Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T18:37:19.263Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of genetic group and feed system on locomotion score, clinical lameness and hoof disorders of pasture-based Holstein–Friesian cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2009

G. Olmos ,
L. Boyle ,
B. Horan ,
D. P. Berry ,
P. O’Connor ,
J. F. Mee  and
A. Hanlon
G. Olmos*
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, UCD, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
L. Boyle
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
B. Horan
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
D. P. Berry
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
P. O’Connor
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
J. F. Mee
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Moorepark Dairy Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
A. Hanlon
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, UCD, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of the genetic group of the Holstein–Friesian (HF) and pasture-based feeding system (3 × 2 factorial arrangement) on locomotion score (six gait aspects scored from one to five), clinical lameness and hoof disorders within a seasonal calving milk production system. The three genetic groups compared had an average Economic Breeding Index (EBI) value of 40, 70 and 80: representing the Irish national average genetic merit (LOW-NA), high EBI genetic merit of North American ancestry (HIGH-NA) and high EBI genetic merit of New Zealand ancestry (HIGH-NZ), respectively. Two feed systems were compared: a high grass allowance, low-concentrate system typical of spring-calving herds in Ireland (control) and a high-concentrate system. Data from 126 cows collected across a complete lactation period were analysed using generalised estimating equations and survival analysis. Genetic group of HF had a significant effect on locomotion score, clinical lameness and hoof disorders. Higher EBI cows (HIGH-NA and HIGH-NZ) had lower hazard of poor locomotion score in some gait aspects (e.g. spine curvature) and lower odds of clinical lameness in the first 200 days post-calving (Odds ratios 0.08 and 0.24, respectively, relative to the LOW-NA) and some hoof disorders (e.g. traumatic lesions) compared with LOW-NA cows. The high-concentrate feed system showed a higher incidence and severity of digital dermatitis (P < 0.01). Thus, high EBI cows have better locomotion, fewer cases of clinical lameness and less-severe hoof disorders (i.e. digital dermatitis, white line disease and traumatic lesions) than low EBI cows. These findings have important implications for cow welfare and productivity.

Keywords

Holstein–Friesiangenetic groupfeed systemlamenesshoof disorders
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 96 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2008

