O'brien, B and Mayes, RW (2002) The effect of forage type and level of concentrate supplementation on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows in early lactation. Grass and Forage Science 57, 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksson, T, Ciszuk, P, Murphy, M and Wilson, AH (2004) Ruminal digestion of leguminous forage, potatoes and fodder beets in batch culture: II. Microbial protein production. Animal Feed Science and Technology 111, 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, E and Messerschmidt, U (2017) Sugar beets as a substitute for grain for lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology 8, 25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleming, AE, Edwards, G, Bryant, RH, Dalley, D and Gregorini, P (2018) Milk production and milk fatty acid composition of grazing dairy cows supplemented with fodder beet. New Zealand Journal of Animal Science and Production 78, 6–10.Google Scholar
Forbes, JM (1996) Integration of regulatory signals controlling forage intake in Ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 74, 3029–3035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forbes, JM (2007) A personal view of how ruminant animals control their intake and choice of food: minimal total discomfort. Nutrition Research Reviews 20, 132–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forbes, JM and Provenza, FD (2000). Integration of learning and metabolic signals into a theory of dietary choice and food intake. In Cronje, P (ed). Ruminant Physiology: Digestion, Metabolism, Growth and Reproduction. Wallingford UK: CAB international, pp. 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, SC, Pedernera, M, Fulkerson, WJ, Horadagoda, A and Nandra, K (2007) Feeding concentrates based on individual cow requirements improves the yield of milk solids in dairy cows grazing restricted pasture. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 502–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gozho, GN, Plaizier, JC, Krause, DO, Kennedy, AD and Wittenberg, KM (2005) Subacute ruminal acidosis induces ruminal lipopolysaccharide endotoxin release and triggers an inflammatory response. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1399–1403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregorini, P (2012) Diurnal grazing pattern: its physiological basis and strategic management. Animal Production Science 52, 416–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregorini, P, Beukes, PC, Romera, AJ, Levy, G and Hanigan, MD (2013) A model of diurnal grazing patterns and herbage intake of a dairy cow, MINDY: model description. Ecological Modelling 270, 11–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregorini, P, Villalba, JJ, Provenza, FD, Beukes, PC and Forbes, JM (2015) Modelling preference and diet selection patterns by grazing ruminants: a development in a mechanistic model of a grazing dairy cow, MINDY. Animal Production Science 55, 360–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregorini, P, Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ, Beukes, PC and Forbes, MJ (2018a) Dynamics of forage ingestion, oral processing and digesta outflow from the rumen: a development in a mechanistic model of a grazing ruminant, MINDY. The Journal of Agricultural Science 156, 980–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregorini, P, Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ, Beukes, PC and Forbes, MJ (2018b) Diurnal patterns of urination and drinking by grazing ruminants: a development in a mechanistic model of a grazing ruminant, MINDY. The Journal of Agricultural Science 156, 71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, MB and Huntington, GB (2008) Nutrient synchrony: sound in theory, elusive in practice. Journal of Animal Science 86(Suppl), E287–E292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hegarty, RS and Gerdes, R (1999) Hydrogen production and transfer in the rumen. Recent advances in Animal Nutrition in Australia 12, 37–44.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, W (1976) Influence of the composition of the ration and the feeding frequency on pH regulation in the rumen and on feed intake in ruminants. Livestock Production Science 3, 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khafipour, E, Krause, DO and Plaizier, JC (2009) Alfalfa pellet-induced subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy cows increases bacterial endotoxin in the rumen without causing inflammation. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1712–1724.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khalili, H and Huhtanen, P (1991) Sucrose supplements in cattle given grass silage based diet. 2. Digestion of cell wall carbohydrates. Animal Feed Science and Technology 33, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleen, JL, Hooijer, GA, Rehage, J and Noordhuizen, JPTM (2003) Subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA): a review. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases 50, 406–414.Google ScholarPubMed
Matthews, KB, Buchan, K, Sibbald, AR and Craw, S (2002). Using soft-systems methods to evaluate the outputs from multi-objective land use planning tools. Paper presented at the Integrated Assessment and Decision Support: Proceedings of The 1st Biennial Meeting of the Int. Environ. Modelling and Software Society.Google Scholar
