Effect of water trough type on the drinking behaviour of pasture-based beef heifers

Effect of Climatic Condition, Type of Trough and Water Cleanliness on Drinking Behavior in Dairy Cows

Increasing ambient temperatures lead to higher water intake and higher risks of microbial growth in cattle troughs. This study aims to analyze drinking water quality and dairy cows' drinking behavior (n = 8081 drinking episodes) on a commercial farm with 135 and 144 lactating cows in two climatic conditions, considering trough type and cleanliness, respectively. Daily video recording was conducted at two trough types (two open troughs, 70 L; two-valve troughs, variable volume of 5-15 L) in the first two hours after feeding (n = 60 days in total) under cold (December 2019-February 2020) and warm ambient temperatures (September 2021). The trough cleaning scheme allowed cows to access either cleaned or uncleaned troughs in each system. Water quality was tested daily and analyzed at the beginning and end of the trials. In warmer ambient temperatures, fewer and-at uncleaned troughs and open troughs-shorter drinking episodes were recorded, with longer but fewer water intake periods, longer drinking breaks, and fewer sips (p < 0.0001). Considering the drinking episodes, respectively, water intake and drinking breaks in number and duration, the number of sips and the number of agonistic behaviors might optimize dairy cow water supply and hygiene management.

Heritability and variance component estimation for feed and water intake behaviors of feedlot cattle

Feed and water intake are two important aspects of cattle production that greatly impact the profitability, efficiency, and sustainability of producers. Feed and, to a lesser degree, water intake have been studied previously; however, there is little research on their associated animal behaviors and there is a lack of standardized phenotypes for these behaviors. Feed and water intakes obtained with an Insentec system (Hokofarm Group, The Netherlands) from 830 crossbred steers were used to compute five intake behaviors for both feed and water: daily sessions (DS), intake rate (IR), session size (SS), time per session (TS), and session interval (SI). Variance components and heritabilities were estimated for each trait. Heritabilities for feed intake behaviors were 0.50 ± 0.12, 0.63 ± 0.12, 0.40 ± 0.13, 0.35 ± 0.12, and 0.60 ± 0.12 for DS, IR, SS, TS, and SI, respectively. Heritabilities for water intake behaviors were 0.56 ± 0.11, 0.88 ± 0.07, 0.70 ± 0.11, 0.54 ± 0.12, and 0.80 ± 0.10 for NS, IR, SS, TS, and SI, respectively. Daily dry matter intake (DDMI) and daily water intake (DWI) had heritabilities of 0.57 ± 0.11 and 0.44 ± 0.11. Phenotypic correlations varied between pairs of traits (-0.83 to 0.82). Genetic correlations between DDMI and feed intake behaviors were moderate to high, while genetic correlations between DWI and water intake behaviors were low to moderate. Several significant single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) were identified for the feed and water intake behaviors. Genes and previously reported quantitative trait loci near significant SNPs were evaluated. The results indicated that feed and water intake behaviors are influenced by genetic factors and are heritable, providing one additional route to evaluate or manipulate feed and water intake.

Invited review: Freedom from thirst-Do dairy cows and calves have sufficient access to drinking water?

The importance of drinking water for production and animal welfare is widely recognized, but surveys and animal welfare assessment schemes suggest that many dairy calves and dairy cows do not have sufficient access. Limit milk-fed calves drink more water than calves fed milk ad libitum, but ad libitum milk-fed calves also require access to drinking water, as milk does not meet the animal's requirement for water. At hot ambient temperatures and when calves are sick, access to water is especially important and should be provided at all times. Many young calves do not have access to water throughout 24 h, and whether healthy young calves require free access to water at all times, or from which age, is not clear and requires further study. Dairy cow free water intake (FWI) is largely determined by milk yield, and high-yielding dairy cows may drink up 100 L of water per day. Dry matter, crude protein, and salt content of feed, as well as ambient temperature, have considerable effects on dairy cow water intake. Deprivation of water affects meal patterning for the cow, as well as increased subsequent rate of drinking and compensatory water intake. Although dairy cow ad libitum water intake may exceed the water provision necessary to maintain production, offering water for ad libitum intake may be necessary to safe guard animal welfare. Cattle are suction drinkers that prefer to drink from large open water surfaces, and Holstein dairy cows can drink at a rate of up to 24 L/min. Research on the effect of design and placement of water troughs for indoor-housed dairy cows on their drinking behavior and water intake is limited. Access to a water source at pasture increases the time cows spend there, and access to shade reduces water requirements during periods of warm weather. In both indoor and pastured cattle, there is a lack of knowledge about the effect of stocking of water troughs on competition, drinking behavior, and intake in dairy cows. Studies on the effect of available water trough length and placement, and of the number of cows being able to drink from the same trough of a given dimension, are needed to evaluate current recommendations.

