Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:16:53.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of forage NDF content and body condition score on forage intake by Holstein–Friesian dairy cows in the dry period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2009

R. J. Dewhurst ,
D. W. R. Davies  and
W. J. Fisher
R. J. Dewhurst*
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
D. W. R. Davies
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
W. J. Fisher
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
Get access

Abstract

This study used individual weekly results for 160 non-lactating Holstein–Friesian dairy cows in the last 5 weeks of gestation to develop regression equations based on forage NDF content and individual body condition score (BCS) for predicting dry matter (DM) intake. Results were used from treatments in which cows received the same forage and no concentrates throughout the dry period. Ten different conserved forages, either grass silages or mixtures of grass silage and barley straw, were fed in six different experiments and forage NDF ranged from 452 to 689 g/kg DM. On average cows gained 390 g live weight per day, which is less than conceptus growth at this stage – suggesting some mobilisation of maternal tissues to support conceptus growth. BCS remained unchanged at 2.5 over the dry period. DM intake declined from 10.79 kg/day 5 weeks before calving to 9.32 kg/day in the week before calving, with half of this decline occurring in the final week before calving. Intake as a percentage of live weight was moderately predicted (R2 = 0.61 for the entire period) from measures of diet composition (NDF) and cow state (BCS). There were highly significant negative effects of forage NDF and increased BCS on DM intake. The effect of BCS on DM intake was greatly reduced in the week before calving, possibly as a result of a change in metabolic priorities from gaining to losing body reserves.

Keywords

dry cowfeed intakebody condition scoreneutral detergent fibre
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 76 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Agricultural Research Council 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough, UK.Google Scholar
Bell, AW, Burhans, WS, Overton, TR 2000. Protein nutrition in late pregnancy, maternal protein reserves and lactation performance in dairy cows. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 59, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, JM, Hampton, JH, Staples, CR, Thatcher, WW 1998. Body condition influences maintenance of persistent first wave dominant follicle in dairy cattle. Theriogenology 49, 751–760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Moorby, JM, Dhanoa, MS, Evans, RT, Fisher, WJ 2000a. Effects of altering energy and protein supply to dairy cows during the dry period. 1. Intake, body condition, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1782–1794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Davies, DWR, Fisher, WJ 2000b. Effects of varying forage type and offering additional concentrates to dry cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 120 (abstract).Google Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Davies, DWR, Fisher, WJ 2001. Extended grazing of dry cows. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Davies, DWR, Fisher, WJ 2009. Effects of silage digestibility on intake and body reserves of dry cows and performance in the first part of the next lactation. Animal (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Fisher, WJ, Tweed, JKS, Wilkins, RJ 2003. Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 1. Production responses with different levels of concentrate. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2598–2611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Moorby, JM, Dhanoa, MS, Fisher, WJ 2002. Effects of level of concentrate feeding during the second gestation of Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. 1. Feed intake and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forbes, JM 1987. Voluntary food intake and reproduction. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 46, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, DG, Van Amburgh, ME, Tylutki, TP 1999. Predicting requirements for growth, maturity and body reserves in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 1968–1977.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friggens, NC, Andersen, JB, Larsen, T, Aaes, O, Dewhurst, RJ 2004. Priming the dairy cow for lactation: a review of dry cow feeding strategies. Animal Research 53, 453–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayirli, A, Grummer, RR, Nordheim, EV, Crump, PM 2003. Models for predicting dry matter intake of Holsteins during the prefresh transition period. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 1771–1779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ingvartsen, KL, Dewhurst, RJ, Friggens, NC 2003. On the relationship between lactational performance and health: is it yield or metabolic imbalance that cause production disease in dairy cattle? A position paper. Livestock Production Science 83, 277–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingvartsen, KL, Friggens, NC, Faverdin, P 1999. Food intake regulation in late pregnancy and early lactation. British Society of Animal Science Occasional Publication 24, 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust 2007. Genstat release 10.1 reference manual. VSN International, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Moorby, JM, Dewhurst, RJ, Evans, RT, Fisher, WJ 2002. Effects of varying the energy and protein supply to dry cows on high-forage systems. Livestock Production Science 76, 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvany, P 1977. Dairy cow condition scoring. National Institute for Research in Dairying Paper No. 4468.Google Scholar
Pond, CM 1984. Physiological and ecological importance of energy storage in the evolution of lactation: evidence for a common pattern of anatomical organization of adipose tissue in mammals. In Physiological strategies in lactation (ed. M Peaker, RG Vernon and CH Knight), pp. 1–29, The Zoological Society of London, London.Google Scholar
Sangsritavong, S, Combs, DK, Sartori, R, Armentano, LE, Wiltbank, MC 2002. High feed intake increases liver blood flow and metabolism of progesterone and estradiol-17β in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2831–2842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stockdale, CR, Roche, JR 2002. A review of the energy and protein nutrition of dairy cows through their dry period and its impact on early lactation performance. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 737–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar