Cow Lying Behaviour and Bedding Quality Changes during Five Weeks on a Stand-Off Pad

A Review of the Effects of Stress on Dairy Cattle Behaviour

In this narrative review, the authors summarise the relationship between stress and behaviour and how dairy cattle cope with stressors. Based on the available literature, the most common stressors in intensive dairy cattle farming, such as pain, disease, heat stress, poor comfort caused by technology, and social stress, are surveyed. The authors describe how these stressors modify the behaviour of dairy cattle, influencing their feeding patterns, social interactions, and overall well-being. Additionally, the review explores the effectiveness of various coping mechanisms employed by dairy cattle to mitigate stress, including physiological adaptations and behavioural responses. This review is a valuable resource for understanding and grading stress in dairy cattle through behavioural reactions. Elucidating the intricate interplay between stressors and behaviour offers insights into potential interventions to improve animal welfare and productivity in dairy farming. Furthermore, this review highlights areas for future research, suggesting avenues for more comprehensive behavioural studies to enhance our understanding of stress management strategies in dairy cattle.

Effects of two wintering practices on behavioral and physiological indicators of welfare of non-lactating, pregnant dairy cattle in a pasture-based system

In countries with pasture-based dairy systems and relatively cold winters, such as New Zealand, it is common to manage pregnant, nonlactating cows on forage crop paddocks rather than pasture due to slow pasture growth rates. Wintering dairy cattle on grazed crops can compromise welfare if wet and muddy underfoot conditions occur, which can reduce lying. This study investigated behavioral and physiological indicators of welfare of cows under 2 wintering practices: cows managed on and grazed kale crop (Brassica oleracea), and cows managed on pasture with baled hay. Following dry-off (d 0), 80 cows were randomly assigned to one of the 2 wintering practices (40 cows/practice) and monitored between d 4 and d 32 (phase 1). During this period, lying and stepping behavior was continuously recorded using leg-based accelerometers. Blood samples were obtained at d 0 and 32 for measurements of thyroxine (T4), nonesterified fatty acids (NEFA), white blood cells (WBC), and red blood cells (RBC). All data for phase 1 were presented descriptively due to the lack of treatment replication. Daily mean air temperature during this period was 5.2°C (range: 0.0 to 10.7°C), and rainfall was 1.1mm/d (range: 0 to 5.6mm/d). Between d 4 and 32, cows in both groups spent similar amounts of time lying (pasture with hay cows: 8.9h/24h ± 2.57, kale crop cows: 8.7h/24h ± 3.06, mean ± SEM). Both groups reduced their lying on wet and cold days and there was evidence of rebound lying once unfavorable weather conditions stopped. Cows on kale crop had numerically higher NEFA and lower WBC compared with cows managed on pasture, although most physiological values were within normal ranges. In a second phase of the study (d 34 and 35), cows were managed under controlled, replicated conditions in the 2 wintering practices using typical on-farm stocking rates (2 or 4 cows per group in the pasture with hay and kale crop treatments, respectively; n = 10 groups/treatment). During this period, cow behavior, skin and surface temperatures, hygiene scores, feed intakes and ground conditions were measured. Weather conditions during the 48-h exposure were mostly cold and dry (mean air temperature: 7.8°C, range: -2.2 to 20.5°C). Cows managed on pasture with hay spent more time lying down on the first day of exposure, however, this was likely due to less space being available to kale cows on this day. Cows managed on pasture with hay ruminated more than cows on kale crop on both days of observations (Day 1: 37.9% vs 30.9% of observations, Day 2: 36.8% vs 28.7% of observations for pasture with hay and kale crop groups, respectively) and were lying more often in postures indicative of greater thermal comfort. Cows managed on pasture with hay had higher skin and surface temperatures compared with cows on kale crop, whereas cows on kale crop had dirtier coats. Results suggest that opportunities for thermal comfort were greater for cows managed on pasture with hay bales, which may be due to increased rumination activities and more insulated lying areas.

Treatment of cow manure from exercise pens: A laboratory-scale study of the effect of air injection on conventional and alternative biofilters

Woodchips in stand-off pads for wintering cows have been applied in countries like Ireland and New Zealand. Their primary role is to protect soils by effectively filtering nutrients during wet conditions, while ensuring a healthy and comfortable environment for the cows. The stand-off pad concept has the potential to be adopted in Canada to provide year-long outdoor access to tie-stall dairy cows. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of alternative filtering materials and bed aeration under controlled laboratory conditions. Twelve biofilter columns (0.3 m in diameter and 1-m high) were installed in 12 environmentally-controlled chambers (1.2-m wide by 2.4-m long), and divided into four treatments: a bed of conventional woodchips or an alternative mix of organic materials (sphagnum peat moss, woodchips and biochar) with and without aeration (flux rate set at 0.6 m3/min/m2). Approximately 0.6 L of semi-synthetic dairy manure and 1 L of tap water were poured on the biofilters during two experimental periods of 4 weeks, simulating the effect of either winter or summer conditions (room temperature below or over 10 °C) on the retention of nutrients and fecal bacteria. Results showed that the alternative biofilters under both summer and winter conditions were more efficient in removing COD, SS, TN, and NO3-N than conventional biofilters (maximum efficiencies of 97.6%, 99.7%, 96.4%, and 98.4%, respectively). Similarly for E. coli, they achieved a minimum concentration of 1.8 Log10 CFU/100 ml. Conventional biofilters were more efficient for PO4-P removal with a maximum efficiency of 88.2%. Aeration did not have any significant effect under the tested temperature conditions. Additional factors such as media adaptation time as well as aeration flow during this period should be considered.