Nagaraja, TG, Bartley, EE, Fina, LR and Anthony, HD (1978) Relationship of rumen Gram-negative bacteria and free endotoxin to lactic acidosis in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 47, 1329–1337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nocek, JE (1997) Bovine acidosis: implications on laminitis. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1005–1028.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oba, M (2011) Effects of feeding sugars on productivity of lactating dairy cows. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 91, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, FN, Secrist, DS, Hill, WJ and Gill, DR (1998) Acidosis in cattle: a review. Journal of Animal Science 76, 275–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pacheco, D, Muetzel, S, Lewis, S, Dalley, D, Bryant, M and Waghorn, GC (2020) Rumen digesta and products of fermentation in cows fed varying proportions of fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) with fresh pasture or silage or straw. Animal Production Science 60, 524–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penner, GB and Oba, M (2009) Increasing dietary sugar concentration may improve dry matter intake, ruminal fermentation, and productivity of dairy cows in the postpartum phase of the transition period. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 3341–3353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penner, GB, Beauchemin, KA and Mutsvangwa, T (2007) Severity of ruminal acidosis in primiparous Holstein cows during the periparturient period. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 365–375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penno, JW, Macdonald, KA, Holmes, CW, Davis, SR, Wilson, GF, Brookes, IM and Thom, ER (2006a) Responses to supplementation by dairy cows given low pasture allowances in different seasons 1. Pasture intake and substitution. Animal Science 92, 661–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penno, JW, Macdonald, KA, Holmes, CW, Davis, SR, Wilson, GF, Brookes, IM and Thom, ER (2006b) Responses to supplementation by dairy cows given low pasture allowances in different seasons 2. Milk production. Animal Science 92, 671–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, CJC (1988) The use of conserved forage as a supplement for grazing dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 43, 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaizier, JC, Krause, DO, Gozho, GN and McBride, BW (2008) Subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy cows: the physiological causes, incidence and consequences. Veterinary Journal 176, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prendergast, SL and Gibbs, SJ (2015) A comparison of microbial protein synthesis in beef steers fed ad libitum winter ryegrass or fodder beet. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 75, 251–256.Google Scholar
Provenza, FD (1995) Postingestive feedback as an elementary determinant of food preference and intake in ruminants. Rangeland Ecology & Management/Journal of Range Management Archives 48, 2–17.Google Scholar
Provenza, FD (1996) Acquired aversions as the basis for varied diets of ruminants foraging on rangelands. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2010–2020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roche, JR, Lee, JM, Aspin, PW, Sheahan, AJ, Burke, CR, Kolver, ES, Sugar, B and Napper, AR (2006) Supplementation with concentrates either pre-or post-partum does not affect milk production when diets are isoenergetic. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 66, 416–422.Google Scholar
Saldias, B and Gibbs, SJ (2016) Brief communication: ad libitum fodder-beet and pasture beef finishing systems–intake, utilisation, grazing behaviour and liveweight gains. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 76, 87–89.Google Scholar
Satter, LD and Roffler, RE (1975) Nitrogen requirement and utilization in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 58, 1219–1237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stockdale, CR, Callaghan, A and Trigg, TE (1987) Feeding high energy supplements to pasture-fed dairy cows. Effects of stage of lactation and level of supplement. Crop and Pasture Science 38, 927–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockdale, CR, Currie, R and Trigg, TE (1990) Effects of pasture and supplement quality on the responses of lactating dairy cows to high energy supplements. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 30, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trevaskis, LM, Fulkerson, WJ and Nandra, KS (2004) Effect of time of feeding carbohydrate supplements and pasture on production of dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 85, 275–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waghorn, GC, Collier, K, Bryant, M and Dalley, DE (2018) Feeding fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) with either barley straw or pasture silage to non-lactating dairy cows. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 66, 178–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waghorn, GC, Law, N, Bryant, M, Pacheco, D and Dalley, D (2019) Digestion and nitrogen excretion by Holstein–Friesian cows in late lactation offered ryegrass-based pasture supplemented with fodder beet. Animal Production Science 59, 1261–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zebeli, Q and Metzler-Zebeli, BU (2012) Interplay between rumen digestive disorders and diet-induced inflammation in dairy cattle. Research in Veterinary Science 93, 1099–1108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zebeli, Q, Dijkstra, J, Tafaj, M, Steingass, H, Ametaj, BN and Drochner, W (2008) Modeling the adequacy of dietary fiber in dairy cows based on the responses of ruminal pH and milk fat production to composition of the diet. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 2046–2066.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed