Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:25:38.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effect of genetic merit for milk production and concentrate feeding level on the reproductive performance of Holstein-Friesian cows in a grass-based system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

J. Kennedy
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
P. Dillon
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
K. O’Sullivan
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
F. Buckley
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
M. Rath
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
Get access

Abstract

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect on reproductive performance of varying level of concentrate supplementation with both high and medium genetic merit cows in a spring calving grass-based system of milk production. The effect of year, cow genetic merit for milk production and concentrate feeding level on milk production, body condition score, live weight, blood metabolites and dry-matter (DM) intake were studied. A repeated measures model with a factorial arrangement of genetic merit and concentrate feeding level was used to do this. Associations between these variables and pregnancy to first service (PREG1), pregnancy to first and second service (PREG12) and overall pregnancy (PREG) rates were assessed using logistic regressions for year 2.

Cows were grouped into high (HM) and medium (MM) genetic merit based on their pedigree indices for milk production (PD milk). The HM cows had a PD milk of + 276 (s.d. 100) kg, while the MM cows had mean PD milk of + 81 (s.d. 95) kg. Within genetic merit groupings, cows were assigned to one of three concentrate feeding levels; low (LC), 376 kg; medium (MC), 810 kg; and high (HC), 1540 kg of concentrate per cow per lactation. In year 1, all 78 cows were second lactation animals, while in year 2, 71 cows (previously in year 1) were third lactation and 12 second lactation. All cows calved between February and April, and were presented for rebreeding from late April until late July each year.

When treatment means were compared, genotype and concentrate feeding levels had no significant effects on reproductive performance while year was significant for most parameters. Comparing year 2 to year 1 pregnancy rate to first service (P 0•001; 37 v. 64%), pregnancy rate to first and second service (P < 0•05; 64 v. 81%), overall pregnancy rate (P < 0•05; 78 v. 92%) were lower. Also in year 2, cows had significantly higher milk yields at first insemination (36•9 v. 32•3 kg per cow per day), greater live-weight losses from calving to first insemination (-86 v. –53 kg per cow), lower live-weight gain in the 90 days after their first insemination (+ 24•6 v. + 34•2 kg per cow), higher DM intake (20•6 v. 17•3 kg DM per cow per day) and lower plasma glucose concentrations (3•18 v. 3•61 mmol/l) than in year 1.

In year 2, there were significant negative associations between the likelihood of PREG12 and both PD milk and live-weight gain in the 90 days after first insemination. The results of this study indicate that continued selection for increased milk production, resulting in greater partitioning of energy to milk production rather than body reserves will reduce reproductive performance and offering higher levels of concentrate supplementation may not alleviate this problem.

