Effect of dietary protein level and corn processing on behavior activity of high producing dairy cows

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of corn processing and protein level on the feeding, lying, and post milking standing (PMS) behavior in high producing cows. Eight Holstein cows were randomly assigned to diets containing either finely ground (FGC) or steam flaked (SFC) corn based on either low (LP) or high (HP) protein content. Cows receiving LP had lower milk yield than cows receiving HP with similar DMI. Moreover, FGC-fed cows had higher DMI than SFC-fed cows with similar milk yields. Eating and rumination time tended to be lower and chewing time was lower in HP-fed cows than LP-fed cows. Cows fed SFC tended to have higher laying rumination interval and lower lying rumination bouts than cows fed FGC. Total and average PMS were lower in cows fed HP than LP. Cows fed LP had higher chewing activity in the daytime than cows fed HP. Our results suggested that the protein level and corn processing affect the standing and lying behavior of high producing dairy cows, although, this effect is marginal. Results also indicated that probably any change in the diet that increases the rumination and eating times could also improve the PMSThe objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of corn processing and protein level on the feeding, lying, and post milking standing (PMS) behavior in high producing cows. Eight Holstein cows were randomly assigned to diets containing either finely ground (FGC) or steam flaked (SFC) corn based on either low (LP) or high (HP) protein content. Cows receiving LP had lower milk yield than cows receiving HP with similar DMI. Moreover, FGC-fed cows had higher DMI than SFC-fed cows with similar milk yields. Eating and rumination time tended to be lower and chewing time was lower in HP-fed cows than LP-fed cows. Cows fed SFC tended to have higher laying rumination interval and lower lying rumination bouts than cows fed FGC. Total and average PMS were lower in cows fed HP than LP. Cows fed LP had higher chewing activity in the daytime than cows fed HP. Our results suggested that the protein level and corn processing affect the standing and lying behavior of high producing dairy cows, although, this effect is marginal. Results also indicated that probably any change in the diet that increases the rumination and eating times could also improve the PMS

Individual and environmental factors associated with defecation while lying down in dairy cows

Cows typically defecate while standing. Freestalls are designed to position standing cows such that their feces fall into the alley. Cows sometimes defecate while lying down, increasing the risk that feces contaminate the stall surface. We conducted 2 studies investigating cow-level and environmental factors associated with defecating while recumbent. In experiment 1, we hypothesized that conditions making it more difficult for cows to stand up (including greater age, high body weight, pregnancy, and lameness) would increase the risk of this behavior. We followed 92 cows for 12 d, scanning stalls 5 times/d using live observation. Almost half (48%) of all cows defecated while recumbent at least once; cows that spent more time lying down and that were earlier in gestation were at highest risk. Weight, parity, age, and lameness were not associated with this behavior. In experiment 2, we tested how overstocking influenced the occurrence of defecating while recumbent. We predicted overstocking would increase the occurrence of this behavior, especially when cows were in stalls at more preferred locations. We recorded stall occupancy, displacement attempts, and defecating while recumbent in 4 groups of 36 cows tested at both 100% and 150% lying stall stocking densities for 2 nights each using a crossover design. Overstocking resulted in higher stall use and more displacements, but less lying and fewer perching events. We did not detect any relationship between use of specific stalls or competition and defecating while recumbent. Most recorded displacements were associated with perching. Increased time perching increased the likelihood of defecating while recumbent, perhaps because perching cows were less dominant or more reluctant to stand up once lying down in the stall. Overstocking did not increase defecating while recumbent, likely because cows spent less time lying down. Together, these results indicate that defecating while recumbent can be common, and points to some of the cow-level factors associated with this behavior.

Invited review: Lying time and the welfare of dairy cows

Adequate time lying down is often considered an important aspect of dairy cow welfare. We examine what is known about cows' motivation to lie down and the consequences for health and other indicators of biological function when this behavior is thwarted. We review the environmental and animal-based factors that affect lying time in the context of animal welfare. Our objective is to review the research into the time that dairy cows spend lying down and to critically examine the evidence for the link with animal welfare. Cows can be highly motivated to lie down. They show rebound lying behavior after periods of forced standing and will sacrifice other activities, such as feeding, to lie down for an adequate amount of time. They will work, by pushing levers or weighted gates, to lie down and show possible indicators of frustration when lying behavior is thwarted. Some evidence suggests that risk of lameness is increased in environments that provide unfavorable conditions for cows to lie down and where cows are forced to stand. Lameness itself can result in longer lying times, whereas mastitis reduces it. Cow-based factors such as reproductive status, age, and milk production influence lying time, but the welfare implications of these differences are unknown. Lower lying times are reported in pasture-based systems, dry lots, and bedded packs (9 h/d) compared with tiestalls and freestalls (10 to 12 h/d) in cross-farm research. Unfavorable conditions, including too few lying stalls for the number of cows, hard or wet lying surfaces, inadequate bedding, stalls that are too small or poorly designed, heat, and rain all reduce lying time. Time constraints, such as feeding or milking, can influence lying time. However, more information is needed about the implications of mediating factors such as the effect of the standing surface (concrete, pasture, or other surfaces) and cow behavior while standing (e.g., being restrained, walking, grazing) to understand the effect of low lying times on animal welfare. Many factors contribute to the difficulty of finding a valid threshold for daily lying time to use in the assessment of animal welfare. Although higher lying times often correspond with cow comfort, and lower lying times are seen in unfavorable conditions, exceptions occur, namely when cows lie down for longer because of disease or when they spend more time standing because of estrus or parturition, or to engage in other behaviors. In conclusion, lying behavior is important to dairy cattle, but caution and a full understanding of the context and the character of the animals in question is needed before drawing firm conclusions about animal welfare from measures of lying time.

Effect of stocking density and effective fiber on the ruminal bacterial communities in lactating Holstein cows

Overstocking can be a major issue in the dairy cattle industry, leading to negative changes in feeding and resting behavior. Additional stress imposed and alterations in feeding behavior may significantly impact the rumen microbiome. The rumen microbiome is responsible for the successful conversion of feed to usable energy for its host. Thus, understanding the effects of stocking density on the rumen microbiome is imperative for further elucidation of potentially negative consequences of overstocking in dairy cattle. This study implemented a Latin Square design accounting for four pens of cattle and four treatment periods so that all treatment combinations were assigned to every pen during one period of the study. Two treatment factors, including two levels of physically effective neutral detergent fiber, achieved with addition of chopped straw, and stocking density (100% vs. 142%) of freestalls and headlocks, were combined and tested within a factorial treatment design. Within each pen, three or four cannulated cows (n = 15 total) were sampled for rumen content on the final day of each treatment period. Each treatment was randomly assigned to a single pen for a 14-day period. The V1-V3 hypervariable regions of the 16S rRNA gene were targeted for bacterial analyses. Variables with approximately normally-distributed residuals and a Shapiro-Wilk statistic of ≥0.85 were analyzed using a mixed model analysis of variance with the GLIMMIX procedure with fixed effects of feed (straw vs. no straw), stocking density (100% vs. 142%), and the interaction of feed × stocking density, and random effects of pen, period, feed × stocking × pen × period. Pen was included as the experimental unit in a given period and the sampling unit as cow. Variables included Shannon's Diversity Index, Faith's phylogenetic diversity index, chao1, observed OTU, and Simpson's evenness E as well as most individual taxa. Data were analyzed in SAS 9.4 utilizing the GLIMMIX procedure to perform mixed model analysis of variance. If data were not normally distributed, a ranked analysis was performed. No differences were observed in α-diversity metrics by fiber or stocking density (P > 0.05). Beta diversity was assessed using weighted and unweighted Unifrac distances in QIIME 1.9.1 and analyzed using ANOSIM. No differences were observed in weighted (P = 0.6660; R = -0.0121) nor unweighted (P = 0.9190; R = -0.0261) metrics and R values suggested similar bacterial communities among treatments. At the phylum level, Tenericutes differed among treatments with an interaction of stocking density by feed (P = 0.0066). At the genus level, several differences were observed by treatment, including Atopobium (P = 0.0129), unidentified members of order RF39 (P = 0.0139), and unidentified members of family Succinivibrionaceae (P = 0.0480). Although no diversity differences were observed, taxa differences may indicate that specific taxa are affected by the treatments, which may, in turn, affect animal production.