A short-term comparison of wheat straw and poplar wood chips used as litter in tiestalls on hygiene, milk, and behavior of lactating dairy cows

A short-term study was conducted to compare the effect of using poplar wood chips (PWC) instead of wheat straw (WS) litter in dairy cows. A total of 38 lactating Holstein cows (204 ± 119 days in milk, 26.9 ± 6.5 kg of milk yield [MY]) were housed in a tiestall farm for a 10-d trial including 5 d of adaptation followed by 5 sampling days (from d 5 to 10). Cows were divided into 2 homogeneous groups: one group was bedded with WS, and the second with PWC. Both litter materials were provided in the amount of 7 kg/stall per d. Each group was composed of 3 subgroups of 6 or 7 cows; the subgroups were physically separated along the feeding line by wooden boards. During the sampling days, fecal composition, used litter composition, and bacterial count (Clostridium spp., Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli, Lactobacillus, and total bacterial count) were analyzed by subgroup twice a day. On d 1 and from d 5 to 10, udder hygiene score and cow cleanliness score were also evaluated individually twice a day. Meanwhile MY, milk hygiene (total bacterial count [TBC], coliform bacterial count [CBC], and spore-forming units [SFU]) and quality were measured and analyzed from 9 animals per group. Moreover, individual animal behavior (body position and behavioral traits) and subgroup dry matter intake were measured on d 9 and 10. Fecal dry matter did not differ between groups, PWC had the lowest used litter moisture and N content favoring the highest clean cow frequency, but also gave rise to the greatest used litter microbial contamination. The MY, milk quality, TBC, SFU, and CBC were similar. The lying behavior frequency was similar between groups. However, the PWC group showed the lowest sleeping frequency, the highest frequency of other behaviors (including discomfort signs), and the lowest dry matter intake. However, despite this apparent reduction in cow comfort, no biologically important differences were observed in this short-term study between cows on PWC and WS in milk production or hygiene.

Effect of transition to an automated milking system for a tie-stall barn on milk production and cow condition

The effect of the transition from a conventional milking (CM) system in a tie-stall barn to an automated milking (AM) system specialized for a tie-stall barn on milk yield, milk composition, teat-end score, body condition score (BCS), and lying time was evaluated. This study was conducted at a commercial dairy farm from -15 to 153 days after the installation of the AM system. Lactating cows milked with the CM system (average 85 heads) were gradually transitioned to the AM system, and finally, 57 heads were milked with the AM system. No obvious effects of the milking system on milk yield, milk components, BCS, and daily lying time were found based on comparisons between CM and AM cows in the same herd under the same situation of twice-daily milking. The linear mixed-effects model for teat-end scores showed higher scores for front than for rear teats, and small but negative estimates for independent variables of the day after AM, indicating worse teat-end condition for front than for rear teats and improvement of the condition with increased time since AM.

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.

Free-Stall Use and Preferences in Dairy Cows: A Case Study on Neck Rails Covered by Foam

Simple Summary

Neck rails are used in many free-stall barns; they are intended to keep cows standing at the rear of the stall such that faeces and urine are more likely to fall in the alley rather than on the stall surface. However, cows can come into contact with the neck rail when entering the stall or when standing up. This study tested the effect of covering neck rails with a protective foam surface, by allocating stalls to control and foam conditions using a crossover design. There was no effect of the foam treatment on the time that stalls were occupied for lying. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of the stalls in the pen, it was found that cows preferred one of the two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between the time of stall occupation for two different rows in the pen, including the time for lying as well as the time of standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Results from this study can be used to support the design process for free-stall barns.

Abstract

This study tested the effect of neck rails equipped with and without foam on stall usage and preference by dairy cows. The hypothesis of the experiment, that cows prefer lying stalls with foam in comparison to stalls without foam, was rejected. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in lying time and time spent standing with two and four hooves in the lying stalls between the two treatment groups. Considering the time of individual stall occupation and the distribution of stalls in the pen, cows showed a preference for one of two lying stall rows. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the time of stall occupation for the two different rows in the pen, including the time spent lying and the time spent standing with two and four hooves in the stall. Lying time per stall in the preferred row (near the feeding alley) in comparison with the alternative row was 580 ± 101 min·d⁻¹·stall⁻¹ versus 50 ± 28 min·d⁻¹·stall⁻¹, respectively. These results can support a design process for new barns with a free-stall housing system for dairy cattle.