Beef Cattle on Pasture Have Better Performance When Supplied With Water Trough Than Pond

The behavior and performance of steers on pasture regarding water availability in troughs or in ponds were compared. Eight paddocks were randomly allocated to one treatment: POND (~30 m of diameter) or TROUGH (water trough, 120 cm diameter and 60 cm high and 500 L capacity). Eight groups of six beef steers were randomly assigned to one of the paddocks. The first 10 days were considered for animal habituation. Animals were individually weighed (days 0, 30, 60, and 90). Beginning in the day after each weighing on days 30 (Month 1), 60 (Month 2), and 90 (Month 3), behavior and animal distribution in the paddock were recorded by direct visual observation in three periods of 4 consecutive days. Water temperature and fecal and herbage DM were also recorded in these periods. Water intake was measured during 16 random days in the troughs. Data were analyzed using Generalized Linear Mixed Models, with treatment and period as fixed effects. TROUGH steers gained more weight (0.44 vs. 0.34 kg/day/animal; P ≤ 0.007) during the experiment and were heavier than the others at the end of the study (P ≤ 0.05). POND steers spent more time drinking water, but TROUGH steers increased the number of drinking events throughout the study (P ≤ 0.05), suggesting an adaptation for the new type of water source. Both treatments increased grazing time throughout the study, but not ruminating time (P ≤ 0.05). Walking time differed between treatments in all periods of behavior observation (P ≤ 0.05). Events of animal licking and ingesting salt of POND steers reduced throughout the study (P ≤ 0.05). The number of drinking events of TROUGH steers increased throughout the study, and drinking events were longer for POND steers than TROUGH steers (P ≤ 0.05). TROUGH steers spent more time on pasture on Month 2 (P ≤ 0.05). Period collection did not affect the water intake of TROUGH treatment (P > 0.05). This study demonstrates that water available in troughs rather than ponds for steers on pasture has positive effects on their weight gain and affects cattle behavior.

Welfare Assessment on Pasture: A Review on Animal-Based Measures for Ruminants

Simple Summary

Welfare assessment in outdoor and extensive systems has rarely been investigated, and little is known about the most appropriate indicators. This study aimed at compiling a list of animal-based measures of welfare for domestic ruminants raised on outdoor/extensive systems by means of a systematic review. Out of 810 papers retrieved, 52 matched the inclusion criteria and went through an in-depth analysis. According to available literature, 45 indicators have been used to assess welfare on pasture, often following different methodologies. Most indicators were measured by observers even if the use of sensor technologies increased in recent years. Considering the growing interest in pasture-based or grass-fed products, it is suggested that welfare assessment in outdoor/extensive farming systems is carried out by following shared methodologies in order to provide evidence of the higher animal welfare claims that these products often imply compared to indoor systems.

Abstract

Outdoor and extensive farming systems allow animals to behave in a natural way and are often perceived as welfare friendly. Nonetheless, the natural environment poses multiple challenges to the welfare of animals, sometimes hampering their capacity to cope. Welfare assessment in outdoor and extensive systems has been rarely investigated, and little is known about the most appropriate indicators. The aim of this review was to identify animal-based measures of welfare to apply in extensive and pasture-based systems in domestic ruminants. Through the use of a dedicated software for systematic reviews, 810 papers were screened and a total of 52 papers were retained for in-depth analysis. ABM resulting from these papers were initially divided according to the species (cattle and small ruminants, including sheep and goats) and then to four principles: comfort, behavior, feeding and health. The results showed that welfare data were collected applying different methodologies, with an increasing use of sensors in recent years. The need to herd and restrain animals for individual data collection is one of the major constraints to data collection in extensive farming systems. It is suggested that welfare assessment in outdoor/extensive farming systems is carried out by following shared procedures in order to provide evidence of the higher animal welfare claims that these products often imply compared to indoor systems.

Application of accelerometers to record drinking behaviour of beef cattle

Accelerometers have been used to record many cattle postures and behaviours including standing, lying, walking, grazing and ruminating but not cattle drinking behaviour. This study explores whether neck-mounted triaxial accelerometers can identify drinking and whether head-neck position and activity can be used to record drinking. Over three consecutive days, data were collected from 12 yearling Brahman cattle each fitted with a collar containing an accelerometer. Each day the cattle were herded into a small yard containing a water trough and allowed 5 min to drink. Drinking, standing (head up), walking and standing (head down) were recorded. Examination of the accelerometer data showed that drinking events were characterised by a unique signature compared with the other behaviours. A linear mixed-effects model identified two variables that reflected differences in head-neck position and activity between drinking and the other behaviours: mean of the z- (front-to-back) axis and variance of the x- (vertical) axis (P &lt; 0.05). Threshold values, derived from Kernel density plots, were applied to classify drinking from the other behaviours using these two variables. The method accurately classified drinking from standing (head up) with 100% accuracy, from walking with 92% accuracy and from standing (head down) with 79% accuracy. The study shows that accelerometers have the potential to record cattle drinking behaviour. Further development of a classification method for drinking is required to allow accelerometer-derived data to be used to improve our understanding of cattle drinking behaviour and ensure that their water intake needs are met.

Designing Better Water Troughs: Does Trough Color Influence Dairy Cows' Preference?

Eighteen lactating dairy cows were used to elucidate their preference for green, grey, or red troughs. The herd was managed under a rotational grazing system with ad-libitum access to water until 11:30 h. For 9 days, all cows were tested individually following the afternoon milking. Cows drank similar quantities, spent a similar amount of time drinking, and took a similar number of sips from the 3 trough colors (p > .05). In 75% of the tests, cows drank more than 95% of the test period from the same trough. Within this time, the percentage of choices did not differ among colors (33.3% green, 39.0% grey, and 27.7% red). When they chose the red trough, cows spent less time drinking (p ≤ .05) and tended to take fewer sips (p = .07), which could suggest a partial aversion to this color. Suboptimal water trough design may have long-term negative effects on both the production and welfare of dairy cattle; however, the results suggest that color does not play a major role in the drinking behavior of dairy cows.