Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:53:22.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determination of factors affecting milk yield, composition and udder morphometry of Hair and cross-bred dairy goats in a semi-intensive system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2021

Hakan Erduran  and
Birol Dag
Hakan Erduran*
Affiliation:
Department of Small Ruminant Breeding, Bahri Dağdaş International Agricultural Research Institute, Konya, Turkey
Birol Dag
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Agriculture Faculty University of Selcuk, Konya, Turkey
*
Author for correspondence: Hakan Erduran, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this Research Communication we report milk yield, milk composition and udder morphometry of Hair, Alpine × Hair F1 (AHF1), and Saanen × Hair F1 (SHF1) cross-bred goat genotypes managed in a semi-intensive system. The SHF1 genotype had significantly higher lactation milk yield, fat yield, protein yield, and electrical conductivity than other genotypes, whilst AHF1 was intermediate. The milk fat, protein, lactose, solids-non-fat and total solids contents as well as pH and density of the Hair goat milk were significantly higher than the corresponding values of the cross-bred genotypes. The highest correlation amongst udder characteristics and production was between lactation milk yield and udder volume (P < 0.01; r = from 0.63 to 0.77). The results of this study suggest that crossbreeding can have a positive effect on the milk production characteristics of local goats, thereby reducing the pressure on the ecosystem, and suggest that udder measurements, especially volume, can be a helpful tool for estimating milk yield.

Keywords

crossbreedingHair goatmilk productionudder traitssustainability of ecosystem
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 88 , Issue 3 , August 2021 , pp. 265 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hannah Dairy Research Foundation

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

Duru, M and Therond, O (2015) Livestock system sustainability and resilience in intensive production zones: which form of ecological modernization? Regional Environmental Change 15, 1651–1665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emediato, RMS, Siquera, ER, Stradiotto, MM, Maesta, SA and Fernandes, S (2008) Relationship between udder measurements and milk yield in Bergamasca ewes in Brazil. Small Ruminant Research 75, 232–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erduran, H (2014) Year comparison of milk yield and composition traits of Alpine × Hair crossbred, Saanen × Hair crossbred and pure Hair goats in rural conditions. Proceedings of the International Participated Small Ruminant Congress, Konya, Turkey 104–105.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT (2019) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (online) Website. Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL (Accessed 2 February 2021).Google Scholar
Flores-Najera, MJ, Velez-Monroy, LI, Sanchez-Duarte, JI, Cuevas-Reyes, V, Mellado, M and Rosales-Nieto, CA (2020) Milk yield and composition and body weight of offsprings of mixed-breed goats on semi-arid rangelands with different rainfall. Tropical Animal Health and Production 52, 3799–3808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ICAR (2009) International Agreement of Recording Practices. Guidelines approved by the General Assembly of the International Committee for Animal Recording, 18 June 2008. Niagara Falls, New York.Google Scholar
Inglingstad, RA, Eknaes, M, Brunborg, L, Mestawet, T, Devold, TG, Vegarud, GE and Skeie, SB (2016) Norwegian goat milk composition and cheese quality: the influence of lipid supplemented concentrate and lactation stage. International Dairy Journal 56, 13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kesici, T and Kocabas, Z (2007) Biyoistatistik. Ankara, Turkey: Ankara University Faculty of Pharmacy.Google Scholar
Margatho, G, Quintas, H, Rodriguez-Estevez, V and Simoes, J (2020) Udder morphometry and its relationship with intramammary infections and somatic cell count in Serrana goats. Animals 10, 1534–1542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mavrogenis, AP, Papachristoforou, C, Lysandrides, P and Roushias, A (1988) Environmental and genetic factors affecting udder characters and milk production in Chios sheep. Genetics Selection Evolution 20, 477–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, B and Lu, C (2019) Current status of global dairy goat production: an overview. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 32, 1219–1232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morand-Fehr, P, Fedele, V, Decandia, M and Le Frileux, Y (2007) Influence of farming and feeding systems on composition and quality of goat and sheep milk. Small Ruminant Research 68, 20–34.10.1016/j.smallrumres.2006.09.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholtens, MR, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Garrick, D, Blair, H, Lehnert, K and Snell, R (2020) Genetic parameters for total lactation yields of milk, fat, protein, and somatic cell score in New Zealand dairy goats. Animal Science Journal 91, e13310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Serradilla, JM (2001) Use of high yielding goat breeds for milk production. Livestock Production Science 71, 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TURKSTAT (2020) Turkish Statistics Institute (online) Website. Available at https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=101&locale=tr (Accessed 2 February 2021).Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Erduran and Dag supplementary material

Erduran and Dag supplementary material

Download Erduran and Dag supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 206.8 KB