Exploring herd-level perinatal calf mortality risk factors in eastern Canadian dairy farms

This closed cohort study aimed to identify the associations between dairy calf management practices and herd-level perinatal calf mortality risk. From February 2020 to June 2021, predominantly Holstein dairy farms in Québec (n = 1,832) and New Brunswick (n = 52), Canada, that were registered in the dairy herd improvement program were visited once. A questionnaire covering all aspects of precalving, calving, and colostrum management was administered. Data regarding perinatal mortality were retrieved from the dairy herd improvement program database for each farm for 2021. Perinatal mortality was calculated for each farm as the proportion of calves dead at birth or dying within 24 h after birth. A multivariable negative binomial model was used to assess herd-level factors associated with the risk of perinatal mortality. The final model included the lying surface in the calving area, the typical time to first colostrum intake, typical cow-calf contact time, the proportion of males born, the proportion of assisted calvings, and herd size. Herd-level perinatal mortality risk ranged from 0% to 38.1% (mean ± SE = 7.6% ± 0.1%). A greater proportion of males born, a higher proportion of assisted calvings, and delayed colostrum feeding were associated with increased herd-level perinatal mortality. Factors associated with a decreased herd-level perinatal mortality risk were having a typical cow-calf contact time between 7 and 12 h after calving compared with reduced cow-calf contact time, soft lying surfaces in the calving area compared with concrete and mat-lying surfaces, and an increased number of calvings per year. Our results show that although some of the significant risk factors are not well understood (i.e., calving area lying surface, typical cow-calf contact time), Canadian farmers could focus on the factors under their control (i.e., time to first colostrum feeding, proportion of difficult calvings, males born, and calvings per year) to reduce the risk of perinatal mortality. Future work should focus on qualitative research to understand the dairy farmer motivations and limitations to implementing practices identified in this and other studies to reduce perinatal mortality.

Welfare of dairy cows

This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission's mandate on the welfare of dairy cows as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. It includes three assessments carried out based on literature reviews and complemented by expert opinion. Assessment 1 describes the most prevalent housing systems for dairy cows in Europe: tie-stalls, cubicle housing, open-bedded systems and systems with access to an outdoor area. Per each system, the scientific opinion describes the distribution in the EU and assesses the main strengths, weaknesses and hazards potentially reducing the welfare of dairy cows. Assessment 2 addresses five welfare consequences as requested in the mandate: locomotory disorders (including lameness), mastitis, restriction of movement and resting problems, inability to perform comfort behaviour and metabolic disorders. Per each welfare consequence, a set of animal-based measures is suggested, a detailed analysis of the prevalence in different housing systems is provided, and subsequently, a comparison of the housing systems is given. Common and specific system-related hazards as well as management-related hazards and respective preventive measures are investigated. Assessment 3 includes an analysis of farm characteristics (e.g. milk yield, herd size) that could be used to classify the level of on-farm welfare. From the available scientific literature, it was not possible to derive relevant associations between available farm data and cow welfare. Therefore, an approach based on expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was developed. The EKE resulted in the identification of five farm characteristics (more than one cow per cubicle at maximum stocking density, limited space for cows, inappropriate cubicle size, high on-farm mortality and farms with less than 2 months access to pasture). If one or more of these farm characteristics are present, it is recommended to conduct an assessment of cow welfare on the farm in question using animal-based measures for specified welfare consequences.

The effect of housing tiestall dairy cows in deep-bedded pens during an 8-week dry period on gait and step activity

•

Housing dry cows in loose pens versus tiestalls did not increase step activity.

•

Joint flexion improved for dry cows housed in loose pens and worsened for dry cows housed in tiestalls.

•

Cows with higher step activity had better gait regardless of housing system.