Type
Ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2003

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

Arendonk, J. A. M. van, Nieuwhof, G. J., Vos, H. and Korver, S. 1991. Genetic aspects of feed intake and efficiency in lactating dairy heifers. Livestock Production Science 29: 263275.Google Scholar
Bauman, D. E. and Currie, W. B. 1980. Partitioning of nutrients during pregnancy and lactation: a review of mechanisms involving homeostasis and homeorhesis. Journal of Dairy Science 63: 15141529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beever, D. E., Cammell, S. B., Sutton, J. D. and Humphries, D. J. 1998. Energy metabolism in high yielding dairy cows. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, 1998, p. 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, D. P., Buckley, F., Dillon, P., Evans, R. D., Rath M. and Veerkamp, R. F. 2003. Genetic relationships among body condition score, body weight, milk yield and fertility in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science In press.Google ScholarPubMed
Buckley, F., Dillon, P., Crosse, S., Flynn, F. and Rath, M. 2000. The performance of Holstein-Friesian dairy cows of high and medium merit for milk production on grass based feeding systems. Livestock Production Science 64: 107119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, F., O’Sullivan, K., Mee, J. F., Evans, R. D. and Dillon, P. 2003. Relationships among milk yield, body condition, cow weight and reproduction in spring-calved Holstein-Friesians. Journal of Dairy Science In press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, W. R. and Smith, R. D. 1989. Interrelationships between energy balance and postpartum reproductive function in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 767783.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamberlain, A. T. and Wilkinson, J. M. 1998. Assessing nutritional status. In Feeding the dairy cow, pp. 159166. Chalcombe Publications, Lincoln, UK.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. T. 1982. An interpretation of responses in milk yield of dairy cows to increased levels of feeding during late pregnancy. Proceedings of the 14th Australian Society of Animal Production conference, pp. 409412. Pergamon Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
Dillon, P., Crosse, S., Stakelum, G. and Flynn, F. 1995. The effect of calving date and stocking rate on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 50: 286299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P. and Stakelum, G. 1989. Herbage and dosed alkanes as a grass measurement technique for dairy cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 28: 104 (abstr. ).Google Scholar
Evans, R. D., Buckley, F., Dillon, P. and Veerkamp, R. F. 2002. Genetic parameters for production and fertility in spring calving Irish dairy cattle. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 41: 4354.Google Scholar
Faust, M. A., McDaniel, B. T., Robison, O. W. and Britt, J. H. 1988. Environmental and yield effects on reproduction in primiparous Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 30923099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, C. P., McCoy, M. A., Lennox, S. D., Catney, D. C. and Gordon, F. J. 2003. Nutrient utilisation and energy balance associated with two contrasting winter milk production systems for high genetic merit autumn calving dairy cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 41: 5570.Google Scholar
Fry, J. C. 1999. Biological data analysis. A practical approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Fulkerson, W. J., Wilkins, J., Dobos, R. C., Hough, G. M., Goddard, M. E. and Davison, T. 2001. Reproductive performance in Holstein-Friesian cows in relation to genetic merit and level of feeding when grazing pasture. Animal Science 73: 397406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grohn, Y. T., Hertl, J. A. and Harman, J. I. 1994. Effect of early lactation milk yield on reproductive disorders in dairy cows. American Journal of Veterinary Research 55: 15211528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoekstra, J., Lugt, A. W., Werf, J. H. J. van der and Ouweltjes, W. 1994. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for milk production and fertility traits in upgraded dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science 40: 225232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosmer, D. W. and Lemeshow, S. 1989. Applied logistic regression. Wiley-Interscience, John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J., Dillon, P., Faverdin, P., Delaby, L., Buckley, F. and Rath, M. 2002. The influence of cow genetic merit on response to concentrate supplementation in a grass based system. Journal of Animal Science 75: 433446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E. and Nizum, A. 1998. Collinearity. In Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods, third edition, pp. 237240. Duxberry Press. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Pacific Grove, California.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1997. Genstat 5, release 4. 1. IACR-Rothamsted, Harpenden.Google Scholar
Lean, I. J., Galland, J. C. and Scott, J. L. 1989. Relationships between fertility, peak milk yields and lactational persistency in dairy cows. Theriogenology 31: 10931103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lean, I. J., Harver, T. B., Troutt, H. F., Bruss, M. L., Galland, J. C., Baldwin, R. L., Holmberg, C. A. and Weaver, L. D. 1992. Time series cross correlation analysis of post parturient relationships among serum metabolites and yield variables in Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 75: 18911900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. and Somerville, S. 1976. Condition scoring of cattle, revised edition. East of Scotland College of Agriculture, bulletin no. 6.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: 161170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morten, J. 2000. The Incalf Project. Progress report no. 2. Dairy Research and Development Corporation, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Nagelkerke, N. J.D. 1991. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 78: 691692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, M. 2000. The relationship between the performance of dairy cows and grassland management on intensive dairy farms in Ireland. Ph. D. thesis, University College Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Philipsson, J. 1981. Genetic aspects of female fertility in dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science 8: 307319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryce, J. E., Esslemont, R. J., Thompson, R., Veerkamp, R. F., Kossaibati, M. A. and Simm, G. 1998. Estimation of genetic parameters using health, fertility and production data from a management recording system for dairy cattle. Animal Science 66: 577584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryce, J. E. and Veerkamp, R. F. 2001. The incorporation of fertility indices in genetic improvement programmes. In Fertility in the high producing dairy cow (ed. Diskin, M. G.), British Society of Animal Science occasional publication no. 26, pp. 237249.Google Scholar
Pursley, J. R., Wiltbank, M. C., Stevenson, J. S., Ottobre, J. S., Garverick, H. A. and Anderson, L. L. 1997. Pregnancy rates per artificial insemination for cows and heifers inseminated at a synchronised ovulation or synchronised oestrus. Journal of Dairy Science 80: 295300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J.J. 1986. Changes in body composition during pregnancy and lactation. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 45: 7180 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical methods, seventh edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1991. User’s guide: statistics. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences. 1999. SPSS regression models, version 10. 0. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Sutter, F. and Beever, D. E. 2000. Energy and nitrogen metabolism in Holstein-Friesian cows during early lactation. Journal of Animal Science 70: 503514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F., Simm, G. and Oldham, J. D. 1994. Effects of interaction between genotype and feeding system on milk production, feed intake, efficiency and body tissue mobilization in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 39: 229241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar