Feed bunk length requirements for Holstein dairy heifers

Large Group Housing Systems in Fattening Bulls-Comparison of Behavior and Performance

According to international housing recommendations, fattening bulls should not be housed in groups of more than 12-20 animals. However, there are no scientific studies supporting these recommendations as most studies on fattening cattle refer to smaller groups. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare behavior and performance of 187 fattening bulls housed in different group sizes of 16, 22, and 33 animals. Behavioral observations were performed during three observation periods at an average age of 8.5, 13, and 17 months. Furthermore, body condition, health status and carcass weights were analyzed. Effects of increasing group size were observed regarding more synchronized lying behavior, longer lying durations and more undisturbed feeding and lying behavior. Interindividual variations in lying and feeding as well as mean and maximum percentages of animals participating simultaneously in interactions did not increase with group size. Health and growth performance were satisfactory in all group sizes. Therefore, the results of this study do not provide scientific evidence for the common argument that increasing group size leads to increased aggression. Furthermore, these findings indicate large group systems to be suitable for the housing of fattening cattle and to contribute to increasing animal welfare. Consequently, current recommendations should be revised.

Characterization of feeding behavior traits in steers with divergent residual feed intake consuming a high-concentrate diet

The objective of this study was to examine the differences in feeding behavior patterns of steers with divergent phenotypes for residual feed intake (RFI). Three trials were conducted with 508 Angus-based composite crossbred steers (body weight [BW] = 309 ± 57 kg) fed a high-concentrate diet in pens equipped with electronic feed bunks (GrowSafe System). Initial and final carcass ultrasound measurements (intra-muscular fat, backfat depth, and rib-eye area) were collected on days 0 and 70, and BW measured at 14-d intervals. Individual dry matter intake (DMI) and feeding behavior traits were collected for 70 d, and RFI calculated as the residual from the regression of DMI on average daily gain (ADG) and mid-test BW0.75. Steers were ranked by RFI and assigned to low-, medium-, and high-RFI classes based on ± 0.5 SD from the mean RFI within the trial. The feeding behavior traits evaluated in this study included frequency and duration of bunk visit (BV) and meal events, head-down (HD) duration, mean meal length, time-to-bunk interval, the maximum nonfeeding interval, and the day-to-day variation of these traits, defined as the root mean squared error (RMSE) from linear regression of each trait on the day of trial. Additionally, three ratio traits were evaluated: BV events per meal, HD duration per BV event, and HD duration per meal event. Low-RFI (feed-efficient) steers consumed 16% less (P < 0.01) DMI, while BW and ADG were not different compared with high-RFI steers. Low-RFI steers had 18% fewer and 21% shorter (P < 0.01) BV events, and 11% fewer and 13% shorter (P < 0.01) meal events per day compared with high-RFI steers. Furthermore, low-RFI steers exhibited less (P < 0.05) day-to-day variance in DMI, as well as in frequency and duration of BV and meal events and HD duration compared with high-RFI steers. Differences in feeding behavior traits due to RFI were minimally affected by covariate adjustment for DMI, indicating that steers with divergent RFI have distinct feeding behavior patterns that are largely independent of differences in DMI. These results suggest that feeding behavior traits may be useful biomarkers for the prediction of feed efficiency in beef cattle.

Effects of feedbunk restrictions and push-up frequency on the growth performance of Holstein dairy heifers offered a forage-based diet with a limit-feeding strategy

Conceptually, there are 2 feeding strategies for avoiding over-conditioning, which can be problematic for gravid dairy heifers that have reduced dietary energy density requirements relative to younger animals: (1) diluting the ad libitum-fed diet with low-energy forages; or (2) offering a diet of greater nutrient density but intentionally restricting the DM available for consumption (limit-feeding). Our objectives for this study were to evaluate the effects of feedbunk restriction and feed push-up frequency on the growth performance of gravid Holstein dairy heifers. A total of 128 Holstein heifers (434 ± 46.7 kg) were enrolled in the trial. Heifers were blocked by weight, and assigned to 1 of 16 identical research pens (4 pens/weight block; 8 heifers/pen), where the mean initial body weight (BW; ± SD) for the 4 blocks were 491 ± 19.0, 450 ± 16.5, 419 ± 10.6, 374 ± 23.0 kg. Within each block, a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments was assigned; treatments consisted of feedbunk access [full (FUL) or restricted (RES] and feed push-up frequency [1.5- or 3.0-h intervals]. The RES treatment was applied by covering 2 of the 8 head-locking feed gates in assigned pens with plywood partitions, thereby creating a feedbunk-stocking rate of 133%. A total mixed ration diet composed of alfalfa haylage (60.5%), corn silage (38.0%), and mineral (1.5%) was offered once daily for 91 d; daily feed allotments (overall mean = 9.11 kg dry matter (DM)/d) were generally consumed entirely within 9 h of feeding. Nutrient intakes were not affected by push-up frequency or the interaction of main effects, but all intakes were affected by feedbunk access, except for DM and neutral detergent fiber expressed as a percentage of BW (overall means = 1.93 and 0.80%, respectively). In each case, intakes for FUL were greater than those observed for RES; for DM intake, this amounted to a difference of 0.20 kg/d between those main-effect treatments. After 91 d, heifers without feedbunk restriction exhibited greater final BW, but total gain and average daily gain differed only numerically between FUL and RES. Under the conditions of this trial, heifers were blocked by weight, such that BW were relatively uniform within each pen, and head-locking feed gates were used, which also provided some protection from adjacent aggressive heifers. These results suggest heifers can exhibit acceptable growth performance on high-forage diets in a limit-feeding program that includes moderate feedbunk restriction provided other forms of stress are minimized.

Feeding Behavior of Fattening Bulls Fed Six Times per Day Using an Automatic Feeding System

The usage of automatic feeding systems (AFS) in cattle offers multiple advantages, mostly due to the possibility of an increased feeding frequency. While it is gaining more and more importance in dairy farming, there is still a lack of experience and scientific knowledge regarding its use in fattening cattle. The aim of this study was to describe the behavior of 56 Simmental bulls fed with an AFS six times daily a total mixed ration. The animals arrived at the farm with an average age of 148 ± 11 days. They were housed in four straw-bedded pens in groups of 14 animals each. Their average slaughter age was 558 ± 20 days. Behavioral observations were made during three observation periods (OP) at an average of 11, 14, and 16 months of age. Using scan sampling, feeding, and lying behavior of all animals and the order of bulls feeding after feed delivery were recorded. Furthermore, body condition and health status were monitored and complemented with the carcass weights. Body condition, health status, and carcass weights of the bulls were found to be satisfactory: Mean body condition score increased from 2.8 ± 0.3 in OP1 to 3.0 ± 0.1 in OP3 and mean carcass weight was 432.71 ± 40.82 kg. No severe health problems occurred. The feeding activity of the bulls was spread out over the course of the day with peaks in the afternoon and evening. Percentages of bulls feeding per pen never exceeded 20%, animals feeding mostly alone (during 28.04 ± 2.15% of total observation time) or in groups of two to three (16.61 ± 2.00% and 6.74 ± 1.90%). The order of bulls feeding after feed delivery varied indicating that all animals had similar access to fresh feed. These results emphasize the importance of constant feed availability and quality at any time of the day, thus indicating the ability of an AFS with six daily feedings to ensure such a consistency.

Effects of overstocking at the feedbunk on the growth performance and sorting characteristics of a forage-based diet offered for ad libitum intake to replacement Holstein dairy heifers

Various forms of overcrowding are common in heifer-rearing operations. Our objectives for this study were to evaluate the effects of overstocking at the feedbunk (100, 133, 160, or 200% of capacity) on the growth performance, feedbunk sorting behaviors, and hygiene of 128 gravid Holstein heifers (475 ± 55.3 kg) consuming an alfalfa haylage and corn silage diet diluted with processed wheat straw at an inclusion rate of 25.2% (DM basis). In this study, heifers were overstocked only at the feedbunk, and not with respect to available freestalls or pen area. Heifers were blocked by weight, and subsequently assigned to 1 of 16 identical research pens. A total mixed ration was distributed at 1000 h daily for 91 d via a drive-through feed alley, with heifers allowed access to the feedbunk through head-locking feeding gates. Mean weights for the 4 blocks (32 heifers/block) were 406 ± 14.9, 453 ± 15.3, 493 ± 17.6, and 548 ± 21.9 kg. Generally, nutrient intakes were not affected by stocking rate at the feedbunk; mean intakes of dry matter, neutral detergent fiber, and total digestible nutrients across all feedbunk stocking rates were 10.63, 5.19, and 6.29 kg/d, respectively. Overall, the effects of competition at the feedbunk on heifer growth performance were minor, with a collective average daily gain of 1.02 kg/d across all treatments. Only trends for linear increases in total weight gain and BCS were observed with overstocking at the feedbunk. Collectively, overstocked rates also exhibited a trend for better feed-to-gain ratio than pens stocked at 100% of feedbunk capacity (10.3 vs. 11.0 kg:kg). We observed solid evidence that heifers collectively sorted against large (>19 mm) particles, and also exhibited preference for short (>1.18 and <8 mm) and fine (<1.18 mm) feed particles; however, these responses were not affected by feedbunk stocking rate. Additionally, heifers sorted against neutral detergent fiber as the concentration of neutral detergent fiber remaining in the feedbunk increased during the 24-h period following feeding; conversely, they preferred crude protein, as indicated by a decreasing concentration of this nutrient over time. Heifer hygiene was not affected by competition at the feedbunk. Under the experimental conditions established for this trial, overstocking at the feedbunk did not affect heifer growth performance, but it should not be practiced blindly without attention to other critical components of animal welfare.

Growth performance and sorting characteristics of corn silage-alfalfa haylage diets with or without forage dilution offered to replacement Holstein dairy heifers

Gravid heifers consuming high-quality forage diets are susceptible to excessive weight gains and overconditioning. One approach for controlling this problem is to dilute diets with low-energy forages, such as straw, that reduce the caloric density and dry matter intake (DMI) of that diet by heifers. These diluting agents are often sortable by dairy heifers, but previous visual evidence has suggested that eastern gamagrass haylage may be a nonsortable alternative. Our objectives were (1) to compare the growth performance of dairy heifers offered a high-quality forage diet (control) with diets containing 1 of 3 diluting agents [eastern gamagrass haylage (EGH), chopped wheat straw (WS), or chopped corn fodder (CF)]; and (2) evaluate sorting behaviors of heifers offered these forage diets. Holstein heifers (n=128) were stratified (32 heifers/block) on the basis of initial body weight (heavy, 560 ± 27.7 kg; medium-heavy, 481 ± 17.7 kg; medium-light, 441 ± 22.0 kg; and light, 399 ± 14.4 kg), and then assigned to 1 of 16 identical research pens (4 pens/block; 8 heifers/pen), where each of the 4 research diets were assigned to 1 pen within each block. Diets were offered in a 118-d feeding trial with heifers crowded to 133% of capacity at the feed bunk. Inclusion of low-energy forages was effective in reducing both diet energy density and DMI. Concentrations of physically effective fiber (pef) particles did not change during the 24-h period following feeding for either the control or EGH diets; however, this response for pef particles masked the competing (and cancelling) responses for individual large and medium particles, which heifers sorted with discrimination and preference, respectively. Sorting against pef particles was detected for WS, and much more severely for the CF diet. Sorting of forage particles by heifers could not be related to heifer performance. Compared with control (1.16 kg/d), average daily gains (ADG) were reduced by dilution in all cases, but were virtually identical between EGH (0.98 kg/d) and CF (0.97 kg/d), which exhibited no sorting and extensive sorting of pef, respectively. Furthermore, ADG for WS was approximately 0.2 kg/d less than EGH or CF, despite exhibiting sorting characteristics intermediate between EGH and CF. Diets diluted with low-energy forages were formulated to be isonitrogenous and isocaloric; within that context, WS was most effective in reducing DMI and maintaining ADG within typical recommendations for Holstein heifers.

Nonnutritional factors influencing response to the nutritional program

In this article, the important role of the cow's environment is addressed, namely, the facilities that provide opportunities to eat, sleep, drink water, and socially interact. Research and anecdotal observation suggest that cow comfort is a critical factor to success of any nutritional program.

Effect of frequency of feed delivery on the feeding behaviour, growth, and rumen temperature of limit-fed dairy heifers

Greter, A. M., AlZahal, O., Duffield, T. F., McBride, W. B., Widowski, T. M. and DeVries, T. J. 2014. Effect of frequency of feed delivery on the feeding behaviour, growth, and rumen temperature of limit-fed dairy heifers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 11–20. The objective of this experiment was to determine the effect that frequency of provision of feed, provided in a restricted amount, had on feeding and lying behaviour, growth, and rumen temperature of growing dairy heifers. Twenty-four Holstein heifers (178.2±9.3 d of age; mean±SD), divided into six groups of four, were assigned to each of three treatments using a 3×3 Latin square design with 28-d periods (21-d adaptation, 7-d data collection). Treatments were delivery of daily allotment of total mixed ration (fed at 2.0% of body weight): (1) once per day (1×; 0800), (2) twice per day (2×; 0800 and 1600), and (3) four times per day (4×; 0800, 1200, 1600, and 2000). Average daily gain (ADG) was similar across treatments (0.8 kg d−1). There was a tendency for within-pen variation of ADG (average, per pen, of the absolute difference between individual heifer ADG and pen mean ADG) to be greater with 4× (0.3 kg d−1) and 2× (0.3 kg d−1) compared with 1× (0.2 kg d−1). Both feeding (63.1 vs. 44.2 vs. 51.5 min d−1) and unrewarded (presence at the feed bunk when no feed was present; 49.5 vs. 27.7 vs. 33.1 min d−1) time at the feed bunk decreased with increasing frequency of feed delivery (1×, 2×, and 4×, respectively). Frequency of displacements (3.1 displacements d−1) and number of displacements per unit of feeding time (0.06 displacements min−1) were similar between treatments. Lying time was similar between treatments (802.5 min d−1), while there was an increase in the amount of time spent standing without eating as frequency of feed delivery increased (558.9 vs. 590.0 vs. 604.7 min d−1 for 1×, 2×, and 4×, respectively). Thus, feeding 1× d−1 may prove beneficial for limit-fed heifers as it increases the time spent feeding, and decreases time spent standing without eating and within-pen variation in ADG.

Short communication: effects of frequency of feed delivery and bunk space on the feeding behavior of limit-fed dairy heifers

The objective of this experiment was to determine the interaction between feed bunk space and frequency of feed provision on the feeding behavior patterns and growth of growing dairy heifers fed a limited amount. Sixteen Holstein dairy heifers (183.4 ± 9.1 d of age, mean ± standard deviation) were divided into 4 groups of 4. The groups were exposed to each of 4 treatments, using a 4 × 4 Latin square design with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments, over 21-d periods (14-d adaptation period, 7-d data collection periods). The treatments were arranged in 2 feed delivery frequencies (once per day at 1200 h: 1 ×/d, and twice per day at 1200 and 1400 h: 2 ×/d) and 2 levels of feed bunk space (adequate feed bunk space: 0.40 m/heifer, and reduced feed bunk space: 0.29 m/heifer). Pen dry matter intake (DMI) was recorded daily, average daily gain (ADG) was recorded weekly, and variability in ADG was calculated from the standard deviation of ADG. Feeding, unrewarded behavior (time at feed bunk without feed present), and competitive behavior were recorded using time-lapse video. Feeding and unrewarded behavior were measured for the last 7 d of each period, whereas competitive behavior was recorded on d 16, 18, and 20 of each period. Lying time was recorded for the last 7 d of each period. A tendency for interaction between feed bunk space and frequency of feed delivery on the feed efficiency of limit-fed dairy heifers was noted. Heifers provided restricted bunk space were reported as being less efficient when fed 2 ×/d; however, no other interactions were found. Although DMI and variability in ADG were similar between treatments, ADG was higher (1.0 vs. 0.9 kg/d) when heifers were provided with 0.40 m of feed bunk space and tended to be higher when fed 1 ×/d compared with that of heifers given restricted bunk space or fed 2 ×/d. Heifers fed 1 ×/d spent more time feeding throughout the day (70.5 vs. 58.9 min/d) than heifers fed 2 ×/d. Heifers fed at a restricted bunk space or fed 1 ×/d were approximately 25% more variable in feeding time than heifers fed 2 ×/d or with adequate bunk space. Heifers spent a similar amount of time in unrewarded visits to the feed bunk (28.9 min/d). Although feed bunk space did not affect competition (3.6 displacements/d), heifers fed 1 ×/d were displaced twice as frequently than heifers fed 2 ×/d. Regardless of treatment, heifers spent a similar amount of time lying down and standing without eating. Overall, providing sufficient feed bunk space to allow all limit-fed heifers to feed simultaneously improves feed efficiency and ADG and reduces variability in feeding time. Additionally, although delivering feed 1 ×/d resulted in increased competition, it also enabled heifers to gain adequate weight and spend more time feeding each day.

Short communication: Limit feeding dairy heifers: effect of feed bunk space and provision of a low-nutritive feedstuff

The objectives of this study were to examine the behavioral effects of providing limit-fed dairy heifers an increased amount of feed bunk space compared with recommended feed bunk allowance, and to determine if the effects of provision of extra bunk space would be comparable to those seen when limit-fed heifers are provided a low-nutritive feedstuff. Twelve Holstein dairy heifers (381.1 ± 44.8 d of age, 417.3 ± 47.9 kg), divided into groups of 4, were exposed to each of 3 treatments using a 3 × 3 Latin square design with 7-d periods. The treatments were (1) 0.68 m of feed bunk space/heifer (TMR-0.68), (2) 0.34 m of feed bunk space/heifer (TMR-0.34), and (3) 0.34 m of feed bunk space/heifer with an additional 0.34 m of feed bunk space available for free-choice straw (TMR-S). The total mixed ration was fed once daily at a restricted level (1.83% of body weight) and contained (dry matter basis) 19.9% alfalfa/grass haylage, 20.1% corn silage, 49.6% high-moisture corn, and 10.4% protein supplement. Group dry matter intake (DMI) was recorded daily. Behavior at the feed bunk was recorded for the last 4 d of each treatment period. Due to the provision of straw, DMI was highest on the TMR-S treatment compared with the other treatments (9.4 vs. 7.8 kg/d). Heifers spent the most time feeding when on the TMR-S treatment (147.7 min/d), with no difference in feeding time between the limit-fed TMR treatments (64.5 min/d). Within the TMR-S treatment, feeding time on the straw was 76.9 min/d; thus, the rate of consumption of only the TMR was similar across all treatments. Unrewarded time at the feed bunk (when no feed was present) did not differ between treatments. Heifers did not differ in competitive behavior when on the limit-fed TMR treatments (13.1 displacements/heifer per day). However, while on the TMR-S treatment, heifers displaced each other more frequently (23.8 displacements/heifer per day) than while on the other 2 treatments. Overall, results suggest that neither increased feed bunk space nor provision of straw will reduce competition for, or slow consumption rates of, a limit-fed TMR. The provision of straw alongside a limit-fed TMR did increase DMI, which would contribute to further rumen fill, and allowed heifers to increase their time spent feeding throughout the day.

Competition for feed affects the feeding behavior of growing dairy heifers

The objective of this study was to determine how competition for feed influences the feeding behavior of young, growing dairy heifers. Thirty-six prepubertal Holstein heifers (231.5 +/- 12.1 d old, weighing 234.7 +/- 24.0 kg), consuming a total mixed ration ad libitum, were assigned to 1 of 2 treatments: noncompetitive (1 heifer/feed bin), or competitive (2 heifers/feed bin). After 7 d of treatment adaptation, dry matter intake and feeding behavior were monitored for 7 d for each animal. Fresh feed and orts were sampled on the last 3 d of the treatment period from each bin and were subjected to particle size analysis. The particle size separator consisted of 3 screens (18, 9, and 1.18 mm) and a bottom pan resulting in 4 fractions (long, medium, short, and fine). Sorting activity for each fraction was calculated as the actual intake expressed as a percentage of the predicted intake. There was no difference in sorting behavior or dry matter intake between the treatments. Overall, the heifers sorted against long particles (94%), and sorted for medium (102%) and short (103%) particles. The competitively fed heifers tended to have 10% shorter feeding times, particularly at peak feeding periods. The competitively fed heifers also consumed 9% fewer meals per day, although the duration of these meals were 10% longer, and tended to be 13% larger. Competition for feed also tended to increase the day-to-day variation in feeding time, meal duration, and meal size. It can be concluded that competition for feed for growing dairy heifers alters feeding patterns, reduces access to feed, particularly during periods of peak feeding activity, and tends to increase day-to-day variation in feeding behavior.

The use of coarse maize silage as a dietary source of roughage for finishing Limousin bulls: effects on growth performance, feeding behaviour and meat quality

Two isonitrogenous, isocaloric and isofibrous diets for finishing beef cattle differing only in their roughage constituents were compared in a feeding trial with Limousin bulls. A control maize silage (chop length = 9 mm) and wheat straw were the roughage sources of the former diet representing 0·23 and 0·09 of the dietary dry matter (DM) respectively. These roughage sources were fully replaced in the latter by the inclusion of a coarsely chopped maize silage (19 mm) at a level of 0·45 of the total dietary DM. Two balanced groups of 20 Limousin bulls (425·8 ± 20·3 kg live weight) each allotted in four pens were given the two diets ad libitum for a finishing period of 138 days. The different dietary roughages did not affect either bull growth performance (average daily gain = 1·39 ± 0·25 kg/day) or food conversion ratio. However, the diet containing the coarse silage significantly (P < 0·05) reduced the intake of both DM (8·30 v. 9·02 kg/day) and neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) (2·64 v. 2·92 kg/day). Although total ruminating time was similar for both diets, bulls given the coarse maize silage diet spent more time ruminating 1 kg of DM or NDF, probably due to the higher percentage of dietary forage NDF. No food selection activity towards specific chemical constituents was observed in either diet. Slaughter measurements and meat quality were satisfactory and unaffected by the type of dietary roughage. Based on cattle growth performance, feeding behaviour, and meat quality, the use of coarse maize silage as a dietary source of roughage can be considered a feasible alternative in beef cattle finishing.

Prediction of Dairy Housing Construction Costs

Dairy farms in Galicia and elsewhere in Europe are going through a transition phase to adapt to modern dairy technology, improve labor efficiency, and increase in size and scale. Expanding a dairy herd and building housing for more cows can be very expensive. A poor decision during expansion can result in serious financial difficulties even to the point of making the farm economically unviable. Dairy managers must carefully evaluate existing alternatives and must select an optimal strategy. To aid this decision, a computer spreadsheet application has been developed that predicts the cost per cow and cost per unit of area of alternative designs as functions of the number of cows to be housed. The spreadsheet is, in principle, applicable to a wide variety of designs and to housing for livestock other than dairy cattle. However, the current database allows comparison among six of the dairy housing designs that have been used most widely in Galicia in recent years. From projected financial results of the developed model, it was concluded that differing designs were preferred for different farm circumstances. Preferred designs for farms with 60 to 200 cows were either four rows of facing free stalls or four rows of tail-to-tail free stalls, which have virtually the same costs. Whereas for farms with fewer than 60 cows, the preferred design was two rows of tail-to-tail free stalls, designs with three rows of free stalls were generally more costly per cow. Results of design calculations must be integrated with other farm management considerations in choosing a particular design.