Increasing locomotor activity can improve leg health and decrease the prevalence of lameness in dairy cows. The dry period offers an opportunity to provide alternative housing to tiestall (TSL) cows that can increase locomotor activity. The objective was to determine whether housing TSL dairy cows in a deep-bedded loose pen (LP) during the 8-wk dry period affected gait and step activity. Twenty cows, paired by parity and calving date, were assigned at dry-off to a deep-bedded LP or a TSL. Step activity was measured by leg-mounted pedometers. Cows were walked 1×/wk on a test corridor, and video recordings of gait were taken. Six aspects of gait were scored on a 0-to-5 scale (interval: 0.1 unit): tracking up, joint flexion, back arch, asymmetric step, swing, and reluctance to bear weight. Overall gait was also scored using a 1-to-5 scale (interval: 0.5 unit). Data for gait were analyzed based on the change in gait between dry-off and calving. Daily step data were averaged per week of the dry period. Analyses were performed using a mixed model with treatment, term, and block as fixed effects and cow nested within treatment and block as a random effect for step data. The same model, omitting the fixed effect of week, was used for gait variable analyses. There was no difference in step activity between LP and TSL cows (842.1 ± 88.86 vs. 799.5 ± 76.92 steps/d, LP vs. TSL, respectively). Only joint flexion yielded a treatment difference, with LP cows improving over time and TSL cows worsening (−0.4 ± 0.15 vs. 0.2 ± 0.15). Possibly owing to individual variation in motivation to perform locomotor activity, higher levels of step activity, independent of treatment, tended to be correlated with improvements in swinging out, tracking up, joint flexion, and overall gait score. The increased space allotted to LP cows may have allowed for a larger range of motion for each step, and the denser lying surface may have provided a cushioning effect when transitioning between rising and lying, all of which can improve joint health, reflected in improved joint flexion. Further investigation is warranted into the potential benefits of alternative housing on cow comfort, movement opportunity, and cow condition.

Invited review: The welfare of dairy cattle housed in tiestalls compared to less-restrictive housing types: A systematic review

Many dairy cattle worldwide are housed in tiestalls, meaning that they are tethered by the neck to individual stalls. On some farms, tied cattle are permitted seasonal access to pasture, but otherwise their movements are restricted compared with cows housed in freestall barns or other loose housing systems. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the scientific literature pertaining the welfare of tied dairy cattle through comparison with less-restrictive housing systems. Articles identified by PubMed and Web of Science underwent a 5-phase screening process, resulting in the inclusion of 102 papers. These papers addressed measures of welfare related to affective state, natural behavior, and health (with the lattermost category subdivided into hoof and leg disorders, lameness, mastitis, transition disease, and other diseases or conditions). Health was the most researched topic (discussed in 86% of articles); only 19% and 14% of studies addressed natural behavior and affective state, respectively. Our review highlights different health benefits for tethered and loose cattle. For example, tied cattle experience reduced prevalence of white line disease and digital dermatitis, whereas loose cattle experience fewer leg lesions and injuries. The prevalence of mastitis, transition diseases, and other conditions did not differ consistently across housing types. We found that the expression of certain natural behaviors, particularly those associated with lying down (e.g., time spent kneeling, unfulfilled intentions to lie down), were impaired in tiestalls. Articles addressing affective state found benefits to loose housing, but these studies focused almost exclusively on (1) physiological measurements and (2) cow comfort, a concept that lacks a consistent operational definition across studies. We call for future research into the affective state of tied cattle that extends beyond these explorations and employs more sophisticated methodologies.

Graduate Student Literature Review: The effect of housing systems on movement opportunity of dairy cows and the implications on cow health and comfort

Intensification within the dairy industry has led to an increase in use of more restrictive indoor housing systems (most commonly tiestalls and freestalls) and less use of the pasture-based housing systems used in past generations. These indoor housing systems are associated with not only a higher level of restriction to cow movement, but also with a higher prevalence of lameness and cow comfort issues on farm, which negatively affects cow welfare, public perceptions, and producer profitability. In looking for solutions to these issues, several studies have investigated different housing and management options that are less restrictive and increase cow movement opportunity. We hypothesized that movement opportunity, briefly summarized as the level of locomotor activity a cow is able to express in her given environment as well as the ease with which said movement can be expressed, can have a direct, substantial effect on cow comfort as well as cow leg and hoof health. Lying behaviors, which serve as common indicators of cow comfort, are affected not only by the ease of movement that comes with providing more movement opportunity within the lying environment, but also by the aforementioned improvements to leg health. This is particularly true regarding the ability to display different lying postures and to rise and lie down with ease. The complexity of the relationship between the different methods by which movement opportunity can be provided to dairy cows and the corresponding effects on outcome measures related to cow health and comfort is an area of research that warrants exploration. In this literature review, we sought to identify how level of movement opportunity, provided though different housing systems and management practices, affects cow hoof and leg, udder, and reproductive health, as well as the effects that it has on cow lying behaviors that are indicative of comfort.

Making tiestalls more comfortable: IV. Increasing stall bed length and decreasing manger wall height to heal injuries and increase lying time in dairy cows housed in deep-bedded tiestalls

Poor stall configuration can negatively affect cow welfare by impairing lying behavior and leading to injuries in dairy cows. The comfort of the stall bed in tiestalls is affected by the material components of the stall bed (stall base and bedding), but also by the amount of space provided. The amount of space cows are able to access lengthwise in a tiestall is determined by the stall bed length and the height of the manger wall (the front limit of the stall bed), which can limit access into the space available at the front of the stall. This project aimed to maximize cow comfort in deep-bedded tiestalls by investigating the combined effect of increased bed length and decreased manger wall height in a crossover experiment (2 periods with 1 wk habituation + 6 wk data collection). Two rows of 12 tiestalls were modified (n = 24 cows). Each row was a different length, short (178 cm; length commonly found in Quebec) or long (188 cm), and cows remained on the same row (same stall bed length) for the entire experiment. In each row, there were 6 stalls of each manger wall height treatment: high (20 cm, upper limit recommended) or low (5 cm). During period 2, cows switched manger wall height treatments. A 7.6-cm-deep straw bedding layer was added to all stalls by adding a bedding keeper to the ends of stalls. All initially injured locations healed over the 14-wk study, and 2 patterns of healing emerged. Improvement in hock injury (lateral tarsal and calcanei) was observed from wk 1 to 6 for all treatments. A plateau in injury severity score reduction was observed in period 2 for the hock (lateral, dorsal, and medial calcanei), anatomical knee, carpal joints (front knees), and proximal and medial neck, which was likely the result of the insensitivity of the injury scoring scheme rather than healing not occurring. Cows in long stalls were found to spend more time lying (14.1 vs. 13.3 h/d) and had longer lying bouts than cows in short stalls (74.1 vs. 52.9 min/bout). Manger wall height did not affect injury or lying time, but may affect how cows position themselves while lying. Higher lying times in our study were comparable to those reported in deep-bedded loose pens, indicating that cows with more bedding, especially those in long stalls, were more comfortable. Our results suggest that deep-bedded straw stalls with bedding keepers have the potential to be beneficial to cow comfort on tiestall farms.

Making tiestalls more comfortable: III. Providing additional lateral space to improve the resting capacity and comfort of dairy cows

Dairy cows housed in tiestalls are restricted to one space; therefore, this space should be designed to accommodate all the activities cows need to perform. Lying is a very important behavior for dairy cows as well as a critical measure in the assessment of stall designs, to ensure that the cows' needs for resting space are met. The objective of this study was to determine if increasing tiestall width alters the lying behavior of lactating dairy cows. Two treatments were compared: the current recommendation (139 cm) and a double stall (284 cm). Sixteen cows were blocked by parity and lactation stage, then randomly allocated to a treatment and a stall within 1 of 2 rows in the research barn, for 6 wk. The average stall length was 188 cm. Leg-mounted accelerometers were used to record lying behaviors. Cows were video-recorded 24 h/wk using surveillance cameras positioned above the stalls. Video data from wk 1, 3, and 6 were extracted at a rate of 1 image/min and analyzed by a trained observer to assess the position and the location of the cow's body, head, and limbs during the lying hours. Lying behaviors and frequency of each position and location were analyzed in SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) using a mixed model in which treatment, block, and week were included as fixed factors, and cow and row as random factors. Multiple comparisons were adjusted using the Scheffé method. Results indicate that cows in double stalls fully extended their hindlimbs more often than single stall cows (21.7 vs. 7.6% of lying time). Cows in double stalls also intruded in the neighboring stalls with their hindlimbs less often (1.3 vs. 14.7% of lying time), instead positioning them inside their own stall more often (92.7 vs. 84.6% of lying time). Use of the second stall in the double stall group totaled 11.6, 5.1, 33.8, and 18.0% of lying time, respectively, for the head, front legs, hind legs, and body. Total lying time was not statistically different between double (716 min/d) and single stall (671 min/d) groups. Contacts with stall hardware during lying-down movements were also less frequent in double stalls (43.1 vs. 77.1% of lying events) compared with single stalls. These results suggest that dairy cows housed in double stalls modified their resting habits and used the extra space made available to them. Increasing stall width beyond the current recommendation is likely to benefit the cows by improving their ability to rest.

Gain and loss of subcutaneous and abdominal adipose tissue depot mass of German Holstein dairy cows with different body conditions during the transition period

Subcutaneous adipose tissue (SCAT) and abdominal adipose tissue (AAT) depots are mobilized during the fresh cow period (FCP) and early lactation period (ELP) to counteract the negative energy balance (NEB). Earlier studies suggested that fat depots contribute differently to lipomobilization and may vary in functionality. Differences between the adipose depots might influence the development of metabolic disorders. Thus, the gain and loss of subcutaneous and abdominal adipose depot masses in Holstein cows with lower and higher body condition (mean body condition scores: 3.48 and 3.87, respectively) were compared in the period from d -42 to d 70 relative to parturition in this study. Animals of the 2 experimental groups represented adequately conditioned and overconditioned cows. Estimated depot mass (eDM) of SCAT, AAT, retroperitoneal, omental, and mesenteric adipose depots of 31 pluriparous German Holstein cows were determined via ultrasonography at d -42, 7, 28, and 70 relative to parturition. The cows were grouped according to the eDM of SCAT on d -42 [low body condition (LBC) group: n = 16, mean eDM 8.6 kg; high body condition (HBC) group: n = 15, mean eDM 15.6 kg]. Average daily change (prepartum gain and postpartum loss) in depot masses during dry period (DP; from d -42 to d 7), FCP (d 7 to d 28), and ELP (d 28 to d 70) were calculated and daily dry matter intake and lactation performance recorded. Cows of this study stored about 2 to 3 times more fat in AAT than in SCAT depots. After parturition, on average more adipose tissue mass was lost from the AAT than the SCAT depot (0.23 kg/d vs. 0.14 kg/d). Cows with high compared with low body condition had similar gains in AAT (0.33 kg/d) and SCAT (0.14 kg/d) masses during the DP but mobilized significantly more adipose tissue mass from both depots after calving (AAT, HBC vs. LBC: 0.30 vs. 0.17 kg/d; SCAT, HBC vs. LBC: 0.19 vs. 0.10 kg/d). Correlation analysis indicated a functional disparity between AAT and SCAT. In the case of AAT (R² = 0.36), the higher the gain in adipose mass during DP, the higher the loss in FCP, but this was not the case for SCAT. During FCP, a greater NEB resulted in greater loss of mass from SCAT (R² = 0.18). In turn, greater mobilization of SCAT mass led to a higher calculated feed efficiency (R² = 0.18). However, AAT showed no such correlations. On the other hand, during ELP, loss of both SCAT and AAT mass correlated positively with feed efficiency (R² = 0.35 and 0.33, respectively). The results indicate that feed efficiency may not be an adequate criterion for performance evaluation in cows during NEB. Greater knowledge of functional disparities between AAT and SCAT depots may improve our understanding of excessive lipomobilization and its consequences for metabolic health and performance of dairy cows during the transition period.

Graduate Student Literature Review: The effects of bedding, stall length, and manger wall height on common outcome measures of dairy cow welfare in stall-based housing systems

Understanding and improving dairy cow welfare in stall-based housing systems is an important issue for the dairy industry, and one area of the stall that has a large impact on cow welfare is the stall bed. The stall bed is defined both by its size and by the material components of the stall bed (bedding depth, bedding type, and stall base type). This review examines the current literature to determine how the material components of the stall bed, as well as bed length and manger wall/brisket board height (which together define the length of the stall bed) can affect cow welfare through lying time, injuries, lameness, and cow and stall cleanliness. Of the material components of the stall bed, bedding depth appears to have the largest potential positive impact on dairy cow welfare, as deeper levels of bedding in stalls, regardless of the bedding type, can improve compressibility to the extent that the stall base type is negligible. As such, deeper levels of bedding have been associated with increased lying time and a reduced likelihood of a cow developing injuries or becoming lame. Longer stall bed lengths have been shown to increase lying time and decrease the prevalence of injury and lameness. The effect of manger wall or brisket board height on cow welfare has not been studied extensively, but they may work in conjunction with other stall components to define the resting space available to the cow. Overall, the material components of the stall bed, stall length, and manger wall/brisket board height, as well as their combination, all influence cow welfare and need to be taken in consideration to improve the overall welfare of cows in stall-based housing systems.

Effect of forest biomass as bedding material on compost-bedded pack performance, microbial content, and behavior of nonlactating dairy cows

Compost-bedded pack (CBP) barns for dairy cows mainly use sawdust as bedding material. The objective of this study was to compare forest biomass to sawdust as bedding material for CBP. Variables evaluated included CBP moisture, temperature and C:N ratio, bedding microbial counts, and behavior and welfare measures of nonlactating cows. The experimental design was a crossover where two 11-wk periods were performed. Treatments were CBP with sawdust (CBP-S) as a control treatment and CBP with forest biomass (CBP-FB) as the experimental bedding material. Weather conditions, intake, CBP temperature, CBP moisture, and welfare assessment were measured during the entire periods. We took CBP samples for microbiological analysis and video recordings for animal behavior assessment in wk 11 of each period. The CBP management was the same in both treatments and periods, based on twice-daily tilling at a 30 cm depth, and the addition of 0.8 kg/m² of new bedding material per day. Ambient temperature and environmental humidity were 9.1°C and 82.5% in period 1, and 13.2°C and 75.3% in period 2. Average DMI and water consumption were 17.4 ± 0.86 kg/d and 50.9 ± 7.84 L/d in period 1, and 16.3 ± 0.96 kg/d and 56.3 ± 8.02 L/d in period 2. Average of temperature, moisture, and C:N ratio of CBP were 32.2°C, 63.6%, and 44:1 in CBP-S, and 24.3°C, 66.4%, and 35:1 in CBP-FB, respectively. Temperature was higher in CBP-S than in CBP-FB, and in period 2 compared with period 1. Moisture was higher in CBP-FB than in CBP-S in period 1, but did not differ between treatments in period 2. The C:N ratio was higher in CBP-S than in CBP-FB in both periods. Total bacteria count and Bacillus spp. were similar between treatments. Klebsiella spp. counts in CBP-S were higher than in CBP-FB, and Streptococcus spp. and yeasts and fungi counts in CBP-S were lower than in CBP-FB. Total coliforms, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus counts in CBP-S were higher than in CBP-FB in period 1, but did not differ between treatments in period 2. No differences were detected in lying time (15.5 h/d), and time needed to lie down was higher in CBP-FB (5.3 s) than in CBP-S (4.6 s). We found that CBP performance and cow comfort in CBP-FB were lower than in CBP-S, but microbial counts of some species were better controlled in CBP-FB than in CBP-S.

Symposium review: Considerations for the future of dairy cattle housing: An animal welfare perspective

Many contemporary dairy cattle housing practices are at odds with societal perceptions of positive animal welfare. The public (i.e., those external to the dairy industry) typically emphasizes the importance of naturalness for dairy cattle, such as through provision of pasture, freedom of movement, and the ability to interact socially with conspecifics. Yet, in the United States, the majority of lactating dairy cattle are reportedly housed without any access to pasture, and almost 39% of dairy farms use tiestalls, which restrict movement and social interactions. In addition to being in conflict with public expectations, a lack of pasture access and restrictive housing systems are also in conflict with the animals' own motivations, which can adversely affect their welfare. For example, dairy cattle are highly motivated to access pasture and show a reduction in oral stereotypies when allowed on pasture after periods of tethering. Calves housed without social contact have cognitive deficits and exhibit increased fear responses to novelty. We argue that the long-term sustainability of the dairy industry will depend on the extent to which housing systems reflect public concerns and the animals' priorities. The adoption of technologies, such as automated feeders and remote monitoring systems, may represent a means to practically promote the animals' natural behavior while simultaneously improving individualized care. Although older generations of the public may consider technological solutions to be a further deviation from naturalness and a departure from dairy farming's agrarian roots, the definition of "naturalness" for younger generations may well have expanded to include technology. As the buying power shifts to these younger generations, the adoption of technologies that promote natural cattle behaviors may be one means toward reconciling the disconnect between public perceptions of animal welfare and contemporary dairy farming practices.