Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:47:39.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

First description of milk flow traits in Tunisian dairy dromedary camels under an intensive farming system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2014

Moufida Atigui ,
Mohamed Hammadi ,
Ahmed Barmat ,
Mohamed Farhat ,
Touhami Khorchani  and
Pierre-Guy Marnet
Moufida Atigui
Affiliation:
Livestock and Wildlife Laboratory, Arid Lands Institute, 4119 Médenine, Tunisia AGROCAMPUS OUEST, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35042 Rennes, France INRA, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35042 Rennes, France Université européenne de Bretagne, France
Mohamed Hammadi
Affiliation:
Livestock and Wildlife Laboratory, Arid Lands Institute, 4119 Médenine, Tunisia
Ahmed Barmat
Affiliation:
Livestock and Wildlife Laboratory, Arid Lands Institute, 4119 Médenine, Tunisia
Mohamed Farhat
Affiliation:
Livestock and Wildlife Laboratory, Arid Lands Institute, 4119 Médenine, Tunisia
Touhami Khorchani
Affiliation:
Livestock and Wildlife Laboratory, Arid Lands Institute, 4119 Médenine, Tunisia
Pierre-Guy Marnet*
Affiliation:
AGROCAMPUS OUEST, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35042 Rennes, France INRA, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35042 Rennes, France Université européenne de Bretagne, France
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to evaluate milking ability in dromedary camels, 124 milk flow curves were registered during morning milking of 20 dairy Maghrebi dromedary camels. Animals were in lactations 1–8, were 6–19 years old and were 4–15 months of their current lactation. Milk flow curves were recorded using an electronic milk flow meter (Lactocorder®). Milk flow curves were classified in three typical patterns: type 1 represents curves with one high and short peak of milk flow; type 2 represents curves with a moderate mean milk flow rate during a large plateau phase; and type 3 represents curves with lower mean milk flow rate and a relatively longer milking duration. The ratio of the different milk flow patterns in the population evaluated was 40:38:22% for types 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The highest milk yield per milking, average and peak milk flow were observed in camels with type 1 curves (4·24 kg, 1·49 and 3·54 kg/min, respectively) followed by type 2 animals (3·30 kg, 1·12 and 2·12 kg/min, respectively) and lastly type 3 curves (2·34 kg, 0·65 and 1·23 kg/min, respectively). This study confirmed that a major proportion of dromedary camels have a suitable machine milking ability. Nevertheless, our results suggest that pre-stimulation and improving the milking process may improve milking efficiency and guarantee a more complete and rapid emptying of the udder.

Keywords

Camelmachine milkingmilk flow traits
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , May 2014 , pp. 173 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2014 

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

Agrawal, RP, Swami, SC, Beniwal, R, Kochar, DK & Kothari, RP 2003 Effect of camel milk on glycemic control, risk factors and diabetes quality of life in type 1 diabetes: a randomized prospective controlled study. Journal of Camel Practice and Research 10 45–50Google Scholar
Ambord, S, Stoffel, HM & Bruckmaier, MR 2010 Teat anatomy affects requirements for udder preparation in Mediterranean buffaloes. Journal of Dairy Research 77 468–473Google Scholar
Atigui, M, Hammadi, M, Barmat, A, Khorchani, T & Marnet, PG 2011 Effects of vacuum level and pulsation rate on milk flow traits in Tunisian Maghrebi camels (Camelus dromedarius). In Book of Abstracts of the 62nd Annual Meeting of EAAP, Stavanger, Norway, Vol. 17, p. 298Google Scholar
Ayadi, M, Hammadi, M, Khorchani, T, Barmat, A, Atigui, M & Caja, G 2009 Effects of milking interval and cisternal udder evaluation in Tunisian Maghrebi dairy dromedaries (Camelus dromedarius L.). Journal of Dairy Science 92 1452–1459Google Scholar
Bava, L, Sandrucci, A, Tamburini, A & Zucali, M 2007 Milk flow traits of buffalo cows in intensive farming systems. Italian Journal of Animal Science 6 500–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billon, P, Chastin, P, Baritaux, B, Bouvier, F, Ilahi, H, Manfredi, E & Marnet, PG 1999 Milk emission kinetics of goats. In Milking and Milk Production of Dairy Sheep and Goats, Vol. 95, pp. 51–58 (Eds Zervas, N & Barillet, F). Wageningen, Netherlands: EAAP Publication Wageningen PersGoogle Scholar
Borghese, A, Rasmussen, M & Thomas, CS 2007 Milking management of dairy buffalo. Italian Journal of Animal Science 6 39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boselli, C, Mazzi, M, Borghese, A, Terzano, GM, Giangolini, G, Filippetti, F, Amatiste, S & Rosati, R 2010 Milk flow curve and teat anatomy in Mediterranean Italian buffalo cows. Revista Veterinaria 21 576–581Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM & Blum, JW 1996 Simultaneous recording of oxytocin release, milk ejection and milk flow during milking in dairy cows with and without prestimulation. Journal of Dairy Research 63 201–208Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM & Blum, JW 1998 Oxytocin release and milk removal in ruminants. Journal of Dairy Science 81 939–949Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM & Hilger, M 2001 Milk ejection in dairy cows at different degrees of udder filling. Journal of Dairy Research 68 369–337Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM & Wellnitz, O 2007 Induction of milk ejection and milk removal in different production systems. Journal of Animal Sciences 86 15–20Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM, Schams, D & Blum, JW 1994 Continuously elevated concentrations of oxytocin during milking are necessary for complete milk removal in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 61 323–334CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruckmaier, RM, Rothenanger, E & Blum, JW 1995 Milking characteristics in dairy cows of different breeds from different farms and during the course of lactation. Journal of Animal Breed and Genetics 12 293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM, Pfeilsticker, HU & Blum, JW 1996 Milk yield, oxytocin and b-endorphin gradually normalize during repeated milking in unfamiliar surroundings. Journal of Dairy Research 63 191–120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruckmaier, RM, Wellnitz, O & Blum, JW 1997 Inhibition of milk ejection in cows by oxytocin receptor blockade, α adrenergic receptor stimulation and unfamiliar surroundings. Journal of Dairy Research 64 315–325CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caja, G, Salama, OA, Fathy, A, El-Sayed, H & Salama, AAK 2011 Milk partitioning and accumulation in the camel udder according to time elapsed after milking. In Book of Abstracts of the 62nd Annual Meeting of EAAP, Stavanger, Norway, Vol. 17, p. 363Google Scholar
Caria, M, Boselli, C, Murgia, L, Rosati, R & Pazzona, A 2012 Effect of vacuum level on milk flow traits in Mediterranean Italian buffalo cow. Italian Journal of Animal Science 11 137–139Google Scholar
Corbet, V, Billon, P, Allain, C, Saunier, D & Huneau, T 2010 Recommendations for the Use of LactoCorder. Compte rendu 001031006. France: Institut de l’élevage, p. 35Google Scholar
Dzidic, A 2009 Relationship between udder and milking traits during lactation in Istrian dairy crossbreed ewes. Italian Journal of Animal Sciences 8 154–156Google Scholar
Dzidic, A, Macuhova, J & Bruckmaier, RM 2004 Effects of cleaning duration and water temperature on oxytocin release and milk removal in an automatic milking system. Journal of Dairy Science 87 4163–4169Google Scholar
Gorewit, RC & Aromando, MC 1985 Mechanisms involved in the adrenalin induced blockade of milk ejection in dairy cattle. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 180 340–347CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammadi, M, Atigui, M, Ayadi, M, Barmat, A, Belgacem, A, Khaldi, G & Khorchani, T 2010 Training period and short time effects of machine milking on milk yield and milk composition in Tunisian Maghrebi camels (Camelus dromedarius). Journal of Camel Practice and Research 17 1–7Google Scholar
Juhasz, J & Nagy, P 2008 Challenges in the development of a large-scale milking system for dromedary camels. In Proceedings of the WBC/ICAR 2008 Satellite Meeting on Camelid Reproduction, pp. 84–87 (Eds Nagy, P, Huszenicza, G & Juhasz, J). Hungary: BudapestGoogle Scholar
Knierem, U 1991 The effect of human-animal interactions in the milking parlour on the behaviour, heart-rate and milk yield of dairy cows. MSc Thesis. Scotland: Univ. EdinburghGoogle Scholar
Labussière, J 1988 Review of physiological and anatomical factors influencing the milking ability of ewes and the organization of milking. Livestock Production Science 18 253–274Google Scholar
Labussière, J & Martinet, J 1964 Description of two devices for automatically controlling milk flow during machine milking: first results obtained in sheep. Annales de Zootechnie 13 199–212Google Scholar
Lee, DH & Choudhary, V 2006 Study on milkability traits in Holstein cows. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 19 309–314Google Scholar
Lyons, DM 1989 Individual differences in temperament of dairy goats and the inhibition of milk ejection. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 22 269–282Google Scholar
Macuhova, J, Tancin, V, Kraetzl, WD, Meyer, HHD & Bruckmaier, RM 2002 Inhibition of oxytocin release during repeated milking in unfamiliar surroundings: The importance of opioids and adrenal cortex sensitivity. Journal of Dairy Research 69 63–73Google Scholar
Marnet, PG & McKusick, BC 2001 Regulation of milk ejection and milkability in small ruminants. Livestock Production Science 70 125–133Google Scholar
Marnet, PG, Combaud, JFC & Dano, Y 1999 Relationships between characteristic of the teat and mikability in Lacaune ewes. In Milking and Milk Production of Dairy Sheep and Goats, Vol. 95, pp. 41–44 (Eds Zervas, N & Barillet, F). Wageningen, Netherlands: EAAP Publication Wageningen PersGoogle Scholar
Marnet, PG, Billon, P, Da Ponte, P, Martin, J & Manfredi, E 2001 Machine milking ability in goats: genetic variability and physiological basis of milk flow rate. Rencontres Recherches Ruminants 8 321–327Google Scholar
Mayer, HK & Lefcourt, AM 1987 Failure of cortisol injected prior milking to inhibit milk ejection in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Research 54 173–177Google Scholar
Mayer, H, Weber, F & Segessemann, V 1989 A method to record and define milk flow curves of ewe during routine machine milking. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on machine milking of small ruminants. Tel Aviv, Israel, pp. 564–573Google Scholar
McKusick, B, Marnet, PG, Berger, YM & Thomas, DL 2000 Preliminary observations on milk flow and udder morphology traits of east friesian crossbred dairy ewes. In Proceedings of the 6th Great Lakes Dairy sheep Symposium. Guelph, Ontario, Canada, pp. 101–116Google Scholar
Murray, TL, Blache, DB & Bencini, R 2009 The selection of dairy sheep on calm temperament before milking and its effect on management and milk production. Small Ruminant Research 87 45–49Google Scholar
Négrao, JA & Marnet, PG 2003 Cortisol, adrenalin, noradrenalin and oxytocin release and milk yield during first milkings in primiparous ewes. Small Ruminant Research 67 69–75Google Scholar
Ovesen, E 1972 Milking ability in relation to size and shape of teats. Animal Production 15 251–257Google Scholar
Rasmussen, MD, Frimer, ES, Galton, DM & Petersson, LG 1992 The influence of premilking teat preparation and attachment delay on milk yield and milking performance. Journal of Dairy Science 75 2131–2141Google Scholar
Rovaï, M, Thomas, DL, Berger, Y & Caja, G 2004. Udder morphology and effects on milk production and ease of milking in dairy sheep. In Proceeding of the10th annual Great lake dairy sheep symposium, pp. 79–115Google Scholar
Samuelsson, B, Wahlberg, E & Svennersten, K 1993 The effect of feeding during milking on milk production and milk flow. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 23 101–106Google Scholar
Sandrucci, A, Tamburini, A, Bava, L & Zucali, M 2007 Factors affecting milk flow traits in dairy cows: results of a field study. Journal of Dairy Science 90 1159–1167Google Scholar
Sboui, A, Khorchani, T, Djegham, M, Agrebi, A, Elhatemi, H & Belhadj, O 2009a Anti-diabetic effect of camel milk in alloxan-induced diabetic dogs: a dose-response experiment. Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 94 540–546Google Scholar
Sboui, A, Khorchani, T, Djegham, M & Belhadj, O 2009b Comparaison de la composition physicochimique du lait camelin et bovin du Sud tunisien; variation du pH et de l'acidité à différentes températures. Afrique Science 05 93–304Google Scholar
Shahid, MQ, Abdullah, M, Bhatti, JA, Javed, K, Babar, ME, Jabbar, MA & Zahid, IA 2012 Machine milking performance of Nili-Ravi buffaloes on different pre-milking stimulation practices. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 22 (3 Suppl.) 284–287Google Scholar
Tancin, V & Bruckmaier, RM 2001 Factors affecting milk ejection and removal during milking and suckling of dairy cows. Veterinarni Medicina – Czech 46 108–118Google Scholar
Tancin, V, Ipema, B, Hogewerf, P & Mačuhovà, J 2006 Sources of variation in milk flow characteristics at udder and quarter levels. Journal of Dairy Science 89 978–988Google Scholar
Tancin, V, Urhincat, M, Mačuhovà, J & Bruckmaier, RM 2007 Effect of pre-stimulation on milk flow pattern and distribution of milk constituents at a quarter level. Czech Journal of Animal Sciences 52 117–121Google Scholar
Thomas, CS, Svennersten-Sjaunja, K, Bhosrekar, MR & Bruckmaier, RM 2004 Mammary cisternal size, cisternal milk and milk ejection in Murrah buffaloes. Journal of Dairy Research 71 162–168Google Scholar
Tilki, M, Olak, M, Ünal, P & Aulayan, T 2005 Effects of teat shape on milk yield and milking traits in brown swiss cows. Turkish Journal of Veterinary Animal Science 29 275–278Google Scholar
Weiss, D, Weinfurtner, M & Bruckmaier, RM 2004 Teat anatomy and its relationship with quarter and udder milk flow characteristics in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87 3280–3289Google Scholar
Wellnitz, O & Bruckmaier, RM 2001 Central and peripheral inhibition of milk ejection. Livestock production Sciences 70 135–140Google Scholar