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

Amstel, S, Shearer, J 2006. Manual for treatment and control of lameness in cattle. Blackwell, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arkins, S 1981. Lameness in dairy cows. Irish Veterinary Journal 35, 135–141 and 63–170.Google Scholar
Bergsten, C 2001. Effects of conformation and management system on hoof and leg diseases and lameness in dairy cows. Veterinary Clinics of North America Food Animal Practice 17, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP, Buckley, F, Dillon, P, Evans, RD, Veerkamp, RF 2004. Genetic relationships among linear type traits, milk yield, body weight, fertility and somatic cell count in primiparous dairy cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 43, 161–176.Google Scholar
Berry DP, Shalloo L, Cromie AR, Veerkamp RF, Dillon P, Amer PR, Kearney JF, Evans RD and Wickham B 2007. The economic breeding index: a generation on. Technical Report to the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation.Google Scholar
Boelling, D, Pollott, GE 1998. Locomotion, lameness, hoof and leg traits in cattle I. – Phenotypic influences and relationships. Livestock Production Science 54, 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boelling, D, Madsen, P, Jensen, J 2001. Genetic parameters of foot and leg traits in future AI bulls. II. Correlation to body conformation traits in daughters. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica A 51, 122–128.Google Scholar
Booth, CJ, Warnich, LD, Gröhn, YT, Maison, DO, Guard, CL, Janssen, D 2004. Effect of lameness on culling in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 4115–4122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesterton, RN, Pfeiffer, DU, Morris, RS, Tanner, CM 1989. Environmental and behavioural factors affecting the prevalence of foot lameness in New Zealand dairy herds a case-control study. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 37, 135–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarkson, MJ, Downham, WB, Faull, WB, Hughes, JW, Manson, FJ, Merritt, JB, Murray, RD, Russell, WB, Sutherst, JE, Ward, WR 1996. Incidence and prevalence of lameness in dairy cattle. Veterinary Record 138, 563–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, NB, Nordlund, KV, Oetzel, GR 2004. Environmental influences on claw horn lesions associated with laminits and subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87, E36–E46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emanuelson, U 1998. Recording of production diseases in cattle and possibilities for genetic improvements: a review. Livestock Production Science 20, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esslemont RJ and Kossaibati MA 2001. The costs of poor fertility and disease in UK dairy herds, trends in DAISY herds over 10 seasons. In DAISY research report (ed. Invervet), p. 108, UK.Google Scholar
Fatehi, J, Stella, A, Shannon, JJ, Boettcher, PJ 2003. Genetic parameters for feet and leg traits evaluated in different environments. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 661–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, LE, Hedges, VJ, Schukken, YH, Blowey, RW, Packington, AJ 2002. The impact of clinical lameness on the milk yield of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2250–2256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenough, PR, Vermunt, JJ 1991. Evaluation of subclinical laminitis in a dairy herd and observations on associated nutritional and management factors. The Veterinary Record 128, 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, DJ, Hibburt, CD, Anderson, GA, Younis, PJ, Fitspatrick, DH, Dunn, AC, Parson, IW, McBeath, NR 1988. The incidence, cost and factors associated with foot lameness in dairy cattle in South-Western Victoria. Australian Veterinary Journal 65, 171–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirst, WM, Murray, RD, Ward, WR, French, NP 2002. Generalised additive models in hierarchical logistic regression of lameness in dairy cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 55, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, WP, Hansen, LB, Chester-Jones, H 1994. Response of health care to selection for milk yield of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 77, 3137–3152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lischer, ChJ, Ossent, M, Räber, M, Geyer, H 2002. Suspensory structures and supporting tissues of the third phalanx of cows and their relevance to the development of typical sole ulcers (Rusterholz ulcers). The Veterinary Record 151, 694–698.Google Scholar
Logue, DN, Offer, JE, Kempson, SA 1993. Lameness in dairy cattle. Irish Veterinary Journal 46, 47–58.Google Scholar
Margerison, JK 2004. A review of dairy heifer rearing and its effects on heifer performance, longevity, rearing costs and farm income. In Dairying, using science to meet consumers’ needs (ed. E Kebreab, JAN Mills and DE Beever), pp. 1–35. Nottingham University Press, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
McCarthy, S, Berry, DP, Dillon, P, Rath, M, Horan, B 2007. Influence of Holstein–Friesian strain and feed system on body weight and body condition score lactation profiles. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1859–1869.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mülling CKW and Lischer CJ 2002. New aspects on etilogy and pathogenesis of laminitis in cattle. In XXII World Buiatrics Congress, Hanover, Germany, pp. 236–247.Google Scholar
Nocek, JE 1997. Bovine acidosis: implications on laminits. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1005–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Callaghan, KA, Cripps, PJ, Downham, DY, Murray, RD 2003. Subjective and objective assessment of pain and discomfort due to lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Welfare 12, 605–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politiek, RD, Distl, O, Fjeldaas, T, Heeres, J, McDaniel, BT, Nielsen, E, Peterse, DJ, Reurink, A, Strandberg, P 1986. Importance of claw quality in cattle: review and recommendations to achieve genetic improvement. Report of the EAAP working group on “claw quality in cattle”. Livestock Production Science 15, 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauw, WM, Kanis, E, Noordhuizen-Stassen, EN, Grommers, FJ 1998. Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: a review. Livestock Production Science 56, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers GW 1996. Using type for improving health of the udder and feet and legs. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Genetic Improvement of Functional Traits in Cattle (ed. INTERBULL), Bulletin 12, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 33–41.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2006. User’s guide version 9.1 statistics. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Smilie, RH, Hoblet, KH, Eastridge, ML, Weiss, WP, Schnitkey, GL, Moeschberger, ML 1999. Subclinical laminitis in dairy cows: use of severity of hood lesions to rank and evaluate herds. Veterinary Record 144, 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somers, JGCJ, Schouten, WGP, Frankena, K, Noordhuizen-Stassen, EN, Metz, JHM 2005. Development of claw traits and claw lesions in dairy cow kept on different floor systems. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 110–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sprencher, DJS, Hostetler, DE, Kaneene, JB 1997. A lameness scoring system that uses posture and gait to predict dairy cattle reproductive performance. Theriogenology 47, 1179–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranter, WP, Morris, RS 1991. A case study of lameness in three dairy herds. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 39, 88–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uribe, HA, Kennedy, BW, Martin, SW, Kelton, DF 1995. Genetic parameters for common health disorders of Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 421–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Waaij, EH, Holzhauer, M, Ellen, E, Kamphuis, C, de Jong, G 2005. Genetic parameters for claw disorders in Dutch dairy cattle and correlations with conformation traits. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 3672–3678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Dorp, TE, Boettcher, P, Shaeffer, LR 2004. Genetics of locomotion. Livestock Production Science 90, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veerkamp, RF, Dillon, P, Kelly, E, Cromie, AR, Groen, AF 2002. Dairy cattle breeding objectives combining yield, survival and calving interval for pasture-based systems in Ireland under different milk quota scenarios. Livestock Production Science 76, 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westwood, CT, Bramley, E, Lean, IJ 2003. Review of the relationship between nutrition and lameness in pasture-fed dairy cattle. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 51, 208–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winckler, C, Willen, S 2001. The reliability and repeatability of a lameness scoring system for use as an indicator of welfare in dairy cattle. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A 51, 103–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar