Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:01:16.060Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prediction of the yields of milk constituents in dairy cows offered silage ad libitum and concentrates at a flat rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. J. Rook ,
J. D. Sutton  and
J. France
A. J. Rook
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
J. D. Sutton
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
J. France
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
Get access

Abstract

Individually recorded milk yields, yields and concentrations of milk components, food intakes and live weights of multiparous dairy cows given silage ad libitum and concentrates at a flat rate in weeks 4 to 13 of lactation and data for silage and concentrate composition from experiments conducted at four sites, were used to obtain simple correlations and multiple linear regressions of yields and concentrations of milk constituents on other variables.

Simple correlations between yields and concentrations and other variables were low. Yield terms were most highly correlated with intake terms. Milk fat concentration was most highly correlated with silage fibre concentration. Milk protein concentration was most highly correlated with digestible energy intake. The best multiple regression models including time effects accounted proportionately for 0·35 of the variation in fat yield, 0·51 in protein yield, 0·55 in lactose yield, 0·39 in total milk yield, 0·19 in fat concentration, 043 in protein concentration and 0·19 in lactose concentration. Most of these models included terms for silage intake and cow live weight which are not generally available on farms. More practical models including fewer independent variates were therefore produced. These models accounted proportionately for 0·33 of the variation in fat yield, 048 in protein yield, 0·50 in lactose yield, 0·32 in total milk yield, 0·19 in fat concentration, 0·40 in protein concentration and 0·17 in lactose concentration.

Keywords

dairy cowsfood intakemathematical modelsmilk compositionmilk yield
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , June 1992 , pp. 313 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1992

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

Atwal, A. S. and Erfle, J. D. 1990. Day to day variations in fat percent of cow's milk. Canadian Journal of Animal 70: 731–734Google Scholar
Cook, R. D. 1977. Detection of influential measures in linear regressio. Technometrics 19: 15–18.Google Scholar
Dewar, W. A. and McDonald, P. 1961. Determination of dry matter in silage by distillation with toluene. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12: 790–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emery, R. S. 1978. Feeding for increased milk protein. Journal of Dairy Science 61: 825–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1984. The effect of level of concentrate supplementation given with grass silage during the winter on the total lactation performance of autumn-calving dairy cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102: 163–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haenlein, G. F. W., Schultz, L. H. and Hansen, L. R. 1968. Relation of milk fat depressing rations and sub-clinical mastitis to milk proteins. Journal of Dairy Science 51: 535–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haigh, P. M. and Hopkins, J. R. 1977. Relationship between oven and toluene dry matter in grass silag. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28: 477–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoerl, A. E. and Kennard, R. W. 1970. Ridge regression: biased estimation for nonorthogonal problem. Technometrics 12: 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulme, D. J., Kellaway, R. C., Booth, P. J. and Bennett, L. 1986. The CAMDAIRY model for formulating and analysing dairy cow rations. Agricultural Systems 22: 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milk Marketing Board. 1987. Milk costs 1986·87. Booklet Feed use and grassland production for the dairy herd. Milk Marketing Board, Thames Ditton.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1986. Feed composition — UK tables offeed composition and nutritive for ruminants. Marlow, Chalcombe.Google Scholar
Oldham, J. D. and Sutton, J. D. 1979. Milk composition and the high yielding cow. In Feeding strategy for the high yielding dairy cow (ed. Broster, W. H. and Swan, H.), pp. 114–147. London, Granada.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. and Thompson, R. 1971. Recovery of inter-block information when block sizes are unequal. Biometrika 58: 545–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phipps, R. H., Sutton, J. D., Weller, R. F. and Bines, J. A. 1987. The effect of concentrate composition and method of silage feeding on intake and performance of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 109: 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phipps, R. H., Weller, R. F. and Bines, J. A. 1987. The influence of forage quality and concentrate level on dry matter intake and milk production of British Friesian heifers. Grass and Forage Science 42: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, A. J., Gill, M., Willink, R. D. and Lister, S. J. 1991. Prediction of voluntary intake of grass silages by lactating cows offered concentrates at a flat rat. Animal Production 52: 407–420.Google Scholar
Sloan, B. K., Rowlinson, P. and Armstrong, D. G. 1988. The influence of a formulated excess of rumen degradable protein or undegradable protein on milk production in dairy cows in early lactatio. Animal Production 46: 13–22.Google Scholar
Small, J. 1986. An evaluation through dairy cows of systems of harvesting grass for silage and the response in milk production to source of supplementary protein. Ph.D. Thesis, Queen's University, Belfast.Google Scholar
Sporndly, E. 1989. Effect of diet on milk composition and yield of dairy cows with special emphasis on milk protein conten. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 19: 99–106Google Scholar
Sutton, J. D. 1981. Concentrate feeding and milk composition. In Recent advances in animal nutrition — 1981 (ed. Haresign, W.), pp. 35–48. London, Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, J. D., Bines, J. M., Morant, S. V., Napper, D. I. and Givens, D. I. 1987. A comparison of starchy and fibrous concentrates for milk production, energy utilisation and hay intakes by Friesian cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 109: 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, J. D. and Morant, S. V. 1989. A review of the potential of nutrition to modify milk fat and protein. Livestock Production Science 23: 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, C., Aston, K. and Daley, S. R. 1985. Milk production from silage. 3. A comparison of red clover with grass silage. Animal Production 41: 23–31.Google Scholar
Thomas, C., Aston, K., Tayler, J. C., Daley, S. R. and Osbourn, D. F. 1981. Milk production from silage. 1. The influence of an additive containing formaldehyde and formic acid on the response of lactating heifers and cows to supplementary protein. Animal Production 32: 285–295.Google Scholar
Thomas, C., Daley, S. R., Aston, K. and Hughes, P. M. 1981. Milk production from silage. 2. The influence of the digestibility of silage made from the primary growth of perennial ryegrass. Animal Production 33: 7–13.Google Scholar
Tyrrell, H. F. and Reid, J. T. 1965. Prediction of the energy value of cows' mil. Journal of Dairy Science 48: 1215–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar