Assessing the diversity of trade-offs between life functions in early lactation dairy cows

Association between body condition profiles, milk production and reproduction performance in Holstein and Normande cows

Body-condition dynamics are known to affect the different steps of reproduction in cattle (cyclicity, estrus expression, fertilization, embryo development). This has led to a widespread idea that there is an ideal-target optimal body condition, but no clear profile has yet been identified. Here we investigated the relationships between body condition score (BCS) profiles and reproductive performance in dairy cows. Data were from Holstein or Normande herds in 6 French experimental farms. In the Holstein breed, we discriminated 4 BCS profiles based on combining BCS at calving (Low: around 2.6 points, or High: around 3.3 points) with BCS loss after calving (Moderate (M): ≤ 1.0 points, or Severe (S): > 1.0 points). The Low-M profile mostly included multiparous cows with higher milk yield and lower reproductive performance than cows in the 3 other profiles. Low-M cows that experienced abnormal ovarian activity had lower reproductive performance than their profile-mates. Moreover, 67% of Low-M cows kept the same profile at the following lactation. The High-S profile mostly included primiparous cows with lower milk yield and higher reproductive performance than cows in other profiles. In High-S cows, higher milk yields correlated to higher risk of failure to calf on first insemination. Moreover, 38% of High-S cows kept the same profile at the following lactation, and none changed to Low-M. The other 2 BCS profiles (Low-S and High-M) were intermediate in terms of milk yield and reproductive performance. In Normande, we discriminated 3 BCS profiles based on combining BCS at calving (Low: around 2.6 points, or High: around 3.5 points) with BCS loss after calving (Flat (F): flat with no loss, Moderate (M): around 0.5 points, or Severe (S): around 1.0 point). The Low-M and High-S profiles included cows with similar performance, even though High-S-profile cows showed better but not significantly different milk yield and reproduction performance. The High-F profile included cows that were more likely to experience abnormal ovarian activity and fail at first insemination than cows in other profiles. More than 50% of Normande cows with 2 successive lactations kept in the same BCS profile at the next lactation. Even though a low BCS at calving combined with severe BCS loss (more than 1 point) after calving was found to increase reproductive failure, there was no evidence of an optimal BCS profile for reproduction in dairy cows, and reproductive success or failure is multifactorial.

Modelling beef cows' individual response to short nutrient restriction in different lactation stages

Short-term nutrient restrictions can occur naturally in extensive beef cattle production systems due to low feed quality or availability. The aims of the study were to (1) model the curves of milk yield, plasma non-esterified fatty acids (NEFAs) and β-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) contents of beef cows in response to short nutritional challenges throughout lactation; (2) identify clusters of cows with different response profiles; (3) quantify differences in cows' response between the clusters and lactation stages. Data of BW, body condition score (BCS), milk yield, NEFA, and BHB plasma concentration from 31 adult beef cows (626 ± 48 kg at calving) were used to study the effect of 4-day feed restriction repeated over months 2, 3 and 4 of lactation. On each month, all cows received a single diet calculated to meet the requirements of the average cow: 100 % requirements for 4 days (d-4 to d-1, basal period), 55 % requirements on the next 4 days (d0 to d3, restriction period) and 100 % requirements for 4 days (d4 to d7, refeeding period). Natural cubic splines were used to model the response of milk yield, NEFA and BHB to restriction and refeeding in the 3 months. The new response variables [baseline value, peak value, days to peak and to regain baseline, and areas under the curve (AUC) during restriction and refeeding] were used to cluster cows according to their metabolic response (MR) into two groups: Low MR and High MR. The month of lactation affected all the traits, and basal values decreased as lactation advanced. Cows from both clusters had similar BW and BCS values, but those in the High MR cluster had higher basal milk yield, NEFA and BHB contents, and responded more intensely to restriction, with more marked peaks and AUCs. Reaction times were similar, and baseline values recovered during refeeding in both clusters. Our results suggest that the response was driven by cows' milk potential rather than size or body reserves, and despite high-responding cattle's higher milk yield, they were able to activate metabolic pathways to respond to and recover from the challenge.

Exploration of robustness indicators using adaptive responses to short-term feed restriction in suckling primiparous beef cows

Animal robustness is a complex trait of importance for livestock production systems and genetic selection. Phenotyping is essential for evaluation of the adaptation of different genotypes to changing environments. This study tested an experimental framework to induce marked deviations in the adaptive responses of suckling beef cows and to identify relevant indicators of responses to characterise individual differences in the robustness of cows. The production and metabolic responses of primiparous suckling Charolais cows to two periods of feed restriction (FR, 50% of their net energy requirements) of different durations were monitored. After calving, 13 cows (aged 39 ± 2 months, BW of 680 ± 42 kg at calving) had ad libitum access to a diet composed of hay and supplemented with concentrate to meet their energy and protein requirements. Starting at 54 ± 6 days postcalving, the cows underwent two periods of FR: 4 days of FR (FR4), which was followed by 17 days of ad libitum intake to study the recovery from FR4, and 10 days of FR (FR10), which was followed by 18 days of ad libitum intake to study the recovery from FR10. The milk yield (MY), BW, body condition score and plasma non-esterified fatty acid (NEFA), β-hydroxybutyrate, glucose and urea concentrations were measured before, during and after each FR. Among all measured variables, the MY and NEFA concentrations showed the most significant changes in response to FR. A functional data analysis approach was applied to the MY and NEFA data to model the adaptive responses and extract quantifiable indicators of deviation and recovery. Linear correlations (P < 0.03-0.07) between FR4 and FR10 were found for some indicators describing MY and NEFA levels before and after FR. The overall repeatability of MY and NEFA responses between both FR accounted for 46% based on quartile analysis performed on average responses. Moreover, the variance in both the MY and NEFA variables did not differ significantly between FR4 and FR10, despite a trend for higher variances in FR10. Altogether, (1) the calculated variables derived from the functional data analysis of the time patterns of the MY and NEFA accounted for the differences in the cow responses to FR, and (2) the animal responses appeared to show concordance between FR4 and FR10. In conclusion, short-term FR is a relevant framework for studying productive and metabolic adaptive responses in suckling cows and allows the identification of potential robustness indicators.

Milk, Fertility and Udder Health Performance of Purebred Holstein and Three-Breed Rotational Crossbred Cows within French Farms: Insights on the Benefits of Functional Diversity

Simple Summary

When implementing dairy crossbreeding in purebred Holstein (HO) herds, farmers expect to improve the overall herd performance. However, they lack knowledge about how to manage and benefit from the diversity of genetic classes generated by three-breed rotational crossbreeding, which firstly refers to the cohabitation of purebred HO and first- and second-generation crosses (F₁ and G₂, respectively) within the herd. This study aimed to compare milk production, reproduction and udder health performance of HO, F₁ and G₂ cows, and to estimate how their combination in different proportions in the herd affects its profitability. We found that HO, F₁ and G₂ had different and complementary performance profiles, with two main trends. First, HO had higher milk yield, while F₁ and G₂ crosses had better fertility performance. Second, F₁ had win-win trade-offs between milk production, fertility and udder health compared to HO and G₂. We showed that HO-F₁ or HO-F₁-G₂ (below 30%) mixed herds could be more profitable than purebred HO or fully crossbred herds with a conventional milk price. These findings can be used for advising purebred HO farmers who wonder about the benefits and the ways of managing the diversity of animal entities generated by the use of dairy crossbreeding in their herds.

Abstract

Using three-breed rotational crossbreeding in a purebred Holstein (HO) herd raises two questions: Do the different genetic classes of cows generated by crossbreeding perform differently? Are there any economic benefits of combining them within a herd? This study aimed at comparing the performance between the different genetic classes resulting from the use of three-breed rotational crossbreeding, and simulating the effect of combining them on herd profitability. Based on a dataset of 14 French commercial dairy herds using three-bred rotational crossbreeding from a HO herd over a 10-year period, we defined three genetic classes according to the theoretical value of heterosis and the percentage of HO genes. We performed linear models and estimated least square means to compare HO cows and the first and second generation of crosses (F₁ and G₂, respectively) on eight performance characteristics related to milk yield and solids, udder health and fertility. We used these to simulate profitability of five herd compositions differing according to HO, F₁ and G₂ proportions. We showed that HO, F₁ and G₂ cows had different and complementary performance profiles. HO had a win-lost trade-off between milk yield and fertility, G₂ had the opposite trade-off and F₁ had a win-win trade-off. Differences regarding milk solids and udder health were less clear-cut. We highlighted that combining HO with F₁ or with both F₁ and G₂ (below 30%) could be more profitable than using purebred HO or crossbred herds in a conventional milk price scenario. These findings provide evidence on the benefits of functional diversity generated from the use of dairy crossbreeding in dairy herds.

The Whole and the Parts—A New Perspective on Production Diseases and Economic Sustainability in Dairy Farming

The levels of production diseases (PD) and the cow replacement rate are high in dairy farming. They indicate excessive production demands on the cow and a poor state of animal welfare. This is the subject of increasing public debate. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of production diseases on the economic sustainability of dairy farms. The contributions of individual culled cows to the farm’s economic performance were calculated, based on milk recording and accounting data from 32 farms in Germany. Cows were identified as ‘profit cows’ when they reached their individual ‘break-even point’. Data from milk recordings (yield and indicators for PD) were used to cluster farms by means of a principal component and a cluster analysis. The analysis revealed five clusters of farms. The average proportion of profit cows was 57.5%, 55.6%, 44.1%, 29.4% and 19.5%. Clusters characterized by a high proportion of cows with metabolic problems and high culling and mortality rates had lower proportions of profit cows, somewhat irrespective of the average milk-yield per cow. Changing the perception of PD from considering it as collateral damage to a threat to the farms’ economic viability might foster change processes to reduce production diseases.

The Management of Lamb Heterogeneity is a Tool for Farmers' Marketing Strategies

Simple Summary

In a value chain, matching supply and demand is needed. Indeed, both vary widely in space and time. The first method of approaching this issue is homogenizing the supply of meat production. It depends on the possibility for farmers to limit the variability in biological processes by improving production conditions. Other marketing strategies are based on the management of animal heterogeneity. In these situations, farmers market a range of products and deal with several market channels.

Abstract

The technical processes used in sheep farming systems are elaborate and difficult to control. The result is a certain heterogeneity in marketed lambs. The aim of this study was to understand how farmers use their practices and modes of marketing to manage and exploit this heterogeneity. We analyzed livestock farming systems in Languedoc-Roussillon (South of France) through eight case studies. We characterize the heterogeneity of lambs during their growth and sale and how the farmers cope with this. Our analysis shows how this heterogeneity, whether intentionally created or merely endured, can be used to invest in different marketing chains. Heterogeneity not only offers adaptable farmers marketing opportunities, but also a method of managing production risks.

Consequences of walking or transport by truck on milk yield and quality, as well as blood metabolites, in Holstein, Montbéliarde, and Valdostana dairy cows

In the mountains, the traditional practice of transhumance is common in dairy production systems to make use of the high-altitude summer pastures. Although the effects of highland grazing have been intensively studied with respect to cow performance and milk and cheese quality, the actual moving of the animals to the highlands and the consequences of this stressor for performance and milk quality in the days immediately following transhumance has not been investigated in detail. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of a 6-km walk (lasting 1.5 h) to those of a truck transport of 10.5 km (lasting 1 h), simulating cow movement in transhumance systems, as well as a control treatment in which cows were not moved. The experiment included 12 late-lactating Valdostana Red Pied, 12 Montbéliarde, and 12 Holstein cows (i.e., breeds contrasting in genetic merit for milk production). Each cow was subjected to each treatment in a 3-wk Latin square design. Milk yield was measured, and milk and blood samples were taken around the transhumance simulation events. Cows of the 3 breeds responded similarly to both movement treatments. Walking decreased milk yield by 1 kg/milking, but truck transport did not affect milk yield. Both treatments led to an increase in plasma nonesterified fatty acids and milk somatic cell count compared with controls, and truck transport increased milk fat content. Milk coagulation properties were better for Valdostana Red Pied and Montbéliarde cows than for Holstein cows but were not affected by walking or truck transport. Further studies aiming to compare the 3 breeds should include a wider range of response variables over a longer term, including reproduction performance and repeated transhumance.

Trade-Offs Underwater: Physiological Plasticity of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Confronted by Multiple Stressors

Organisms have evolved mechanisms to partition the available resources between fitness-relevant physiological functions. Organisms possess phenotypic plasticity to acclimate to changing environmental conditions. However, this comes at a cost that can cause negative correlations or “trade-offs”, whereby increasing investments in one function lead to decreased investments in another function. The aim of the present study was to investigate the prioritization of resource allocation between growth, pathogen defense, and contaminant response in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) exposed to changes of resource income or expenditure. We performed a multifactorial experiment with three resource-impacting stressors—limited food availability, a parasitic infection, exposure to a vitellogenesis-inducing contaminant—and combinations thereof. Treatment with the individual stressors evoked the expected responses in the respective physiological target systems—body growth, immune system, and hepatic vitellogenin transcription—but we found little evidence for significant negative relations (trade-offs) between the three systems. This also applied to fish exposed to combinations of the stressors. This high phenotypic flexibility of trout in their resource allocation suggests that linear resource allocations as mechanisms of phenotypic plasticity may be too simplistic, but it also may point to a greater capacity of ectothermic than endothermic vertebrates to maintain key physiological processes under competing resource needs due to lower maintenance costs.

Review: Make ruminants green again - how can sustainable intensification and agroecology converge for a better future?

Livestock farming systems provide multiple benefits to humans: protein-rich diets that contribute to food security, employment and rural economies, capital stock and draught power in many developing countries and cultural landscape all around the world. Despite these positive contributions to society, livestock is also the centre of many controversies as regards to its environmental impacts, animal welfare and health outcomes related to excessive meat consumption. Here, we review the potentials of sustainable intensification (SI) and agroecology (AE) in the design of sustainable ruminant farming systems. We analyse the two frameworks in a historical perspective and show that they are underpinned by different values and worldviews about food consumption patterns, the role of technology and our relationship with nature. Proponents of SI see the increase in animal protein demand as inevitable and therefore aim at increasing production from existing farmland to limit further encroachment into remaining natural ecosystems. Sustainable intensification can thus be seen as an efficiency-oriented framework that benefits from all forms of technological development. Proponents of AE appear more open to dietary shifts towards less animal protein consumption to rebalance the whole food system. Agroecology promotes system redesign, benefits from functional diversity and aims at providing regulating and cultural services. We analyse the main criticisms of the two frameworks: Is SI sustainable? How much can AE contribute to feeding the world? Indeed, in SI, social justice has long lacked attention notably with respect to resource allocation within and between generations. It is only recently that some of its proponents have indicated that there is room to include more diversified systems and food-system transformation perspectives and to build socially fair governance systems. As no space is available for agricultural land expansion in many areas, agroecological approaches that emphasise the importance of local production should also focus more on yield increases from agricultural land. Our view is that new technologies and strict certifications offer opportunities for scaling-up agroecological systems. We stress that the key issue for making digital science part of the agroecological transition is that it remains at a low cost and is thus accessible to smallholder farmers. We conclude that SI and AE could converge for a better future by adopting transformative approaches in the search for ecologically benign, socially fair and economically viable ruminant farming systems.

Review: Deciphering animal robustness. A synthesis to facilitate its use in livestock breeding and management

As the environments in which livestock are reared become more variable, animal robustness becomes an increasingly valuable attribute. Consequently, there is increasing focus on managing and breeding for it. However, robustness is a difficult phenotype to properly characterise because it is a complex trait composed of multiple components, including dynamic elements such as the rates of response to, and recovery from, environmental perturbations. In this review, the following definition of robustness is used: the ability, in the face of environmental constraints, to carry on doing the various things that the animal needs to do to favour its future ability to reproduce. The different elements of this definition are discussed to provide a clearer understanding of the components of robustness. The implications for quantifying robustness are that there is no single measure of robustness but rather that it is the combination of multiple and interacting component mechanisms whose relative value is context dependent. This context encompasses both the prevailing environment and the prevailing selection pressure. One key issue for measuring robustness is to be clear on the use to which the robustness measurements will employed. If the purpose is to identify biomarkers that may be useful for molecular phenotyping or genotyping, the measurements should focus on the physiological mechanisms underlying robustness. However, if the purpose of measuring robustness is to quantify the extent to which animals can adapt to limiting conditions then the measurements should focus on the life functions, the trade-offs between them and the animal's capacity to increase resource acquisition. The time-related aspect of robustness also has important implications. Single time-point measurements are of limited value because they do not permit measurement of responses to (and recovery from) environmental perturbations. The exception being single measurements of the accumulated consequence of a good (or bad) adaptive capacity, such as productive longevity and lifetime efficiency. In contrast, repeated measurements over time have a high potential for quantification of the animal's ability to cope with environmental challenges. Thus, we should be able to quantify differences in adaptive capacity from the data that are increasingly becoming available with the deployment of automated monitoring technology on farm. The challenge for future management and breeding will be how to combine various proxy measures to obtain reliable estimates of robustness components in large populations. A key aspect for achieving this is to define phenotypes from consideration of their biological properties and not just from available measures.

Disentangling the relative roles of resource acquisition and allocation on animal feed efficiency: insights from a dairy cow model

Background

Feed efficiency of farm animals has greatly improved through genetic selection for production. Today, we are faced with the limits of our ability to predict the effect of selection on feed efficiency, partly because the relative importance of the components of this complex phenotype changes across environments. Thus, we developed a dairy cow model that incorporates the dynamic interplay between life functions and evaluated its behaviour with a global sensitivity analysis on two definitions of feed efficiency. A key model feature is to consider feed efficiency as the result of two processes, acquisition and allocation of resources. Acquisition encapsulates intake and digestion, and allocation encapsulates partitioning rules between physiological functions. The model generates genetically-driven trajectories of energy acquisition and allocation, with four genetic-scaling parameters controlling these processes. Model sensitivity to these parameters was assessed with a complete factorial design.

Results

Acquisition and allocation had contrasting effects on feed efficiency (ratio between energy in milk and energy acquired from the environment). When measured over a lactation period, feed efficiency was increased by increasing allocation to lactation. However, at the lifetime level, efficiency was increased by decreasing allocation to growth and increasing lactation acquisition. While there is a strong linear increase in feed efficiency with more allocation to lactation within a lactation cycle, our results suggest that there is an optimal level of allocation to lactation beyond which increasing allocation to lactation negatively affects lifetime feed efficiency.

Conclusions

We developed a model to predict lactation and lifetime feed efficiency and show that breaking-down feed conversion into acquisition and allocation, and introducing genetically-driven trajectories that control these mechanisms, permitted quantification of their relative roles on feed efficiency. The life stage at which feed efficiency is evaluated appears to be a key aspect for selection. In this model, body reserves are also a key component in the prediction of lifetime feed efficiency since they integrate the feedback of acquisition and allocation on survival and reproduction. This modelling approach provided new insights into the processes that underpin lifetime feed efficiency in dairy cows.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-016-0251-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.